I understand, but the question is what happens to people when they get taken off the street? If the litmus test for locking somebody up against their will is “mental illness? Yes/no?” you have to consider how many non-violent people that includes.
What is the goal when you take someone into custody? Is it to help the person get treatment and get back on their feet, or is it just to take them away so you don’t have to see them/be bothered by them?
The reason it became more difficult to hold people against their will under Reagan was bc he wanted to make a bunch of efficiency cuts/close down mental health hospitals. If you have nowhere to send people for treatment, do you just throw all mentally ill people in with people who have committed violent crimes?
That’s what they used to do way back in the day, and they stopped doing it for good reason. You had horror stories of innocent and wrongly detained people being thrown into absolute hellholes (which nobody, even criminals should have been placed). I remember one case in a Pennsylvania sanitarium where due to issues with over crowding, a mentally ill man who was barely able to function on his own was just thrown into a cell with two violent individuals. They tortured and murdered him within 24 hours. Devolving back to this kind of practice isn’t a solution to treating mental illness, it just locks it behind closed doors so society doesn’t have to see it.
Under Trump, you have proposals like this to make it easier to hold people against their will, along with simultaneous cuts to public assistance for mental health and housing. You also have privatization and profiting by his administration and other politicians by taking advantage of an immigration system that detains people in mass. Aside from anyone’s beliefs on immigration, it’s important to consider how many people have just disappeared or died in these overcrowded detention centers.
It’s hard to imagine a more clear recipe for disaster, or a more slippery slope of making a broad exception to populations who deserves human rights and safety based on a relatively small subset of that population.
I said this in another reply, but the oligarchs breaking current systems and safety nets while creating policies that prey on vulnerable people in desperate situations for their own profit, actually display some pretty clear behaviors that indicate mental illness.
Call it callous and unemotional traits. Call it psychopathy. Call it whatever you want. Predatory behavior for personal gain is a danger to society. The day these people are comfortable being held against their will in the prisons they’ve created for their own profit, and forced to get “treatment” for their own mental illness, is the day I feel comfortable with them doing it to anyone else.
I understand, but the question is what happens to people when they get taken off the street? If the litmus test for locking somebody up against their will is “mental illness? Yes/no?” you have to consider how many non-violent people that includes.
What is the goal when you take someone into custody? Is it to help the person get treatment and get back on their feet, or is it just to take them away so you don’t have to see them/be bothered by them?
The reason it became more difficult to hold people against their will under Reagan was bc he wanted to make a bunch of efficiency cuts/close down mental health hospitals. If you have nowhere to send people for treatment, do you just throw all mentally ill people in with people who have committed violent crimes?
That’s what they used to do way back in the day, and they stopped doing it for good reason. You had horror stories of innocent and wrongly detained people being thrown into absolute hellholes (which nobody, even criminals should have been placed). I remember one case in a Pennsylvania sanitarium where due to issues with over crowding, a mentally ill man who was barely able to function on his own was just thrown into a cell with two violent individuals. They tortured and murdered him within 24 hours. Devolving back to this kind of practice isn’t a solution to treating mental illness, it just locks it behind closed doors so society doesn’t have to see it.
Under Trump, you have proposals like this to make it easier to hold people against their will, along with simultaneous cuts to public assistance for mental health and housing. You also have privatization and profiting by his administration and other politicians by taking advantage of an immigration system that detains people in mass. Aside from anyone’s beliefs on immigration, it’s important to consider how many people have just disappeared or died in these overcrowded detention centers.
It’s hard to imagine a more clear recipe for disaster, or a more slippery slope of making a broad exception to populations who deserves human rights and safety based on a relatively small subset of that population.
I said this in another reply, but the oligarchs breaking current systems and safety nets while creating policies that prey on vulnerable people in desperate situations for their own profit, actually display some pretty clear behaviors that indicate mental illness.
Call it callous and unemotional traits. Call it psychopathy. Call it whatever you want. Predatory behavior for personal gain is a danger to society. The day these people are comfortable being held against their will in the prisons they’ve created for their own profit, and forced to get “treatment” for their own mental illness, is the day I feel comfortable with them doing it to anyone else.