First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Oh Canada...
14964 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/11/17

walker1455 wrote:

If his doctors believe he's capable of going back into society then they're the experts here, not politicians or the public. Due to the extremely high-profile nature of this case the doctors have every incentive to be diligent, because if Li/Baker goes nuts and kills again then their asses are grass. Unless another medical expert can show his doctors aren't doing this right then I'm quite content to sit back and let the system do its job without it being hijacked by politics.


Re-read your first sentence.
21369 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Leanbox, Gameindu...
Offline
Posted 2/11/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am not quite sure I agree. There are some innately vicious people like Ted Bundy, who I would definitely say deserve the death penalty, but I think certain considerations should be made for those like Schizophrenics, whose reality actually is voices and such.

I think a better explanation for why they cannot differentiate is because some are born with it, while others develop. Therefore, it might be logically to assume it is real, if I had to guess. It is not so obvious when you are the afflicted. It is is this pseudo reality thing that makes up heaps of simulated reality dystopias and such.

Sort of like how bad eyesight is difficult to detect because the person with such a defect does not even know that said sign is suppose to be blurry at so and so distance.


I completely agree with a person who committed murder with such a condition shouldn't not face the death penalty or even prison. I guess my disagreement is on what those "considerations" should be. I'd argue for a state mental institution (which is usually the case here in the US anyway, not sure what other countries do), but releasing someone back into society like nothing happened just seems wrong and potentially puts others in danger.
209 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Manitoba, Canada
Offline
Posted 2/12/17
Right now the scariest thing about living in Canada is M-103. Nicknamed the anti-islam bill. Say anything bad about Islam and you could be fined or go to jail. Scary stuff for a country that has free speech....
2196 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / The margins
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


walker1455 wrote:

If his doctors believe he's capable of going back into society then they're the experts here


Pretty much this. The criminal justice system's job is to get rehabilitated people back on the street and that is no different for people who have medical issues such as this. We shouldn't be appalled that this guy is being released, we should be glad that the system believes that he is rehabilitated.


That's a strong statement; how far are you going with it?
35657 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

illivatur wrote:
Right now the scariest thing about living in Canada is M-103. Nicknamed the anti-islam bill. Say anything bad about Islam and you could be fined or go to jail. Scary stuff for a country that has free speech....


Pure bullshit. M103 is a non-binding motion. Not a law or a bill. It lays out no offenses nor any corresponding penalties or punishments.

Go fear monger somewhere else.

14848 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

auroraloose wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


walker1455 wrote:

If his doctors believe he's capable of going back into society then they're the experts here


Pretty much this. The criminal justice system's job is to get rehabilitated people back on the street and that is no different for people who have medical issues such as this. We shouldn't be appalled that this guy is being released, we should be glad that the system believes that he is rehabilitated.


That's a strong statement; how far are you going with it?


I don't think it is that controversial of a statement and I think I'm willing to go about as far as Sweden.
11403 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

illivatur wrote:

Right now the scariest thing about living in Canada is M-103. Nicknamed the anti-islam bill. Say anything bad about Islam and you could be fined or go to jail. Scary stuff for a country that has free speech....


M 103 is a motion to ask the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to conduct a study into a possible government approach to eliminate religious discrimination, including but not limited to islamophobia.

If you're going to go around saying that people not wanting you to discriminate against others without even punishing you for it is a violation of freedom of speech you are more than welcome to pack your shit and fuck off to the land of alternative facts seeing as that's clearly the only thing you want to listen to.
2196 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / The margins
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


auroraloose wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

The criminal justice system's job is to get rehabilitated people back on the street and that is no different for people who have medical issues such as this.


That's a strong statement; how far are you going with it?


I don't think it is that controversial of a statement and I think I'm willing to go about as far as Sweden.


Do you have any links handy on Sweden's stance?
14848 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

auroraloose wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

I don't think it is that controversial of a statement and I think I'm willing to go about as far as Sweden.


Do you have any links handy on Sweden's stance?


http://rehabilitationnotincarceration.weebly.com/swedens-prison-system.html

Just a random link from Google...
27922 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17
I wonder what the experts would say to the family of the murder victim? If you take a life you should spend a lifetime away from the general populace.

I don't think it's unreasonable to tie the fate of the psychiatric doctor to the patient. If he is freed and he kills again the doctor also bares some of the blame.

Like if someone has a gun and doesn't secure it properly. If that gun is misused by a child and harm is done the gun owner should suffer the consequences and rightly so.
14848 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

MysticGon wrote:

I wonder what the experts would say to the family of the murder victim? If you take a life you should spend a lifetime away from the general populace.

I don't think it's unreasonable to tie the fate of the psychiatric doctor to the patient. If he is freed and he kills again the doctor also bares some of the blame.

Like if someone has a gun and doesn't secure it properly. If that gun is misused by a child and harm is done the gun owner should suffer the consequences and rightly so.


1) As PV said earlier, the family should have no bearing on sentencing. As he said "This sort of thing preludes legal vigilantism"

2) Tying the doctor to the patient sets up a bit of a dangerous circumstance which is similar to what we are seeing in medicine and the prevalence of legal suits. Doctors now have a tendency to overtreat which leads to increased costs, increased treatment (which isn't always a good thing) and increased prescriptions which has led to our overreliance on prescription opiods. If the psychiatric doctor's fate was tied to the patient, we would see much longer sentences for people with mental issues for little to no gain, creating a further burden on our prison systems, our mental health systems and on our taxpayers.
17710 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


walker1455 wrote:

If his doctors believe he's capable of going back into society then they're the experts here


Pretty much this. The criminal justice system's job is to get rehabilitated people back on the street and that is no different for people who have medical issues such as this. We shouldn't be appalled that this guy is being released, we should be glad that the system believes that he is rehabilitated.
US and CANANDA Justice systems does not see killings by a mentally ill person as ill intent murder, but a result of a condition they don't have full control over. That's why thy get rehabilitation.

Somethings can't be rehabilitated. Like that rapey college freshmen that everyone was taking about months ago. How is one suppose to rehabilitate frat boy syndrome? (I know that it's not what you said, but it reminded of that incident)
29087 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/12/17
IMHO people who do crimes due to sever mental illneses should do time and be treated then released.

Someone shouldn't be punished if there mental illness leads them to doing something they wouldn't do in the right mind there is a reason why insanity pleas exist.

Rehabilitation is whats needed.
29087 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

kevz_210 wrote:

Someone who commits a crime like that needs to be permanently removed from society like in a state run mental institution. I guess political correctness trumps public safety. Besides, letting someone who decapitates a random person walk free is no justice for the victim's family, I could understand an alternative to prison in this case, but come on.


sundin13 wrote:


walker1455 wrote:

If his doctors believe he's capable of going back into society then they're the experts here


Pretty much this. The criminal justice system's job is to get rehabilitated people back on the street and that is no different for people who have medical issues such as this. We shouldn't be appalled that this guy is being released, we should be glad that the system believes that he is rehabilitated.


This is where much of the international community and the US differ. Is see people such as murders and rapists beyond redemption and the prison system should be looked as a form of punishment, not as some sort of therapy or resort for the worst criminals.

Now lower level criminals, sure I could get on board with that and drug usage and sex work offenses shouldn't even be crimes. Why the hell the government is policing what individuals decide to consume or do with their bodies is beyond me. If someone wants to destroy their health or participate in something that much of the public sees as immoral while they aren't not hurting anyone else, well that's on them. It's not daddy government's job to protect people from themselves.


No one is beyond redemption everyone is treatable we just do not have the means to treat them.
Those who kill have something wrong with them until we can treat them they should stay in a cell.

But if we can treat the person then rehabilitation should always come first.
27922 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

I wonder what the experts would say to the family of the murder victim? If you take a life you should spend a lifetime away from the general populace.

I don't think it's unreasonable to tie the fate of the psychiatric doctor to the patient. If he is freed and he kills again the doctor also bares some of the blame.

Like if someone has a gun and doesn't secure it properly. If that gun is misused by a child and harm is done the gun owner should suffer the consequences and rightly so.


1) As PV said earlier, the family should have no bearing on sentencing. As he said "This sort of thing preludes legal vigilantism"

2) Tying the doctor to the patient sets up a bit of a dangerous circumstance which is similar to what we are seeing in medicine and the prevalence of legal suits. Doctors now have a tendency to overtreat which leads to increased costs, increased treatment (which isn't always a good thing) and increased prescriptions which has led to our overreliance on prescription opiods. If the psychiatric doctor's fate was tied to the patient, we would see much longer sentences for people with mental issues for little to no gain, creating a further burden on our prison systems, our mental health systems and on our taxpayers.


In a perfect world you would swap all the nonviolent drug offenders with the violent mentally ill patients. That's something I'd gladly pay for. Then you split the violent prison population between those with mental disabilities and those without. Isolate the group that needs treatment and treat them in an environment that would be beneficial for them. But I wouldn't release them.

As far as the the victims family go. I think leaving them out in the cold during this difficult time would be unsympathetic. Being able to sue and having the peace of mind that their loved one's murderer is no longer walking free is a reasonable line in the sand. With a well established rule there would be no room for escalation. Money and peace isn't an unreasonable demand.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.