someone who chooses to drink and drive and then goes and kills someone is ok to be reintroduced into society ... despite all the awareness of the dangers drinking and driving causes ...
while someone who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia which caused him to kill someone and had absolutely no control of his actions and did not choose to have this mental illness is not?
family, friends, etc of victims all mourn the same way ... the victims in the above scenarios are both dead ... the difference is the drunk driver knew he was doing something risky and did it anyways while vince li had absolutely no control of his actions nor did he choose to have this illness ...
Both this maniac and the drunk driver committed a crime resulting in a death.
Both were punished, given a sentence, I assume the drunk driver to prison time.
In my opinion in addition neither should ever be able to victimize again.
The maniac should remain hospitalized, the drunk driver should not drive again,
once he serves his time.
When a life is taken the resonance of that is immense, the people affected,
hurt, lives changed.
Life is the most valuable thing we have, it/they should be protected by laws
and diligence.
i must publicly say that i, chadwick, love to pieces one mr. byrnzie. this frickin dude inspires me, changes my views, helps me see things differently and is a brave soul that i admire.
btw, i still think this head muncher is a lunatic and could be extremely dangerous. however, i am no psychiatric doctor, i have not, did not nor do i plan on attending a school of psychiatry. all that said, i am fully capable of making up my own mind on this bunk ass bullshit.
the friends and family of the man killed will suffer through mourning until the day they themselves die.
yes i believe the killer is a monster. in spite of all that, maybe just maybe he himself is a true victim of mental pain & suffering. which seems to be the case.
I'm with ya too Chadwick...I dont know enough about these disorders to know whether or not someone who lopped off someones head and made them dinner is capable of doing that same thing again...It would honestly make me a bit uneasy if he was sitting next to me in public or my neighbor in some way...Then again, I dont know to what extent they are talking about letting him in public.
How is any doctor or specialist able to know if this guy is capable of repeating the insanity? I'd like to think he could be rehabilitated, but it just doesnt sound right. How exactly do you fix a brain disorder like this?
So.... if god 'speaks' to you and talks about the future/saving orphans in africa/converting (or killing) infidels - all is well - one is 'enlightened'. But if god 'speaks' to you and tells you the person next to you is an alien and you must kill him/her in order to protect others - one is a dangerous schitzo. Hmmmm..... And before anyone mentions it - of course I know the actions that may follow these 'conversations' could have very different consequences but I'm talking about having this 'conversation' in your head to start with. What is the difference (again - besides possible resulting actions)? Why does one type of conversation is seen as 'good' and the other as 'bad'. Then again... who knows which is the correct conversation/what god really wants to talk about?
Maybe it depends on what side of the bed 'God' got out of that morning.
Didn't 'God' tell Tony Blair to invade Iraq? Maybe he was having a bad hair day.
He did... get rid of a 'bad' man to 'save' others. This sounds familiar.... :think:
No. This doesn''t sound familiar. After the poor fellow mutilated the other poor fellow... he pocketed some organs, ate some others, in overkill fashion carved up the 'alien's face, and waved the kid's decapitated head around the bus acting like a blood-lusting lunatic- trying to get at others who were frantically keeping the bus door wedged shut.
He is a deranged psychopath. In one of your other posts, you pity the gentleman and excuse his ridiculous behaviours with (unnamed) labels that might motivate someone to slice a random bus guy into little pieces and then run around on the bus in a blood frenzy.
I don't care what drugs he's taken to 'numb him' and I don't care how he might have responded to an ink blot in his government paid therapy sessions... he is not even close to being rehabilitated. Here's my label for him: filth. I'm sure if the victim had a voice, he'd be agreeing with me here.
It never ceases to amaze me how people can see so differently on such an issue. I really cannot knock your position, yet I strongly disagree with it. Quite frankly, I'd support this man's execution. I can say that the thread has at least caused me to think about such an event and consider an alternative emotional or logical personal response to it. Having considered the compassionate perspective, I'm not with you, though. I just cannot forget about the last moments of that kid's life, the aftermath for the family, other people on the bus, and society.
You can come up with an excuse for any action (ill, drunk, angry, sad, jealous, etc.), but is there a baseline anywhere for behaviours that represents zero tolerance?
I really cannot knock your position, yet I strongly disagree with it...... Having considered the compassionate perspective, I'm not with you, though.
Fair enough. It's hard to get one's head around this. Horrible actions that beggers belief yet one can't hold the attacker responsible? Not easy to think through that one.
someone who chooses to drink and drive and then goes and kills someone is ok to be reintroduced into society ... despite all the awareness of the dangers drinking and driving causes ...
while someone who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia which caused him to kill someone and had absolutely no control of his actions and did not choose to have this mental illness is not?
family, friends, etc of victims all mourn the same way ... the victims in the above scenarios are both dead ... the difference is the drunk driver knew he was doing something risky and did it anyways while vince li had absolutely no control of his actions nor did he choose to have this illness ...
Me thinks you may have gone to far comparing drunk driving to cutting off someone's head.
Risky behavior vs CUTTING OFF SOMEONES HEAD?
And, since alcohol changes people's thought process, they can't be held accountable for their actions either then, can they?
Heres the thing, there is absolutely no hard evidence any of these experts can provide to show that the guy is ok and won't do something like that again. None, zero.
I'll go back to the arguments that people who are pro-choice always tell me...
I should take care of all the unwanted babies if I don't believe in abortion. Well then, go ahead and take this guy into your homes and around your families...kids. Me? No thanks.
Me thinks you may have gone to far comparing drunk driving to cutting off someone's head.
Risky behavior vs CUTTING OFF SOMEONES HEAD?
And, since alcohol changes people's thought process, they can't be held accountable for their actions either then, can they?
Heres the thing, there is absolutely no hard evidence any of these experts can provide to show that the guy is ok and won't do something like that again. None, zero.
1. drunk drivers choose to impair themselves and then make that decision to drive ... vince li had no control over his illness
2. there is plenty of evidence to support his temporary visits ... he has a team of doctors working within a medical umbrella in conjunction with a judicial system ... if they let him out and he kills another person - they would be held accountable ... you think they are gonna do that if they think he will kill again?
Heres the thing, there is absolutely no hard evidence any of these experts can provide to show that the guy is ok and won't do something like that again. None, zero.
1. drunk drivers choose to impair themselves and then make that decision to drive ... vince li had no control over his illness
2. there is plenty of evidence to support his temporary visits ... he has a team of doctors working within a medical umbrella in conjunction with a judicial system ... if they let him out and he kills another person - they would be held accountable ... you think they are gonna do that if they think he will kill again?
1. There is no intent to kill when driving drunk. I thought that mattered?
2. Pretty sure when you cut someone's head off you intend to kill.
3. What is this evidence? You mean the doctor's opinions based on talking to him? Not enough for me. Doctors are not superheros, they get things wrong all the time.
4. I believe that they feel like he won't do it again, but there is no way they know for sure, and that is a problem for me with a heinous crime like this. The risk is far too great in my opinion.
The passes can be issued starting May 24....he could be headed for some breakfast right now , anyone remember silince of the lambs ? this guy has no business roaming the streets escorted or not, in my opinion mental illness's don't just go away with treatments..I don't think they ever go away.
... in my opinion mental illness's don't just go away with treatments..I don't think they ever go away.
Godfather.
They don't - they are just kept under control with therapy and/or meds. Just like a lot of other illnesses or health issues such as diabetes, asthma, etc.
I don't think anyone in this thread said he was 'cured'. Thus keeping him in the institution.
1. There is no intent to kill when driving drunk. I thought that mattered?
2. Pretty sure when you cut someone's head off you intend to kill.
3. What is this evidence? You mean the doctor's opinions based on talking to him? Not enough for me. Doctors are not superheros, they get things wrong all the time.
4. I believe that they feel like he won't do it again, but there is no way they know for sure, and that is a problem for me with a heinous crime like this. The risk is far too great in my opinion.
1. if i load a gun and shoot randomly out my window ... i may not intend to kill someone but there is a good chance i might
2. but as a paranoid schizophrenic - he had no control of his delusions ... people need to read up on this illness
3. yeah the doctors ... they aren't perfect but if you are really sick are you gonna go to one and go with their advice?
4. this is where not understanding his illness comes into play ... your entire assumption is based strictly on a feel and bias ... and again - it is a temporary leave escorted ... he is not being released back into society ...
... in my opinion mental illness's don't just go away with treatments..I don't think they ever go away.
Godfather.
They don't - they are just kept under control with therapy and/or meds. Just like a lot of other illnesses or health issues such as diabetes, asthma, etc.
I don't think anyone in this thread said he was 'cured'. Thus keeping him in the institution.
I don't think he should be allowed on the streets at all,was that already covered ? I stepped into this topic a bit late.
Actually those here who do not think this man should have the opportunity to freedoms
are basing this on common sense.
There is no 100% guarantee that he will never do this horrific act again.
He displayed a level of insanity way out of the "norm" for his disease.
It was vicious, it was raging and raving mad, it can almost not even be described
by definition.
Above and beyond all this he took a life and for his victim and his victims family
and of course the safety of society he should remain under lock and key.
Actually those here who do not think this man should have the opportunity to freedoms
are basing this on common sense.
There is no 100% guarantee that he will never do this horrific act again.
He displayed a level of insanity way out of the "norm" for his disease.
It was vicious, it was raging and raving mad, it can almost not even be described
by definition.
Above and beyond all this he took a life and for his victim and his victims family
and of course the safety of society he should remain under lock and key.
Or ignorance.
There is no 'norm' for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia which is under control. Also, he is supervised at all times.
Actually those here who do not think this man should have the opportunity to freedoms
are basing this on common sense.
There is no 100% guarantee that he will never do this horrific act again.
He displayed a level of insanity way out of the "norm" for his disease.
It was vicious, it was raging and raving mad, it can almost not even be described
by definition.
Above and beyond all this he took a life and for his victim and his victims family
and of course the safety of society he should remain under lock and key.
1. if i load a gun and shoot randomly out my window ... i may not intend to kill someone but there is a good chance i might
2. but as a paranoid schizophrenic - he had no control of his delusions ... people need to read up on this illness
3. yeah the doctors ... they aren't perfect but if you are really sick are you gonna go to one and go with their advice?
4. this is where not understanding his illness comes into play ... your entire assumption is based strictly on a feel and bias ... and again - it is a temporary leave escorted ... he is not being released back into society ...
1. Whats the purpose of a bullet again? Whats the purpose of a car?
2. This doesn't make me more comfortable with him being out and about.
3. Probably, but more than 1 as they all have different opinions on what to do.
4. No it's not, but thanks for telling me what I think yet again. I know he is escorted and it's temporary. So, if he can't control it, and the docs are wrong in that they don't have it under control...what happens to his escort? That's my point.
I'm ok with it for criminals of lots of different crimes and backgrounds. This one scares the crap out of me. Would you spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy? Would the docs treating him? I wonder.
Certainly challenges my view. Not so much in the case of cutting off someone's head, but still...
All about rehabilitation. Punishment but also rehabilitation - not locked up somewhere with key thrown away. It is also understood that not everyone can be 'rehabilitated' in such a manner. The example given of this man who killed whilst in an alcoholic rage. I'm guessing he has also been treated for his alcoholism, thus the 'cause' of his action having been removed. The continued rehab will hopefully ensure this 'cause' will no longer be a temptation for him.
Certainly challenges my view. Not so much in the case of cutting off someone's head, but still...
All about rehabilitation. Punishment but also rehabilitation - not locked up somewhere with key thrown away. It is also understood that not everyone can be 'rehabilitated' in such a manner. The example given of this man who killed whilst in an alcoholic rage. I'm guessing he has also been treated for his alcoholism, thus the 'cause' of his action having been removed. The continued rehab will hopefully ensure this 'cause' will no longer be a temptation for him.
It works.
Yep, seems reasonable in certain cases. I don't think it applies directly to this one though.
My favorite part is the job training portion people receive.
There is no 'norm' for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia which is under control. Also, he is supervised at all times.
But one is aware of this but chooses to ignore.
Oh please, here we go again. Someone doesn't agree and they are ignorant. Please. Such a dumbass comment, but so common around here.
I am not saying someone is ignorant. I am saying that one may be completely ignorant on the subject of this type of mental illness and therefore cannot make an informed judgement.
Yep, seems reasonable in certain cases. I don't think it applies directly to this one though.
My favorite part is the job training portion people receive.
You mean Li? His illness was the cause of his actions. His illness is being controlled (like many other patients with mental illnesses). Some people with mental illnesses can be fully rehabilitated, trusted to continue with therapy and meds and lead a perfectly normal life. Li is not being released, just a few, short, supervised outings as part of his rehabilitation. Due to the nature of the crime, he may always need to be monitored and never be released.
1. Whats the purpose of a bullet again? Whats the purpose of a car?
2. This doesn't make me more comfortable with him being out and about.
3. Probably, but more than 1 as they all have different opinions on what to do.
4. No it's not, but thanks for telling me what I think yet again. I know he is escorted and it's temporary. So, if he can't control it, and the docs are wrong in that they don't have it under control...what happens to his escort? That's my point.
I'm ok with it for criminals of lots of different crimes and backgrounds. This one scares the crap out of me. Would you spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy? Would the docs treating him? I wonder.
1. people fire bullets without to kill all the time at shooting and gun ranges
2. i can see that - but your comfort or anyone else's is secondary
3. doctors aren't perfect but they are supposed experts in their field and are trained for this work
4. so - if you understand schizophrenia - why would you suggest he had control over his actions at the time of the murder? ... and why would you not understand that with treatment - many of the symptoms related to this illness can be controlled? ... if the doctors are wrong - they will be held accountable ... look at the article you just posted about re-offending rates ...
my choice is obviously not to spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy but i wouldn't spend a weekend in a hotel room with too many guys (sick or not sick) ... would you live with barrels of toxic waste in your backyard? ... probably not but no one seems to care that the shit is dumped into the public on a daily basis ...
1. people fire bullets without to kill all the time at shooting and gun ranges
2. i can see that - but your comfort or anyone else's is secondary
3. doctors aren't perfect but they are supposed experts in their field and are trained for this work
4. so - if you understand schizophrenia - why would you suggest he had control over his actions at the time of the murder? ... and why would you not understand that with treatment - many of the symptoms related to this illness can be controlled? ... if the doctors are wrong - they will be held accountable ... look at the article you just posted about re-offending rates ...
my choice is obviously not to spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy but i wouldn't spend a weekend in a hotel room with too many guys (sick or not sick) ... would you live with barrels of toxic waste in your backyard? ... probably not but no one seems to care that the shit is dumped into the public on a daily basis ...
1. Funny, if this was a gun control thread I think you'd be singing a different tune. Maybe I'm wrong.
2. Um, yes it does. Society matters and protecting the other people from killers matters.
3. Yes, I understand, but they cannot eliminate all risk. And when he has already displayed the behavior he did, it's my belief that unless you can eliminate all risk, you keep someone under lock and key at all times.
4. Where did I say he had control? I still think people are accountable for their actions regardless of control to some extent, but this is more about if his illness can be controlled to 100% confidence. That's where we differ. I have read the article and think its a good thing for white collar crime and lesser blue collar crime.
You seem to care about the waste dumped into the public, why don't you care about this?
Not crazy... it does work! But I guess it's a difficult concept to grasp when one is used to a society with 'punitive' prisons with no rehabilitation - just dealing with punishment.
1. Funny, if this was a gun control thread I think you'd be singing a different tune. Maybe I'm wrong.
2. Um, yes it does. Society matters and protecting the other people from killers matters.
3. Yes, I understand, but they cannot eliminate all risk. And when he has already displayed the behavior he did, it's my belief that unless you can eliminate all risk, you keep someone under lock and key at all times.
4. Where did I say he had control? I still think people are accountable for their actions regardless of control to some extent, but this is more about if his illness can be controlled to 100% confidence. That's where we differ. I have read the article and think its a good thing for white collar crime and lesser blue collar crime.
You seem to care about the waste dumped into the public, why don't you care about this?
1. i don't believe in people shooting guns aimlessly ... ... it was just a point to show that drunk drivers may not intend to kill but their actions increase the risk
2. no - it doesn't ... just because you are uncomfortable with a situation doesn't mean the law should cater to that ... society creates a judicial system based on a myriad of factors ... despite what you may or may not think - the person charged with a crime has rights ... this is ultimately a philosophical difference in how a state treats prisoners and the level of accountability a person with an illness has upon committing a crime
3. again - this points to the philosophical difference ... no one can guarantee any criminal will not reoffend ... not for petty theft, murder or anything ...
4. you want him to be accountable ... but the courts have ruled that he was not criminally responsible because of his illness ... that's the point ... it's not like they said - ok ... you're free to go ...
i'm not saying i don't care - just pointing out the absurdity in your analogy asking people if they would spend a weekend with him in a hotel room ...
Comments
Both were punished, given a sentence, I assume the drunk driver to prison time.
In my opinion in addition neither should ever be able to victimize again.
The maniac should remain hospitalized, the drunk driver should not drive again,
once he serves his time.
When a life is taken the resonance of that is immense, the people affected,
hurt, lives changed.
Life is the most valuable thing we have, it/they should be protected by laws
and diligence.
I'm with ya too Chadwick...I dont know enough about these disorders to know whether or not someone who lopped off someones head and made them dinner is capable of doing that same thing again...It would honestly make me a bit uneasy if he was sitting next to me in public or my neighbor in some way...Then again, I dont know to what extent they are talking about letting him in public.
How is any doctor or specialist able to know if this guy is capable of repeating the insanity? I'd like to think he could be rehabilitated, but it just doesnt sound right. How exactly do you fix a brain disorder like this?
No. This doesn''t sound familiar. After the poor fellow mutilated the other poor fellow... he pocketed some organs, ate some others, in overkill fashion carved up the 'alien's face, and waved the kid's decapitated head around the bus acting like a blood-lusting lunatic- trying to get at others who were frantically keeping the bus door wedged shut.
He is a deranged psychopath. In one of your other posts, you pity the gentleman and excuse his ridiculous behaviours with (unnamed) labels that might motivate someone to slice a random bus guy into little pieces and then run around on the bus in a blood frenzy.
I don't care what drugs he's taken to 'numb him' and I don't care how he might have responded to an ink blot in his government paid therapy sessions... he is not even close to being rehabilitated. Here's my label for him: filth. I'm sure if the victim had a voice, he'd be agreeing with me here.
It never ceases to amaze me how people can see so differently on such an issue. I really cannot knock your position, yet I strongly disagree with it. Quite frankly, I'd support this man's execution. I can say that the thread has at least caused me to think about such an event and consider an alternative emotional or logical personal response to it. Having considered the compassionate perspective, I'm not with you, though. I just cannot forget about the last moments of that kid's life, the aftermath for the family, other people on the bus, and society.
You can come up with an excuse for any action (ill, drunk, angry, sad, jealous, etc.), but is there a baseline anywhere for behaviours that represents zero tolerance?
I don't pity or excuse the behaviour, just understand that his actions are a result of mental illness therefore he is not criminally responsible.
If I remember correctly, even the victim's mother acknowledged that.
Fair enough. It's hard to get one's head around this. Horrible actions that beggers belief yet one can't hold the attacker responsible? Not easy to think through that one.
And rightly so.
Me thinks you may have gone to far comparing drunk driving to cutting off someone's head.
Risky behavior vs CUTTING OFF SOMEONES HEAD?
And, since alcohol changes people's thought process, they can't be held accountable for their actions either then, can they?
Heres the thing, there is absolutely no hard evidence any of these experts can provide to show that the guy is ok and won't do something like that again. None, zero.
I should take care of all the unwanted babies if I don't believe in abortion. Well then, go ahead and take this guy into your homes and around your families...kids. Me? No thanks.
1. drunk drivers choose to impair themselves and then make that decision to drive ... vince li had no control over his illness
2. there is plenty of evidence to support his temporary visits ... he has a team of doctors working within a medical umbrella in conjunction with a judicial system ... if they let him out and he kills another person - they would be held accountable ... you think they are gonna do that if they think he will kill again?
Which is exactly why he is not being set free.
1. There is no intent to kill when driving drunk. I thought that mattered?
2. Pretty sure when you cut someone's head off you intend to kill.
3. What is this evidence? You mean the doctor's opinions based on talking to him? Not enough for me. Doctors are not superheros, they get things wrong all the time.
4. I believe that they feel like he won't do it again, but there is no way they know for sure, and that is a problem for me with a heinous crime like this. The risk is far too great in my opinion.
Godfather.
They don't - they are just kept under control with therapy and/or meds. Just like a lot of other illnesses or health issues such as diabetes, asthma, etc.
I don't think anyone in this thread said he was 'cured'. Thus keeping him in the institution.
1. if i load a gun and shoot randomly out my window ... i may not intend to kill someone but there is a good chance i might
2. but as a paranoid schizophrenic - he had no control of his delusions ... people need to read up on this illness
3. yeah the doctors ... they aren't perfect but if you are really sick are you gonna go to one and go with their advice?
4. this is where not understanding his illness comes into play ... your entire assumption is based strictly on a feel and bias ... and again - it is a temporary leave escorted ... he is not being released back into society ...
I don't think he should be allowed on the streets at all,was that already covered ? I stepped into this topic a bit late.
Godfather.
are basing this on common sense.
There is no 100% guarantee that he will never do this horrific act again.
He displayed a level of insanity way out of the "norm" for his disease.
It was vicious, it was raging and raving mad, it can almost not even be described
by definition.
Above and beyond all this he took a life and for his victim and his victims family
and of course the safety of society he should remain under lock and key.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/24/world/eur ... ?hpt=hp_c1
Certainly challenges my view. Not so much in the case of cutting off someone's head, but still...
Or ignorance.
There is no 'norm' for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia which is under control. Also, he is supervised at all times.
But one is aware of this but chooses to ignore.
1. Whats the purpose of a bullet again? Whats the purpose of a car?
2. This doesn't make me more comfortable with him being out and about.
3. Probably, but more than 1 as they all have different opinions on what to do.
4. No it's not, but thanks for telling me what I think yet again. I know he is escorted and it's temporary. So, if he can't control it, and the docs are wrong in that they don't have it under control...what happens to his escort? That's my point.
I'm ok with it for criminals of lots of different crimes and backgrounds. This one scares the crap out of me. Would you spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy? Would the docs treating him? I wonder.
Oh please, here we go again. Someone doesn't agree and they are ignorant. Please. Such a dumbass comment, but so common around here.
All about rehabilitation. Punishment but also rehabilitation - not locked up somewhere with key thrown away. It is also understood that not everyone can be 'rehabilitated' in such a manner. The example given of this man who killed whilst in an alcoholic rage. I'm guessing he has also been treated for his alcoholism, thus the 'cause' of his action having been removed. The continued rehab will hopefully ensure this 'cause' will no longer be a temptation for him.
It works.
Yep, seems reasonable in certain cases. I don't think it applies directly to this one though.
My favorite part is the job training portion people receive.
I am not saying someone is ignorant. I am saying that one may be completely ignorant on the subject of this type of mental illness and therefore cannot make an informed judgement.
1. people fire bullets without to kill all the time at shooting and gun ranges
2. i can see that - but your comfort or anyone else's is secondary
3. doctors aren't perfect but they are supposed experts in their field and are trained for this work
4. so - if you understand schizophrenia - why would you suggest he had control over his actions at the time of the murder? ... and why would you not understand that with treatment - many of the symptoms related to this illness can be controlled? ... if the doctors are wrong - they will be held accountable ... look at the article you just posted about re-offending rates ...
my choice is obviously not to spend a weekend in a hotel room with this guy but i wouldn't spend a weekend in a hotel room with too many guys (sick or not sick) ... would you live with barrels of toxic waste in your backyard? ... probably not but no one seems to care that the shit is dumped into the public on a daily basis ...
1. Funny, if this was a gun control thread I think you'd be singing a different tune. Maybe I'm wrong.
2. Um, yes it does. Society matters and protecting the other people from killers matters.
3. Yes, I understand, but they cannot eliminate all risk. And when he has already displayed the behavior he did, it's my belief that unless you can eliminate all risk, you keep someone under lock and key at all times.
4. Where did I say he had control? I still think people are accountable for their actions regardless of control to some extent, but this is more about if his illness can be controlled to 100% confidence. That's where we differ. I have read the article and think its a good thing for white collar crime and lesser blue collar crime.
You seem to care about the waste dumped into the public, why don't you care about this?
I thought this was interesting...but crazy.
Godfather.
Not crazy... it does work! But I guess it's a difficult concept to grasp when one is used to a society with 'punitive' prisons with no rehabilitation - just dealing with punishment.
1. i don't believe in people shooting guns aimlessly ...
2. no - it doesn't ... just because you are uncomfortable with a situation doesn't mean the law should cater to that ... society creates a judicial system based on a myriad of factors ... despite what you may or may not think - the person charged with a crime has rights ... this is ultimately a philosophical difference in how a state treats prisoners and the level of accountability a person with an illness has upon committing a crime
3. again - this points to the philosophical difference ... no one can guarantee any criminal will not reoffend ... not for petty theft, murder or anything ...
4. you want him to be accountable ... but the courts have ruled that he was not criminally responsible because of his illness ... that's the point ... it's not like they said - ok ... you're free to go ...
i'm not saying i don't care - just pointing out the absurdity in your analogy asking people if they would spend a weekend with him in a hotel room ...