Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FBI database for gun buyers missing millions of records

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    Where we disagree.
    1. Law enforcement has no responsibility to try to protect every citizen.
    ( its a lofty goal but an honorable one)
    Then you disagree with the Supreme Court. That is not our mission, and never has been. And again, this shows your TV show mentality: we serve the court system, where prosecutors and judges work with not just the law but with case law and the realities of resources. The devil is in the details, but you stick with bumper sticker slogans.

    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    2. Treatment for mentally illness is not punishment.
    ( It is a benefit to them, and the rest of society)
    If it is willing, sure. But you cannot, by law, force treatment upon an adult.

    Case law prohibits incarceration for mental illness alone. Any detention against a person's will is incarceration. ANY is the key word. Just detaining someone who is acting crazy in a public place is walking a thin line. The only way we get away with it is to ensure the person is not intoxicated or having a diabetic issue.

    If they come up with a cure for diabetes police intervention in the actions of the mentally ill will be drastically cut.

    We've had this discussion numerous times, and you refuse to learn anything.

    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    3. Those who commit violent crimes and have been sentenced to time and the restrictions of parole have made those choices themselves.
    Given time they should be rewarded with the same rights as everyone else.
    But if they fail the consequences should be on them, not on the innocent.
    True. Enforcement of that, on the other hand, is problematic. The PO system is more than swamped, and only they can administer the terms of parole.

    This is a classic example of your problem: you deal in lofty statements, with no effort to consider the practical limitations of the law, civil rights, jurisdiction, or resources.

    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    IMO you lean towards the libertarian thought, that is your right.
    You believe that your experience validates your opinion and disqualifies everyone elseís.
    Not an opinion. I understand how the system works, and you do not. What you are doing is arguing with a mechanic that the reason the transmission is grinding is that the rear tires are too small.

    You do not understand the system well enough, and you do not listen.

    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    I understand that. But sometimes it comes off as callousness.
    We are all victimized when we live our lives in fear. That is where most of us are coming from. Understanding that we expect some attempts be made to make communities safer.
    Expect away, it's a free country. But everyone has civil rights. They have to break the law in an enforceable fashion according to the codes of criminal procedure and case law before anything can be done. And even then the system moves slowly, by design.

    Those are the facts. They are not subject to change so long as the Bill of Rights and attendant case law exists.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
      Then you disagree with the Supreme Court. That is not our mission, and never has been. And again, this shows your TV show mentality: we serve the court system, where prosecutors and judges work with not just the law but with case law and the realities of resources. The devil is in the details, but you stick with bumper sticker slogans.



      If it is willing, sure. But you cannot, by law, force treatment upon an adult.

      Case law prohibits incarceration for mental illness alone. Any detention against a person's will is incarceration. ANY is the key word. Just detaining someone who is acting crazy in a public place is walking a thin line. The only way we get away with it is to ensure the person is not intoxicated or having a diabetic issue.
      A quick search does not show that the above claim is correct...

      https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../563/case.html

      O'Connor v. Donaldson,
      422 U.S. 563 (1975)

      Held:

      1. A State cannot constitutionally confine, without more, a nondangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by himself or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends, and since the jury found, upon ample evidence, that petitioner did so confine respondent, it properly concluded that petitioner had violated respondent's right to liberty. P
      which means that a state CAN constitutionally confine, without more, a nondangerous individual who is is NOT capable of surviving safely in freedom by himself and does not have the help of willing and responsible family members or friends.
      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
        Then you disagree with the Supreme Court. That is not our mission, and never has been. And again, this shows your TV show mentality: we serve the court system, where prosecutors and judges work with not just the law but with case law and the realities of resources. The devil is in the details, but you stick with bumper sticker slogans.



        If it is willing, sure. But you cannot, by law, force treatment upon an adult.

        Case law prohibits incarceration for mental illness alone. Any detention against a person's will is incarceration. ANY is the key word. Just detaining someone who is acting crazy in a public place is walking a thin line. The only way we get away with it is to ensure the person is not intoxicated or having a diabetic issue.

        If they come up with a cure for diabetes police intervention in the actions of the mentally ill will be drastically cut.

        We've had this discussion numerous times, and you refuse to learn anything.



        True. Enforcement of that, on the other hand, is problematic. The PO system is more than swamped, and only they can administer the terms of parole.

        This is a classic example of your problem: you deal in lofty statements, with no effort to consider the practical limitations of the law, civil rights, jurisdiction, or resources.



        Not an opinion. I understand how the system works, and you do not. What you are doing is arguing with a mechanic that the reason the transmission is grinding is that the rear tires are too small.

        You do not understand the system well enough, and you do not listen.



        Expect away, it's a free country. But everyone has civil rights. They have to break the law in an enforceable fashion according to the codes of criminal procedure and case law before anything can be done. And even then the system moves slowly, by design.

        Those are the facts. They are not subject to change so long as the Bill of Rights and attendant case law exists.
        There is no doubt POs are overwhelmed, just as our prisons are. In this state there are only 3 drug analysts in the ISP state lab tp process all drugs confiscated in Idaho, at a time when drug arrests are at an all time high.
        The salary for a crime lab tech and analyst is so low they canít hire anyone. The same is true of prison guards.
        Our current approach is broken. Placing mentally ill people in prison where they are victimized only to come out more screwed up then when they went in is a failure.
        Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
          There is no doubt POs are overwhelmed, just as our prisons are. In this state there are only 3 drug analysts in the ISP state lab tp process all drugs confiscated in Idaho, at a time when drug arrests are at an all time high.
          The salary for a crime lab tech and analyst is so low they canít hire anyone. The same is true of prison guards.
          Our current approach is broken. Placing mentally ill people in prison where they are victimized only to come out more screwed up then when they went in is a failure.
          We don't put people in prison for being mentally ill, we put them there for being convicted of a felony.

          The only other alternative is to do nothing with them.

          You have a strange idea of mental illness; it isn't a reason for banishment from society or draconian treatment.
          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
            We don't put people in prison for being mentally ill, we put them there for being convicted of a felony.

            The only other alternative is to do nothing with them.

            You have a strange idea of mental illness; it isn't a reason for banishment from society or draconian treatment.


            You are correct.
            We cannot involuntarily commit people to mental institutions without "due process". In other words, they are entitled to a hearing and counsel.

            Frequently, once the person is committed they are put back on their medications and their mental illness is largely controlled which leads to their release.
            Once released, and out of observation, many of these people stop taking their meds and the cycle starts all over again.
            Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

            Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
              You are correct.
              We cannot involuntarily commit people to mental institutions without "due process". In other words, they are entitled to a hearing and counsel.

              Frequently, once the person is committed they are put back on their medications and their mental illness is largely controlled which leads to their release.
              Once released, and out of observation, many of these people stop taking their meds and the cycle starts all over again.
              Anyone who believes we donít put people who are clinically insane in prison is either outright lying or is as naive as a day old baby.

              http://jaapl.org/content/35/4/406
              Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                We don't put people in prison for being mentally ill, we put them there for being convicted of a felony.

                The only other alternative is to do nothing with them.

                You have a strange idea of mental illness; it isn't a reason for banishment from society or draconian treatment.
                Now your just banging your gums to hear your teeth rattle.
                You know damn well we warehouse the mentally ill in prisons.
                Serious mental illness has become so prevalent in the US corrections system that jails and prisons are now commonly called ďthe new asylums.Ē In point of fact, the Los Angeles County Jail, Chicagoís Cook County Jail, or New Yorkís Rikerís Island Jail each hold more mentally ill inmates than any remaining psychiatric hospital in the United States. Overall, approximately 20% of inmates in jails and 15% of inmates in state prisons are now estimated to have a serious mental illness. Based on the total inmate population, this means approximately 383,000 individuals with severe psychiatric disease were behind bars in the United States in 2014 or nearly 10 times the number of patients remaining in the nationís state hospitals.
                http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.o...ore-about/3695
                http://jaapl.org/content/35/4/406
                Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Well....do insane people commit crimes?

                  What we don't do is put insane people in prison ONLY because they're insane.

                  As to committing someone who is incapable of providing for their own care:

                  I've articulated it once or twice as 'dangerous to themselves'. I will say that the magistrate doesn't really like it and I'm always treading a very fine line. Also, on the practical side, I don't see them held very long at the hospital, most of them never see the psych ward, they're just released straight out of the ER.
                  Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Well another point of view for what its worth: how bout legalizing drugs? Since our Law Enforcement is overwhelmed now not to mention our prisons and jails are overfilled and no one is in a hurry to build more prisons, why not legalize drugs? That way Law Enforcement and our courts can focus on violent criminals and crime with victims, instead of using most of their resources on fighting the drug war. Seems to me people opposing what Arnold has to say, which he is just stating reality of the issue. There is the way it is and the way you wish it to be. Are you prepared to pay for an even bigger prison system,more courts,more law enforcement, more mental health care, etc,etc? Plus the fact that there is no guarantee that it will actually work.
                    Its strange though not uncommon to see certain issues flip around the political arena. When I was growing up in the 70's the left said, no prisons more schools. Now the left wants more prisons? More law enforcement?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                      Well....do insane people commit crimes?

                      What we don't do is put insane people in prison ONLY because they're insane.

                      As to committing someone who is incapable of providing for their own care:

                      I've articulated it once or twice as 'dangerous to themselves'. I will say that the magistrate doesn't really like it and I'm always treading a very fine line. Also, on the practical side, I don't see them held very long at the hospital, most of them never see the psych ward, they're just released straight out of the ER.
                      Sure, but are they responsible for their actions?
                      It seems you and AJR believe there is nothing wrong with people hallucinating while carrying on everyday life, buying guns, driving around town in 3,000lb. projectiles.
                      Maybe they are talking with people who arenít there, maybe they take things not knowning those things donít will do to them, maybe the self medicate with meth, heroin and Fentanyl and become paranoid.
                      The base difference between AJR and me is I believe the mentally ill need treatment.
                      If you are sick AKA ill, do you go to jail or a doctors office?
                      Last edited by Urban hermit; 14 Nov 17, 20:53.
                      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                        Anyone who believes we donít put people who are clinically insane in prison is either outright lying or is as naive as a day old baby.

                        http://jaapl.org/content/35/4/406
                        I did not say there are no insane people in jail.

                        If the insane person commits a crime, they can go to jail for that crime, but they are not sent to jail for being insane.
                        And, consistent with what I said, they receive due process of law in that there is a trial for their crime and they will have counsel if they wish.

                        People who are insane will not be involuntarily committed without receiving a hearing.
                        You are implying something I said was wrong, but your link addresses nothing that I said.
                        Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                        Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                          Now your just banging your gums to hear your teeth rattle.
                          You know damn well we warehouse the mentally ill in prisons.
                          I know mentally ill end up in prison for felony acts; I've put many of them there. After due process.

                          Once again: your grasp of the term 'mentally ill' is deeply flawed.

                          And you are incapable of learning, or looking beyond extremely simplistic viewpoints.
                          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                            Sure, but are they responsible for their actions?
                            It seems you and AJR believe there is nothing wrong with people hallucinating while carrying on everyday life, buying guns, driving around town in 3,000lb. projectiles.
                            Maybe they are talking with people who arenít there, maybe they take things not knowning those things donít belito them, maybe the self medicate with meth, heroin and Fentanyl and become paranoid.
                            The base difference between AJR and me is I believe the mentally ill need treatment.
                            If you are sick AKA ill, do you go to jail or a doctors office?
                            The main difference between us is that you haven't a clue what the term mentally ill covers, what the law of the land is, or how the system works.

                            You're just frightened by yet another mass shooting. We go through this every time.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Mystikeye View Post
                              Well another point of view for what its worth: how bout legalizing drugs? Since our Law Enforcement is overwhelmed now not to mention our prisons and jails are overfilled and no one is in a hurry to build more prisons, why not legalize drugs? That way Law Enforcement and our courts can focus on violent criminals and crime with victims, instead of using most of their resources on fighting the drug war. Seems to me people opposing what Arnold has to say, which he is just stating reality of the issue. There is the way it is and the way you wish it to be. Are you prepared to pay for an even bigger prison system,more courts,more law enforcement, more mental health care, etc,etc? Plus the fact that there is no guarantee that it will actually work.
                              Its strange though not uncommon to see certain issues flip around the political arena. When I was growing up in the 70's the left said, no prisons more schools. Now the left wants more prisons? More law enforcement?
                              There is no drug war. Barely 5% of LE resources in the USA are focused upon narcotics. And yes, we build lots of new prisons.

                              Say we legalized drugs and every inmate serving time for purely narcotics charges was released. That would not impact our ability to deal with violent criminals because the prison beds emptied would be in low security facilities which cannot house violent inmates. Re-working them to house higher security inmates would cost about as much to build anew.

                              The reason the court system and prisons are full is very simple: there is a strata of society which has become non-functional in a legal and social sense. Kids in foster care and juvenile facilities graduate to prison.

                              Legalizing narcotics will not make addicts any more employable or responsible, and they will continue to steal. Drug dealers put of of work will not dump their guns and fill out applications for McDonalds, they will simply seek out other forms of crime.

                              And the bulk of criminal behaviors will be unaffected.

                              If you want to have an impact on the criminal issues in America, address the social and economic issues that cause them. Create private-sector blue-collar jobs, provide children in the bottom rungs of society with practical, valid education, and show those children that there is a real future for them.

                              Until you do that, nothing will change.

                              Drug dealers sell an escape from a pointless, painful reality. The problem for our nation is not the drug, but the reality that make the drug desirable.

                              Legal narcotics and it becomes a corporate interest to keep people trapped in despair. Right now the situation exists because of benigh neglect. Create a corporate profit incentive, and they will put a great deal of expertise into expanding their customer base.
                              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                                The main difference between us is that you haven't a clue what the term mentally ill covers, what the law of the land is, or how the system works.

                                You're just frightened by yet another mass shooting. We go through this every time.
                                GOD HAS SPOKEN!
                                HE AND ONLY HE KNOWS ALL, SEES ALL,
                                Geez, AJR. Do you really believe you are the only man on earth whose concern and opinions matter?
                                Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X