tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095335453522927911.post2131043685820698837..comments2023-10-29T05:42:41.481-07:00Comments on The Maverick Conservative: NIU Shooter: Media, Politicians, and Gun Control AdvocatesSkiphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06348714266379409861noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095335453522927911.post-16544775617289862702008-02-16T14:34:00.000-08:002008-02-16T14:34:00.000-08:00I think you botched an otherwise great entry with ...I think you botched an otherwise great entry with the 'insanity' paragraph. <br><br>Alchohol isn't a defense because you ram it down your own throat and begin the day in a coherent state of mind (skip the whole 'alcohol is a disease' argument; I have opinions of my own on that.)<br><br>Mental illness is a VASTLY different thing. I think one of the great follies of our medical system is that a mentally ill person must have the cognizance, energy, and diligence to seek out and retain treatment, often while jumping through hoops, somehow purchase medicine and be trusted with its precise doseage and intake WHILE SUFFERING FROM MENTAL ILLNESSES that by definition impair thought and memory. <br><br>That or ignore their disease until they become a danger to themselves or others. Then, with luck, someone will step in. <br><br>I know there's not much of an alternative, as I don't want the government or someone's A-hole of a brother deciding X is sick and needs mandatory treatment. But it's a crap means of treating the disease either way. <br><br>And if you ask me, the problem here isn't gun control or even insanity, it's the 'Glory' attached to 'going collegiate'. <br><br>If the media was to withold the name of a killer; just give us sex, age, background, but with no name, then the number of incidents would drop to nothing. <br><br>Everyone wants their moment in the sun, and these ba**ards are willing to kill to get it. <br><br>Dan<br><br>http://journals.aol.com/slapinions/Slap-Inionscom<br>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095335453522927911.post-21725379980486514912008-02-16T16:20:00.000-08:002008-02-16T16:20:00.000-08:00"If the media was to withold the name of a killer;..."If the media was to withold the name of a killer; just give us sex, age, background, but with no name, then the number of incidents would drop to nothing."<br><br>I agree totally that the media pays too much attention to the KILLERS (giving them the fame/attention they obviously crave).<br><br>While I appreciate the reasoned, well written comment, I don't agree that the insanity defense serves any function. I, too, have some problem with alcoholism as a "disease". But I also have some problem with "mental illness" as the same type of "disease" as a physical disease (see Thomas Szasz, although I would not go so far as he does, in claiming that mental illness is not ever a disease at all). <br><br>Can we possibly know whether a person with mental illness is "at fault" in committing a crime. I don't think so. As I have said (and I was a lawyer), "insanity" is a LEGAL term--essentially nonsense in mental health terms. So we are asking juries to decide something that has no real existence (medically). I can see mental condition being considered on punishment, and evaluated as to whether to provide treatment after conviction. I stand by my position that it should not be a defense to crime. It is one of my fundamental convictioins that we must send the message to everyone that they are responsible for their own actions. I tend to think it is a self-fulfilling expectation.<br><br>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095335453522927911.post-4340476491200217362008-02-16T17:39:00.000-08:002008-02-16T17:39:00.000-08:00I apppreciate the response. I am a firm believer ...I apppreciate the response. <br><br>I am a firm believer in the existence of mental illness as a physical disease. That aside, I realize (having lived through the Dahmer trial here in the early '90's) that 'insanity' is strictly a legal definition. <br><br>Given how rarely an insanity defense is used successfuly, I don't think its existence as a legal concept contributes to the crime rate. <br><br>I would not be philosophically adverse to a concept of 'guilty but insane', with the defendant receiving treatment but with a permanent criminal record and restrictions upon release. <br><br>But to deny that some - some rare, almost unheard of - person acts criminally soley because they lack the mental reasoning to judge their actions, ignores the physical reality of the illness. <br><br>Regards,<br><br>Dan<br><br>http://journals.aol.com/slapinions/Slap-Inionscom<br><br>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com