Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin
Excessive or not is irrelevant if the restrictions shouldn't legally be there. If someone beat up a bar patron at age 23 would it be helpful to attend one meeting once a year for life just to assess that the person is in a good state of mind and doesn't seem like they'll do it again?
Probably not excessive or overly burdsome but also not warranted because now their life has a restriction on it. The analogy is purposely way less egrigious btw, as to highlight how important liberty is and how sometimes we get blinded to that when the crime/incident is more serious.
|
I'm assuming that person hasn't been diagnosed with a serious mental disorder? The day he lost his mind, beheaded, and ate parts of a man this really stopped being about what's best for him and became about what's best for the public. You have to ask yourself if you have a family are you okay with this man being your long term neighbor while unmonitored? Is a 2% chance he may stop taking his medication and lose his mind again good enough for your son, daughter, wife? One percent is too much for me and I don't believe there's an expert on the planet that can claim this man will be able to go back to the daily grind of life where people have bad days, weeks, months, etc and not go back down the road that led him to taking a man's life. How will he feel when he's depressed? Will he stop taking his medication? Start drinking? Sorry but there's simply too many variables and IMO being monitored periodically is a small price to pay considering the lives he affected even if it was indirectly.