Man who beheaded fellow bus passenger wants to live on his own

[GGG]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Wow. I cannot believe I just read that.

So you're telling us that we are all ticking time bombs and will lash out violently if all of a sudden a voice starts telling us to knife the guy next to us?

Good to know.

Well the murder rate for those NCRd is only 20 times that of the average person.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

Well the murder rate for those NCRd is only 20 times that of the average person.

I wonder what the recidivism rate is for people convicted of vehicular manslaughter for drunk driving? We don't seem to have any problems with putting conditions on their release.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Wow. I cannot believe I just read that.
So you're telling us that we are all ticking time bombs and will lash out violently if all of a sudden a voice starts telling us to knife the guy next to us?

I'm saying that for the most part, Bill and Li were exactly like you and me before their schizophrenic episodes and that no one is "immune". So yes. You can look at certain demographics to find who may be statistically more likely, but for for schizophrenia you're looking at first symptoms occurring generally between 10 and 40 years of age. To mistakenly believe that you are somehow immune to a mental illness or psychosis would mean you are unaware and stigmatizing mental illness as something that doesn't happen to "normal" people like you and Swarly.

That idea is actually dangerous because if someone were to start hearing voices, experiencing hallucinations or generally having something weird happen to them, instead of getting the proper help they don't want to be seen as "crazy" and avoid discussing it and trying to hide it. That's when, I would argue, someone does become a "ticking time bomb." But with Bill, him acknowledging that he can't say for certain what will happen in the future is less dangerous than him assuming he is 100% cured and would never suffer another episode...that's when you have people go off medication...

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Wow. I cannot believe I just read that.

So you're telling us that we are all ticking time bombs and will lash out violently if all of a sudden a voice starts telling us to knife the guy next to us?

Good to know.

Good lord there are a lot of dumb answers in this thread. Mental illness is something you don't truly understand until it happens to you or someone you know.

It could have just as easily been the other way around, with the victim having a psychotic break and cutting Li's head off. Thats why Li is considered NCR.

Yes, this could happen to you. Or your brother. Or your son. Etc.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I wonder what the recidivism rate is for people convicted of vehicular manslaughter for drunk driving? We don't seem to have any problems with putting conditions on their release.

If that individual was say 20x more likely to re-offend, I'd say 'we' are negligent if we don't take steps to insure public safety.
Should we lock them up forever? Of course not
Should we monitor them? Absolutely

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I wonder what the recidivism rate is for people convicted of vehicular manslaughter for drunk driving? We don't seem to have any problems with putting conditions on their release.

I'd argue that anyone convicted of a DUI should have mandatory ignition interlock devices for any vehicle they own for ever given that the recidivism rate is quite high. I'd also argue that most people think our vehicular manslaughter punishments are ridiculously light.

Here's some interesting stats but not quite the ones you are looking for as it doesn't address the recidivism rate instead the % of offended caused by those previously convicted
https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nt...USA-tsf-rn.pdf

To me it comes down the the question which no one pro absolute discharge has answered.

Should Li be allowed to choose not to take his medication. Is that a right that he should have.

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

Good lord there are a lot of dumb answers in this thread. Mental illness is something you don't truly understand until it happens to you or someone you know.

It could have just as easily been the other way around, with the victim having a psychotic break and cutting Li's head off. Thats why Li is considered NCR.

Yes, this could happen to you. Or your brother. Or your son. Etc.

Murder whether criminally responsible or not is still murder, someone is dead and not coming back. His illness caused someone to lose their life and its sad that he had no control over it but it happened and like any illness you pay the consequence. His illness changed the course of his life and will never be the same and maybe one day we can cure mental illness (I realize how broad of a term that is) before it comes to this but until then his illness took his life.

I would expect no different if it were me or anyone else close to me.

[DionTheDman]

Well, that's flawed because it's not murder to begin with. If he's having a psychotic episode to the extent that he's no longer criminally responsible, that by definition means he didn't have the intent to kill the person, which is a necessary prerequisite to murder.

What you've said is that if someone has a heart attack while driving a car, veers off and kills a nearby pedestrian, that would be murder.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Murder whether criminally responsible or not is still murder, someone is dead and not coming back.

No, legally murder isn't murder if the person is found NCR.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by jayswin

No, legally murder isn't murder if the person is found NCR.

But...someone...has been murdered right? They've ceased to live against their will?

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by jayswin

No, legally murder isn't murder if the person is found NCR.

Hey that guy, I knew you would be here just not so quick. Oh really that's the law? I never knew that, its not like that is the only argument you bring to the table or anything.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Locke

But...someone...has been murdered right? They've ceased to live against their will?

Is a victim in a car accident murdered?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Locke

But...someone...has been murdered right? They've ceased to live against their will?

Murder isn't any incident where a person has been killed by another person, so no.

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Hey that guy, I knew you would be here just not so quick. Oh really that's the law? I never knew that, its not like that is the only argument you bring to the table or anything.

I'm not being "that guy", I'm just speaking legally. For example, if someone is killed and it's found to be self defense, a person has still been killed by another person, but it is not a murder.

Murder - the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another

[DionTheDman]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Hey that guy, I knew you would be here just not so quick. Oh really that's the law? I never knew that, its not like that is the only argument you bring to the table or anything.

I don't get the point of this post. It's true. And it's a critical distinction to make. If someone dies by "accident", then it's very very different than someone intending to end someone's life and going through with it.

[Raekwon]

Because everyone in here knows what the law is why discuss anything if the only response will be citing the law.

[DionTheDman]

Ok, so what's your point then?

it happened and like any illness you pay the consequence

What does this mean to you then? He should be jailed?

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by DionTheDman

Ok, so what's your point then?



What does this mean to you then? He should be jailed?

Yes he should be jailed, we can argue that he didn't plan to kill anyone or even want to but his illness caused him to he still needs to be punished and not a few years of treatment and released you take a life you give a life. I don't mean give a life as in the death penalty though or even hard time as it is still an illness but he should be in a facility of some kind. Like I said its sad that his illness did this to him but it did and Tim McLean isn't coming back.

[GGG]

What's the purpose of imprisonment in your scenario?

[DionTheDman]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Yes he should be jailed, we can argue that he didn't plan to kill anyone or even want to but his illness caused him to he still needs to be punished and not a few years of treatment and released you take a life you give a life. I don't mean give a life as in the death penalty though or even hard time as it is still an illness but he should be in a facility of some kind. Like I said its sad that his illness did this to him but it did and Tim McLean isn't coming back.

Well, there's a couple of problems I have with that. You said "it happened and like any illness you pay the consequence". I'll go back to my previous example, if someone had an episode while driving a car and ran over a pedestrian while having a heart attack, would you advocate jailing that person? Because I can tell you, that wouldn't happen (barring some specific circumstances). So your premise of "like any illness you pay the consequence" doesn't even work.

Second. If you're advocating punishing people for things they didn't even intend on doing or could have foreseen happening, there's no rational argument against that. Just, no. You don't punish people for being sick. You treat them. Yes, even in cases where their sickness hurt or killed others.

Third. You say "he should be in a facility of some kind". He was. He was in a facility for a very long time. And the goal for any treatment should be for rehabilitation, right? He's been through staged re-integration. First, he had supervised time outside. Then unsupervised. Then moved out, and now this. (I may have some of those stages wrong). But keeping him "in treatment" indefinitely does nothing if his treating physicians don't feel that he would derive further benefit. What's the point in keeping someone with a heart condition in the hospital indefinitely if you can make them aware of their condition, warn them of the risks of neglecting to manage their condition, and prepare them for a life with said condition with a ton of knowledge, medication, and support?

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by GGG

What's the purpose of imprisonment in your scenario?

I would hope that someone would want to study and dissect the mind of someone like Li. He should be a willing participant to help ensure this doesn't happen to others. If we truly don't understand the intricacies of schizophrenia how will we ever cure it? I accept not criminally responsible but how about mentally responsible? Not rot in jail but live for science.