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.
ahhh thanks, crazy meaning who has ever heard of such a thing ? but if it works more power to em.
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.
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
Do you have statistics to back this up?
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
Just because you have 1 success makes it a risk worth taking for all? Really? That's the standard you want?
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
But you missed my point entirely: you are one of the people not considering the impact of failed rehabs.
I am saying that there is a significant cost people need to deliberate before we start feeling good about the 'success stories'. It's my opinion that rehab efforts bear a significant risk to society. Every person who has been impacted by a dangerous criminal who was once incarcerated and posing no harm to anyone until their release... well... it's pretty safe to say that they would side with me.
To the person who asked for statistics to back my claim up... I offer none, nor am I inclined to for this type of discussion on a Pearl Jam forum thread. I stand by my assertion though. We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended. With that said, if you wish to challenge this with some statistics of your own, I might stand corrected. I should say though... that any statistic that does not display an overwhelming percentage for 'minimal' re-offences adds to what I say.
I stand by my assertion... With no facts to back it up.
Gotchya.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
The Columbus Dispatch reports the data found that people convicted of three or more violent offenses account for less than 1 percent of the state population but 33 percent of all violent crime convictions over nearly four decades.
We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended.
I would say that a lot of 'supposedly rehabilitated' criminals are not rehabilitated at all. What is called a 'rehabilitated criminal' is just one that let his sentence run it's course and has been released. Paying your dues to society by serving time for your crime is certainly not rehabilitation - just punishment. Not much in place in prisons for anything else. The type of punitive system in place is not conducive to rehabilitation. How can these criminals then re-integrate into society once their sentence over? I don't think there is much in prison to enable this. Re-offending rates prove this.
We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended.
I would say that a lot of 'supposedly rehabilitated' criminals are not rehabilitated at all. What is called a 'rehabilitated criminal' is just one that let his sentence run it's course and has been released. Paying your dues to society by serving time for your crime is certainly not rehabilitation - just punishment. Not much in place in prisons for anything else. The type of punitive system in place is not conducive to rehabilitation. How can these criminals then re-integrate into society once their sentence over? I don't think there is much in prison to enable this. Re-offending rates prove this.
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended.
I would say that a lot of 'supposedly rehabilitated' criminals are not rehabilitated at all. What is called a 'rehabilitated criminal' is just one that let his sentence run it's course and has been released. Paying your dues to society by serving time for your crime is certainly not rehabilitation - just punishment. Not much in place in prisons for anything else. The type of punitive system in place is not conducive to rehabilitation. How can these criminals then re-integrate into society once their sentence over? I don't think there is much in prison to enable this. Re-offending rates prove this.
I agree with this, however one could certainly allude to numerous examples of parolees who have done and said the right things, been given a clean bill of health, and upon admittance to mainstream society have proven to have been 'not as rehabilitated as advertised'.
But this post opens the can of worms. If we truly believe in rehabilitation, then I would concur with you when you suggest authentic rehabilitation efforts are not at work. If we believe in punishment, then stiffer sentences need to be in order. We sit in the middle. And, because so, we fail at both.
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
I am not sure how he is using his illness as an excuse. I mean it is not like the courts said "well you are mentally ill so you are free to go". I wouldn't want to go to prison and I wouldn't want to be locked in the kind of facility this guy is in either. And like I said way back, it is very likely this guy is going to be living under some kind of supervison for the rest of his life.
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
to begin i would suggest not putting Illness in "".
Yes every criminal does have an excuses of what made them the way they are but i would suggest that mental health is not the same as greed, alcohol, drugs etc due to the fact that mental illness is places on a person and not a choice. A person doesn't wake up one day and decide that they are going to be schizophrenic.
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
to begin i would suggest not putting Illness in "".
Yes every criminal does have an excuses of what made them the way they are but i would suggest that mental health is not the same as greed, alcohol, drugs etc due to the fact that mental illness is places on a person and not a choice. A person doesn't wake up one day and decide that they are going to be schizophrenic.
That is sort of what I was thinking, I mean it would be like if I were driving down the road and had a non-fatal stroke but crashed my car into a crowd of people and killed them. It would be very sad and tragic, but should I be put away for murder for that sort of thing, that would totally be beyond my control?
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
I see what you're saying, but I don't think his schizophrenia is being used as an excuse but rather a known cause. A real, physical cause that can be treated. As it was untreated (and, as far as I know, this psychotic event was his first), he was not responsible for his actions. He had no control or say in this and could not do anything about it. Should he had been diagnosed as schizophrenic earlier (and an incredible number of people do have schizophrenic tendencies - all at different levels of course), he could have been treated a long time ago and this may not have happened. A lot of people with controlled mental illnesses are normal, active members of society.
Li had an illness, not self inflicted (though it can be by drug use, etc.) which makes it different to sentiments such as greed/jealousy or self inflicted issues such as drugs and alcohol. Not sure how one can rehab greed or jealousy but, as seen in the article posted, rehabilitation can work with drugs and alcohol abuse.
1. does vince have a background of crazy bullshit?
2. how can a mental health expert know when someone mentally fucked is for real or jerkin around with the system knowing how to play the system?
3. will vince be wearing a bullet proof vest when strolling down the sidewalks in downtown what have you, canada?
4. and finally... anyone got any pictures of this dude so we can check him out, as well as pictures of the victim?
i keep coming back to this thread even after i excused myself. i am a dick
I agree with this, however one could certainly allude to numerous examples of parolees who have done and said the right things, been given a clean bill of health, and upon admittance to mainstream society have proven to have been 'not as rehabilitated as advertised'.
But this post opens the can of worms. If we truly believe in rehabilitation, then I would concur with you when you suggest authentic rehabilitation efforts are not at work. If we believe in punishment, then stiffer sentences need to be in order. We sit in the middle. And, because so, we fail at both.
Rehabilitation is not a free ride - it goes with punishment. Maybe a more 'positive' type of punishment (if that makes sense).
And yes, I am sure a good number of more hardened criminals can play the system. It's difficult to play the system with an illness which can be measured.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
Just because you have 1 success makes it a risk worth taking for all? Really? That's the standard you want?
its not just 1 success. there are many successful cases of mentally ill people being able to control that illness through varous methods. im speaking of these. im not talking about out and out criminals.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
But you missed my point entirely: you are one of the people not considering the impact of failed rehabs.
I am saying that there is a significant cost people need to deliberate before we start feeling good about the 'success stories'. It's my opinion that rehab efforts bear a significant risk to society. Every person who has been impacted by a dangerous criminal who was once incarcerated and posing no harm to anyone until their release... well... it's pretty safe to say that they would side with me.
To the person who asked for statistics to back my claim up... I offer none, nor am I inclined to for this type of discussion on a Pearl Jam forum thread. I stand by my assertion though. We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended. With that said, if you wish to challenge this with some statistics of your own, I might stand corrected. I should say though... that any statistic that does not display an overwhelming percentage for 'minimal' re-offences adds to what I say.
of course i am considering it. but once again i will state im not talking about out and out criminal repeat offenders. everyone is an individual.. just because one is mentally ill doesnt make one less of an individual. and these things need to be considered on a case by case basis. we dont all react to the same medications and rehab methods the same. this guy isnt being allowed out to wander the streets unsupervised. his caregivers are attempting to reintegrate him into the larger outside world again to see if he can cope. i see no problem with this.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
1. does vince have a background of crazy bullshit?
2. how can a mental health expert know when someone mentally fucked is for real or jerkin around with the system knowing how to play the system?
3. will vince be wearing a bullet proof vest when strolling down the sidewalks in downtown what have you, canada?
4. and finally... anyone got any pictures of this dude so we can check him out?
i keep coming back to this thread even after i excused myself. i am a dick
1)this is the first report of any crime or behavour by Li.
2)mental health worker ( i know quite alot of them in my line of work) are trained to know different areas in dealing with mental health but the fact of the matter is that there is not just one person who makes thsi decision. There are teams of different specialists who deal with the same person.
3) no one knows if he will be wearing a bullet proof vest.
4) can't help you with a picture but don't worry I don't think he will be in your area anytime soon
Comments
ahhh thanks, crazy meaning who has ever heard of such a thing ? but if it works more power to em.
Godfather.
*Didn't read all comments.
You do seem to be an expert on absurd analogies so I will defer (ie. drunk driving = cutting someones head off and eating them).
ah well, we disagree, I'm shocked!!!
you swung and missed on that point .. i'm not saying they are the same things ... only trying to infer the notion of choice ...
but yeah - i'm not shocked we disagree ...
oh well, was aiming for the fences.
I hope all works out with this fella.
It's easy to suggest that rehabilitation works when you ignore the cases that haven't- resulting in innocent people getting hurt or losing their lives. Ask victims of paroled or released criminals how they view rehab. My point of view is that the 'collateral damage' resulting from of failed rehab efforts demands that people who commit violent crimes have forfeited their right to a normal life.
Rehabilitation is not worth the risk. For every success... their are countless failures that have had the effect of creating more harm and perpetuating violence.
"what a long, strange trip it's been"
this is why rehabilitation is 'worth the risk'.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
In this case, we are talking about medical rehabilitation, not criminal. There is a difference. I also did say in my post that not all can be rehabilitated (though I was speaking of the mentally ill).
If we speak of criminal rehabilitation, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we look at the Norwegian way of treating their criminals (not just 'punitive' incarceration) - working at their rehabilitation whilst in prison - compared to the US, it would seem there is something in it as the re-offending rate their is less than 1/2 of that of the US.
But this is probably a different discussion as the treatment/rehab we are speaking of for the purpose of this thread is medical - the control of a mental illness which, untreated, caused a person to commit a crime. Being ill, he was not responsible for his actions. With his schizophrenia under control, he acknowledges (and understands) his actions were wrong, etc. Again, no one is suggesting Li's release back into society for him to fend for himself.
Just because you have 1 success makes it a risk worth taking for all? Really? That's the standard you want?
But you missed my point entirely: you are one of the people not considering the impact of failed rehabs.
I am saying that there is a significant cost people need to deliberate before we start feeling good about the 'success stories'. It's my opinion that rehab efforts bear a significant risk to society. Every person who has been impacted by a dangerous criminal who was once incarcerated and posing no harm to anyone until their release... well... it's pretty safe to say that they would side with me.
To the person who asked for statistics to back my claim up... I offer none, nor am I inclined to for this type of discussion on a Pearl Jam forum thread. I stand by my assertion though. We have been proliferated with countless stories of criminals- supposedly rehabilitated- only to clean up their mess and offer our condolences after they have gone and re-offended. With that said, if you wish to challenge this with some statistics of your own, I might stand corrected. I should say though... that any statistic that does not display an overwhelming percentage for 'minimal' re-offences adds to what I say.
Gotchya.
You could google search...
One example..
http://www.midlandsconnect.com/news/sto ... 76J_bBSTqA
The Columbus Dispatch reports the data found that people convicted of three or more violent offenses account for less than 1 percent of the state population but 33 percent of all violent crime convictions over nearly four decades.
I would say that a lot of 'supposedly rehabilitated' criminals are not rehabilitated at all. What is called a 'rehabilitated criminal' is just one that let his sentence run it's course and has been released. Paying your dues to society by serving time for your crime is certainly not rehabilitation - just punishment. Not much in place in prisons for anything else. The type of punitive system in place is not conducive to rehabilitation. How can these criminals then re-integrate into society once their sentence over? I don't think there is much in prison to enable this. Re-offending rates prove this.
Ah, this is a solid point.
But in this particular case (and most cases for that matter), the two are intertwined. The freak's corner is using his 'illness' to excuse his 'crime' (for lack of better word). With that said, every violent criminal has some form of an excuse that has made them 'the way they are' (background, greed, alcohol, drugs, jealousy, etc.). At some point, though... an excuse and an apology are not enough to warrant an effort on society's part to rehab and give a second chance to.
I agree with this, however one could certainly allude to numerous examples of parolees who have done and said the right things, been given a clean bill of health, and upon admittance to mainstream society have proven to have been 'not as rehabilitated as advertised'.
But this post opens the can of worms. If we truly believe in rehabilitation, then I would concur with you when you suggest authentic rehabilitation efforts are not at work. If we believe in punishment, then stiffer sentences need to be in order. We sit in the middle. And, because so, we fail at both.
I am not sure how he is using his illness as an excuse. I mean it is not like the courts said "well you are mentally ill so you are free to go". I wouldn't want to go to prison and I wouldn't want to be locked in the kind of facility this guy is in either. And like I said way back, it is very likely this guy is going to be living under some kind of supervison for the rest of his life.
to begin i would suggest not putting Illness in "".
Yes every criminal does have an excuses of what made them the way they are but i would suggest that mental health is not the same as greed, alcohol, drugs etc due to the fact that mental illness is places on a person and not a choice. A person doesn't wake up one day and decide that they are going to be schizophrenic.
please read this
http://www.cmha.ca/mental_health/facts- ... 76NgMipDcs
That is sort of what I was thinking, I mean it would be like if I were driving down the road and had a non-fatal stroke but crashed my car into a crowd of people and killed them. It would be very sad and tragic, but should I be put away for murder for that sort of thing, that would totally be beyond my control?
I see what you're saying, but I don't think his schizophrenia is being used as an excuse but rather a known cause. A real, physical cause that can be treated. As it was untreated (and, as far as I know, this psychotic event was his first), he was not responsible for his actions. He had no control or say in this and could not do anything about it. Should he had been diagnosed as schizophrenic earlier (and an incredible number of people do have schizophrenic tendencies - all at different levels of course), he could have been treated a long time ago and this may not have happened. A lot of people with controlled mental illnesses are normal, active members of society.
Li had an illness, not self inflicted (though it can be by drug use, etc.) which makes it different to sentiments such as greed/jealousy or self inflicted issues such as drugs and alcohol. Not sure how one can rehab greed or jealousy but, as seen in the article posted, rehabilitation can work with drugs and alcohol abuse.
1. does vince have a background of crazy bullshit?
2. how can a mental health expert know when someone mentally fucked is for real or jerkin around with the system knowing how to play the system?
3. will vince be wearing a bullet proof vest when strolling down the sidewalks in downtown what have you, canada?
4. and finally... anyone got any pictures of this dude so we can check him out, as well as pictures of the victim?
i keep coming back to this thread even after i excused myself. i am a dick
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Rehabilitation is not a free ride - it goes with punishment. Maybe a more 'positive' type of punishment (if that makes sense).
And yes, I am sure a good number of more hardened criminals can play the system. It's difficult to play the system with an illness which can be measured.
if he is denied the right to watch american idol or canadian idol i for one will be flabbergasted to the highest order of astonishment
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
its not just 1 success. there are many successful cases of mentally ill people being able to control that illness through varous methods. im speaking of these. im not talking about out and out criminals.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
of course i am considering it. but once again i will state im not talking about out and out criminal repeat offenders. everyone is an individual.. just because one is mentally ill doesnt make one less of an individual. and these things need to be considered on a case by case basis. we dont all react to the same medications and rehab methods the same. this guy isnt being allowed out to wander the streets unsupervised. his caregivers are attempting to reintegrate him into the larger outside world again to see if he can cope. i see no problem with this.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
1)this is the first report of any crime or behavour by Li.
2)mental health worker ( i know quite alot of them in my line of work) are trained to know different areas in dealing with mental health but the fact of the matter is that there is not just one person who makes thsi decision. There are teams of different specialists who deal with the same person.
3) no one knows if he will be wearing a bullet proof vest.
4) can't help you with a picture but don't worry I don't think he will be in your area anytime soon