Yes, those causing death committed unwillingly, circumstantially or accidentally may be forgiven in time and upon consideration of mitigating factors. But there is something so deeply and fundamentally wrong in the justice system that allows people like De Grood or Jasmine Richardson become completely free and able to enjoy their lives after brutally and mercilessly taking someone else's. No amount of reasoning, legal debate or forgiveness principle can justify it. NONE. By letting them out, the system spits in the face of the parents who lost their children, exposing them to bad thoughts of taking justice into their own hands and ruining their lives further.
Anyone who commits a murder is in some way psychotic - temporarily or permanently, heavily or mildly. The difference is in a degree and medical etiology of their psychotic state. These murderers must be locked out of the society for the rest of their lives regardless of how well they respond to treatment or rehabilitation. They should also be given an option of choosing assisted suicide.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus
Danielle Smith chimes in
Smith makes the wrong assumption that De Grood will not be monitored when and if he is released back into society. Like Vince Li he will be checked on daily to make sure he takes his meds.
Yes, those causing death committed unwillingly, circumstantially or accidentally may be forgiven in time and upon consideration of mitigating factors. But there is something so deeply and fundamentally wrong in the justice system that allows people like De Grood or Jasmine Richardson become completely free and able to enjoy their lives after brutally and mercilessly taking someone else's. No amount of reasoning, legal debate or forgiveness principle can justify it. NONE. By letting them out, the system spits in the face of the parents who lost their children, exposing them to bad thoughts of taking justice into their own hands and ruining their lives further.
Anyone who commits a murder is in some way psychotic - temporarily or permanently, heavily or mildly. The difference is in a degree and medical etiology of their psychotic state. These murderers must be locked out of the society for the rest of their lives regardless of how well they respond to treatment or rehabilitation. They should also be given an option of choosing assisted suicide.
Why should they be if they respond well to treatment? Sounds pretty backwards.
Smith makes the wrong assumption that De Grood will not be monitored when and if he is released back into society. Like Vince Li he will be checked on daily to make sure he takes his meds.
When De Grood is first released he will be but Li has no restrictions placed on him anymore. He is not obligated to take any medications or talk to a therapist.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Why should they be if they respond well to treatment? Sounds pretty backwards.
Out of respect for those whose lives they've ruined. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
Out of respect for those whose lives they've ruined. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Should we treat a car accident the same way. If a person dies in a car accident and the driver wasn’t breaking any laws at the time should the driver go to jail forever out of respect for the lives they ruined?
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
When De Grood is first released he will be but Li has no restrictions placed on him anymore. He is not obligated to take any medications or talk to a therapist.
De Grood, like Will Baker will have to show and demonstrate he understands the importance of taking of his meds daily before the restrictions are lifted.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
De Grood, like Will Baker will have to show and demonstrate he understands the importance of taking of his meds daily before the restrictions are lifted.
Yes while on the meds and while the meds are working they will have the understanding to not go off of them. However, people end up pregnant because they forget to take birth control. And that assumes the meds continue to work and the person never believes they are cured so stops taking them.
No amount of reasoning, legal debate or forgiveness principle can justify it. NONE.
Yes, God forbid our Justice System use reasoning, legal debate or forgiveness...You're bloodthirsty for revenge, that much is clear. But how can you seek revenge on someone who didn't have control over their actions?
Also, lol at thinking a 12 year old should be imprisoned for life.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Oling_Roachinen For This Useful Post:
If you want to live in a free society, you're going to have to realize there are risks involved in it. To remove the rights of an innocent person, who experts have deemed safe, spits in the face of what Canada is founded on (despite being a quote from Ben there the principles are the same).
The Following User Says Thank You to Oling_Roachinen For This Useful Post:
Yes, those causing death committed unwillingly, circumstantially or accidentally may be forgiven in time and upon consideration of mitigating factors. But there is something so deeply and fundamentally wrong in the justice system that allows people like De Grood or Jasmine Richardson become completely free and able to enjoy their lives after brutally and mercilessly taking someone else's. No amount of reasoning, legal debate or forgiveness principle can justify it. NONE. By letting them out, the system spits in the face of the parents who lost their children, exposing them to bad thoughts of taking justice into their own hands and ruining their lives further.
Anyone who commits a murder is in some way psychotic - temporarily or permanently, heavily or mildly. The difference is in a degree and medical etiology of their psychotic state. These murderers must be locked out of the society for the rest of their lives regardless of how well they respond to treatment or rehabilitation. They should also be given an option of choosing assisted suicide.
This just isn't true. Psychosis is a mental state where you lose the ability to distinguish between what is and isn't real.
The majority of murderers know exactly what they are doing and deserve to be punished for it. The fact that it's not normal human behavior doesn't make it psychosis.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Yes while on the meds and while the meds are working they will have the understanding to not go off of them. However, people end up pregnant because they forget to take birth control. And that assumes the meds continue to work and the person never believes they are cured so stops taking them.
This small loss of liberty is reasonable.
I would prefer he be monitored for the rest of his life to be sure he is taking his meds and weather the dosage needs to be adjusted. Vice Li/Will Baker was willing to do this and i'm willing to bet De Groot would agree to that also.
I would prefer he be monitored for the rest of his life to be sure he is taking his meds and weather the dosage needs to be adjusted. Vice Li/Will Baker was willing to do this and i'm willing to bet De Groot would agree to that also.
No Baker was not willing do to this. His lawyer specifically sought and succeeded in removing this requirement. He stated he will continue to be monitored but it is entirely his choice.
I agree with 99% of the NCR process but not having mandatory touch points is a bridge to far. The standard the professionals use is you have to prove the threat to society rather than prove that the restrictions ensure society is safe. And that difference is a step to far.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
No Baker was not willing do to this. His lawyer specifically sought and succeeded in removing this requirement. He stated he will continue to be monitored but it is entirely his choice.
I agree with 99% of the NCR process but not having mandatory touch points is a bridge to far. The standard the professionals use is you have to prove the threat to society rather than prove that the restrictions ensure society is safe. And that difference is a step to far.
This is what I was referring to....
Quote:
Chris Summerville, CEO of the Schizophrenia Society of Canada, worked with Baker for around eight years and said he's confident Baker will manage his illness effectively.
"We've seen — and I've seen — face-to-face, person-to-person, heart-to-heart, his ability to recover, that is, to learn to live beyond the limitations of his mental illness, with a sense of purpose and hope," Summerville said.
Baker has expressed a desire to "stay engaged" with his doctors and mental health organizations, Summerville said.
The majority of murderers know exactly what they are doing and deserve to be punished for it. The fact that it's not normal human behavior doesn't make it psychosis.
Exactly. Something to the affect of 99.4% of them.
