Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

mental illnesses

buelg
Posts: 79
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2012 2:09:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The government should be allowed to detain people with mental illnesses from the ground because they can be potentially dangerous.

Can you tell me why some peopl agree to this arguments?
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2012 2:16:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/11/2012 2:09:01 AM, buelg wrote:
The government should be allowed to detain people with mental illnesses from the ground because they can be potentially dangerous.

Can you tell me why some peopl agree to this arguments?

Because they actually think the state gives a crap about them? hmmp I don't know. I prefer to keep my views simple. If it is even remotely tyrannical then it sucks.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2012 2:19:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If the police pick up a raving schizophrenic who is known to attack anyone he is around if not medicated, would you prefer the policeman throw him in jail once he's randomly attacked a policeman/stranger/family member or would you instead try to put him in treatment so that he can at some point re-enter society?

It's not like you can just say "that dude is crazy, let's lock him up." There has to be physical danger to others or the self involved.
Clash
Posts: 220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2012 7:41:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/11/2012 2:09:01 AM, buelg wrote:
The government should be allowed to detain people with mental illnesses from the ground because they can be potentially dangerous.

Can you tell me why some peopl agree to this arguments?

If that could save some people from being killed or badly hurt, don't you think it is a good thing then? Indeed, people with serious mental illness who may do some really dangerous things shouldn't be around ordinary people. In my opinion, they should have someone with them 24 hours a day or something.
Websterremembered
Posts: 95
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 2:12:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/11/2012 2:09:01 AM, buelg wrote:
The government should be allowed to detain people with mental illnesses from the ground because they can be potentially dangerous.

Can you tell me why some peopl agree to this arguments?
define mental illness.
socialpinko
Posts: 11,668
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?
Websterremembered
Posts: 95
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 3:02:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

its about the balance of fear/safety vs freedom/ tolerance.
socialpinko
Posts: 11,668
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 3:51:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 3:02:12 PM, Websterremembered wrote:
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

its about the balance of fear/safety vs freedom/ tolerance.

Fear =/= safety
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 4:24:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 3:02:12 PM, Websterremembered wrote:
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

its about the balance of fear/safety vs freedom/ tolerance.

"They who are willing to give up liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." - Benjamin Franklin.
I tip on alligators
and little rattlesnakers,
but I'm another flavor: something like a Terminator..

- Janelle Monae, "Tightrope (ft. Big Boi)"
Websterremembered
Posts: 95
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:11:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 4:24:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/24/2012 3:02:12 PM, Websterremembered wrote:
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

its about the balance of fear/safety vs freedom/ tolerance.

"They who are willing to give up liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." - Benjamin Franklin.

hmm...like in wartime? sometimes extreme measures are necessary, else people would be compelled to live in fear.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:14:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 5:11:23 PM, Websterremembered wrote:
At 6/24/2012 4:24:27 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/24/2012 3:02:12 PM, Websterremembered wrote:
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

its about the balance of fear/safety vs freedom/ tolerance.

"They who are willing to give up liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." - Benjamin Franklin.

hmm...like in wartime? sometimes extreme measures are necessary, else people would be compelled to live in fear.

Why would they?

And honestly, I disagree wholeheartedly. The ends-justify-the-means attitude is what leads to precedents of restricted freedom, which can have dire consequences.
I tip on alligators
and little rattlesnakers,
but I'm another flavor: something like a Terminator..

- Janelle Monae, "Tightrope (ft. Big Boi)"
socialpinko
Posts: 11,668
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:17:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 5:11:34 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/24/2012 3:01:09 PM, Kinesis wrote:
Yeah, lock up the religious.

Aww, no-one bit.

No no!! but we just has faiths? And does you really thinks most people are mentally ill? You knows Hitler was a atheist and hadz mental illness!
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:26:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 5:11:34 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/24/2012 3:01:09 PM, Kinesis wrote:
Yeah, lock up the religious.

Aww, no-one bit.

Lol I almost did.
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:27:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 5:17:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/24/2012 5:11:34 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/24/2012 3:01:09 PM, Kinesis wrote:
Yeah, lock up the religious.

Aww, no-one bit.

No no!! but we just has faiths? And does you really thinks most people are mentally ill? You knows Hitler was a atheist and hadz mental illness!

Yeah I hate it when theists use those types of arguments. They are irrelevant anyway.
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 6:00:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 2:54:21 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a reliable and objective measuring stick to decide when someone is dangerous enough to warrant arresting them? Would you support detaining people who are really angry to the point that they MIGHT do something violent?

In order to demonstrate someone is a danger to themselves or others there must be some act committed before institutionalization. Just "being crazy" isn't enough for the state the unilaterally detain someone. However, if the crazy person continually attempts suicide or gets into fights with people over invisible talking laundry, the state can stop him from being a direct danger to the himself and the public without exposing the individual to the trauma-inducing experience of prison.