Do you support the death penalty for the mentally ill?

[prolesunited]

Just wondering where people stood on this issue.

[Bridget Burke]

1. Easy.

I don't support the death penalty for anyone.

[Swamp Rat]

29. My sentiments exactly!

:thumbsup:

[Iris]

46. Yep. Makes it a lot easier all the way around.

[slackmaster]

47. Same here

:yourock:

[Maat]

49. I agree ... I don't support the death penalty at all.

n/t

[txaslftist]

2. NO!

NO NO NO NO NO.

Why don't you go kick a puppy, too.

[bryant69]

3. Awkwardly framed

People who do support the Death Penalty in some cases would want to know what you meant by mentally ill, while as those who are opposed to the death penalty would happily click no.

It is possible to think that the death penalty has it's place, while still believing, for example, that Alberto Gonzeles was horribly inept in presenting his cases to Governor Bush.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[prolesunited]

6. How do you think mentally ill

should be defined?

[bryant69]

8. I'm not a doctor

But incapable of understanding the ramifications of his actions is the usual answer. But a person can have mental problems and still be able to understand that killing someone is wrong or what killing someone means.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Guaranteed]

14. To be more specific, I believe it is defined as being one of

two things, legally: one either has to not understand the REALITY of their actions (i.e. this is the real world, not a dream/fantasyland), OR they have to have no understanding of the difference between right and wrong.

[TahitiNut]

30. Under either criterion, a government is insane ...

... if it kills prisoners in cold blood. I eschew calling this a "death penalty" because I don't believe death can be called a "penalty." I eschew calling this "capital punishment" because I don't believe death can be called a "punishment."

Anyone who kills a person other than in self-defense at the time their life is threatened is a murderer. That makes a state that does so a murderer. Murder is murder.

The fact that the state regards this as "right" is a clear indication the state doesn't know the difference between right and wrong - and is insane!

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. What about the person who is able to understand what he's doing

and the ramifications, but is under such a powerful compulsion that he does it anyway?

Also, what about the difference between legal insanity and medical insanity? I could never understand why there has to be a differentation between them.

[AlbizuX]

7. ok...who voted yes?

I got to ask...who actually thinks it's ok to kill the Mentally Ill.

Didn't anyone see that movie with Demi Moore where the death of the mentally ill guy was like the last sign of apocalypse!

Seriously though, how could a mentally ill person know what he was doing during a crime?

[MadHound]

4. No, under no circumstance do I support the death penalty. n/t

[raggedcompany]

15. the death penalty is never appropriate

ever

[sam sarrha]

5. there is not proof that Death is a Penalty.. only a religious opinion, or

Revenge.. politicians promising to kill prisoners in custidy if elected is simply a promise of a Blood Sacrafice for their votes.

[SlackJawedYokel]

9. Absolutely, unequivocally NO.

Cletus

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

10. Do you support the death penalty for diabetics? same thing.

I know it isn't popular on DU, but I do believe that the death penalty is appropriate for vile serial killers/child molesters with DNA evidence. However, in cases like Andrea Yates, where there was documented evidence of high-power antipsychotic medications and inpatient/outpatient treatments, she was obviously a deeply disturbed woman. Hard to believe her husband/family didn't take it seriously enough...she should NEVER have been left alone with those kids and she should NEVER have been impregnated a 5th time. She was an obvious ticking time bomb ending in the ultimate tragedy.

[Maat]

50. You know, I respectfully disagree.

As a social worker (Child Protective Services), I sat in the holding cell with many of those vile child-molesters of which you speak, reading them their rights - the ones related to the suspect's child-related rights. They wanted death - they were walking death. They would not have given a fig if you killed them. I resolved then - even more than before - that I was against the death penalty. I would never lower myself to their level - the level of torturers and killers. They enjoy when people do. It's a sort of sick validation for them.

[sam sarrha]

11. our pResident has executed the mentally ill and the retarded..of the 152

from Texas.

[Benhurst]

12. NO! with one exception: high public officials convicted of high treason.

[mdhunter]

13. I don't support the death penalty, but if they're too disturbed to know...

the difference, why not?

Oh, sorry, you were serious :)

[Guaranteed]

16. There is only one type of case in which I believe the death penalty

is appropriate, and that is a case in which SO MANY family members and friends of victims have been affected by the convict's actions that a massive amount of closure to a tragedy would be gained from putting him or her to death.

I'm talking like Timothy McVeigh/bin Laden types.

And, even when McVeigh was killed, I didn't feel good about it, at all. My government went out of their way to kill someone who wasn't threatening anybody. It still seemed wrong.

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. Personally, I think they executed McVeigh to shut him up. n/t

[NoPasaran]

17. Of course not

If you start executing people for being mentally ill, soon you'll be putting people to death for having bad haircuts. Where will it end?

[Walt Starr]

18. If somebody has been hospitalized repeatedly for a mental illness

where they have been violent. And upon a diagnosis of being well are released where they go off their medication and again become violent, then there is no choice but the death penalty if they end up being released and committing numerous murders.

The actual act of illegality occurs when, after becoming well and with full knowledge of the potential violent nature of their actions, in an act of depraved indifference they choose to stop taking their medication putting the public at risk.

They are cognizant of the nature of their illness and the potential for harm to the public while they are on their medication and yet they choose to do so anyway. That's the crime and if the action results in multiple felonies while one or more people are killed by them, it is deserving of the death penalty.

[sam sarrha]

19. you are obviously confused or just F'n ignorant of Schizophrenia or the

present state of the mental health industry and the governments control of it in this country...

the prisons are the mental hospitals in this country..
the prison system is the problem

NOT the poor suffering son of a bitch who does not know what is going on..

they wake up in jail after being forced to take their medication and are informed of their crime and sentence.

they dont take their medication because they are Fucking crazy !!!...which leads to disaster and they are put back in prison and forced to take their medication...

the fault lies in the goverments refusal to rationally discuss the problem and do something effective about it.. but that costs money and there are rich republicans out there that deserve the money more than some fool that deserves only what he gets.. that is the political way.. the Democrats aren't much better.. but 'sometimes' they try.

[Walt Starr]

20. Not so. Case currently in chicago

whre a homeless man who is mentally ill repeatedly sexually assaulted women, would be hospitalized and medicated. Would then be deemed healthy and released. He goes off his meds and again starts sexually assaulting women.

He had been charged more than ten times. If he goes off his meds again and kills somebody, IMO he should be put to death.

[Bunny]

21. But Walt, the thing is, he goes off his meds BECAUSE of his mental

illness. Not because he willfully defies the law. It's a hallmark of mental illness to go off of medication once you start to feel better. It's not a willful choice to do so, it's *part* of the symptomology of the illness itself. Again, it is not a willful, wanton act of depraved indifference.

Having said that, I see no reason why the fellow you cited in your post shouldn't be confined to a mental institution for an indefinite period of time (read:life) if he poses that kind of danger to others.

[Walt Starr]

23. Then they cannot be released

I'm sorry, but I disagree completely with the premise that they do not know what they are doing when they REPEATEDLY go off their meds and end up in the same position. I simply do not buy it.

Then again, I would NEVER buy an insanity plea, either.

[Bunny]

24. Well, if it's something that you can NEVER buy, then you will never truly

understand mental illness. You are expecting clear, rational thinking from people who are not capable of it.

[Walt Starr]

26. Sorry if you don't like it

but if I were ever on a jury where somebody tried to claim not guilty by reason of insanity, I would convict no matter what.

[Bunny]

27. It isn't that I don't "like it".

Frankly, I don't care.

And it's good to know that you would wantonly disregard any evidence, jury instructions, etc. just to convict, no matter what. :eyes:

And there are still some among us who wonder why our judicial system is in such a shambles. Way to go, Walt! :toast:

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. Do you, then, believe that insanity is a myth? n/t

[Walt Starr]

36. No, I don;t

I believe you MUST be insane to commit murder, therefore an insanity plea is really a guilty plea.

[RaleighNCDUer]

38. Interesting. That's the same argument I use

for abolishing capital punishment altogether.

[noiretextatique]

25. you really don't understand mental illness...or THE SYSTEM

that continues to release people without access to adequate healthcare of the kind that would keep this man on medication. it seems obvious that this man shouldn't be released. when the entire system is broken, you ignore the root and complexity of the problem by assuming this man knows what he's doing. i do believe he has learned to manipulate the system, but mental illness is ILLNESS, whether you buy it or not. fortuntately, the law does recongnize that (at least to some limited extent).

[prolesunited]

28. What part of mental illness

do you not understand?

You act as if they made an active choice to discontinue drug therapy so they could kill again.

I'm not saying that mentally ill people with violent tendencies should be free to roam the streets, but why would the only possible solution be to kill them.

Can they not be put in a place where they receive appropriate treatment? Instead, we just say this is too much of a bother, so we should just kill them.

Just curious, have you known anyone who was mentally ill?

[davidinalameda]

22. if they're mentally ill

how can they be considered competent enough to be responsible for their crimes

[prolesunited]

41. Actually, there have been cases

in which they are medicated so that they are "sane" when put on trial and executed.

Here's a recent case:
The voices inside Charles Singleton's head varied, in volume and number, regardless of whether he had taken medication for his schizophrenia. Inside his Arkansas cell, he said he could often hear voices that speak of killing him. Singleton was executed by lethal injection Tuesday night at the Cummins prison unit in Varner, about 70 miles south of Little Rock.
<snip>

Singleton understood that he would be put to death and why -- the current legal standards to qualify for execution, said his attorney, Jeff Rosenzweig. Singleton, however, was rational only when he was on medication. It was that fact, as well as an 18-year-old Supreme Court ruling barring executing the insane, that his attorney, some members of the legal and medical communities and death penalty critics pointed to in opposing Singleton's execution.
<snip>

A prison psychiatrist in 1997 diagnosed Singleton as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. That same year, a prison medication review panel ordered Singleton to take antipsychotic drugs after finding he posed a danger to himself and to others.

After the medication took effect, Singleton's psychotic symptoms abated and Arkansas made plans to execute him. Singleton's attorneys filed a lawsuit arguing the state could not constitutionally restore his client's mental competency through the use of forced medication and then execute him.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/06/singleton.death.row/index.html

[DemGirl7]

31. I support the Death penalty...but for the mentally ill...

I'm totally against it..because alot of those people have trouble telling the difference from right and wrong...and if you can't...their should be some sort of alternative.

[prolesunited]

43. Why do you support the death penalty?

In what cases should it be administered? Do you think it's used fairly? How does it benefit society as a whole?

[SmokingJacket]

34. One of the many reason I don't support the DP is the difficulty in

defining "mentally ill."

How can you tell if someone understands the ramifications of what they're doing? How can you judge that someone knows right from wrong?

In my book, George Bush clearly can't tell right from wrong. Is he insane?

If someone does something they KNOW is wrong, that shows a kind of mental instability, too: a total disregard for the mores of society.

It's a fricking quagmire. My solution: NO ONE gets the death penalty, and everyone gets treatment for whatever mental problems they have, and violent prisoners stay in a humane, decent prison (or mental hospital) for life.

[RaleighNCDUer]

37. George Bush clearly can't tell right from wrong. Is he insane?

"my uncle thinks he's St. Jerome. Does that count?"

"I think that's a big yes."

[Cheswick2.0]

39. I don't support it at all

but if I did, I would still oppose it for the mentally ill.

[buddhamama]

40. I am opposed to the death penalty

n/t

[txaslftist]

42. IT DOESN"T FUCKING WORK!

I've actually prosecuted a death penalty case. Kid wanted to be a serial killer, killed a teenage boy and beheaded a teenage girl. He rode the needle.

Bully for me.

Until I found out that thirteen out of twenty-seven people on Illinois' death row were factually proven innocent by college kids in the Innocence Project.

That means the DEATH PENALTY IS INACCURATE. Innocent people are executed in this country, at something close to 50%, if the Illinois statistics mean anything. And those were only the cases where clear DNA or other irrefutable evidence existed to PROVE THE INNOCENCE of the defendants (for those of you who failed civics, we're actually supposed to be presumed innocent).

What factors are most important in determining whether you ride the spike or fire up ol' sparky or suck in almonds? The hideousness of your crime? The number of victims? The modus operandi? The amount of evidence against you?

NOPE. The most important factors are 1. YOUR RACE. 2. THE RACE OF YOUR VICTIM(S) 3. Your income. 4. The quality of your lawyer.

States that have the death penalty statistically have no lower rates of violent crime or homicide than states without it. States that reinstituted it after a brief hiatus courtesy of the Supreme Court have experienced no comensurate decrease in violent crime compared to states without the death penalty.

Gee, txaslftist, why not? You may ask.

Reread the title of this post.

[prolesunited]

44. On this case you prosecuted

Did you already not support the death penalty? If yes, wasn't it hard to go for a "win"?

If no, did this change your perspective?

My position has evolved over time. I used to be somewhat supportive of it, but then when I really started researching the issue, I became a firm opponent of it — in all cases, even when it seems like the criminal really deserves it.

[Disturbed]

45. Money.

People that are prone to be violent when off their meds are not monitored. That seems to go against their Civil Rights. Heroin addicts that are placed on Methadone must check in to be tested to be sure that they are not substituting heroin for Methadone, yet that is not a against their Civl Rights. I guess it would be impossible for America to have a system where people that were prone to violence against themselves or others could be checked out once a week to make sure that they are on their meds. Otherwise, I see no remedy for this situation.

Yates, former husband should have been prosecuted for depraved indifference. He is partly responsible for the death of his own children.

[jbnow]

53. Some places do have that system

This is a system/legal failure though and part of the problem is money.

I've seen many people found "guilty but mentally ill". The court still has jurisdiction... They get treatment and are locked up.

But options when people leave lock up are a continued care order as part of the sentencing. They are held to it for X number years after release. If they fail to meet any part of it (the medication, the checking in, the therapy or whatever is ordered) they can be pulled back in, locked up and then the years start all over.

Many effective antipsychotic drugs can be given via shots, they come in every week and get it so you know they took it. Others can be monitored taking the pill every day or serum drug levels checked.

Some MI people quit taking their meds because they can get delusions about the meds (Being poison, being a soviet plot or whatever) or feel fine and decide they don't need them anymore or hate the very real side effects. I had one client tell me his new doctor had ordered him to go off the meds...and as we talked on I learned this doctor was one of his voices and was "a world famous veterinarian."

A repeat violent offender should never ever be out on the street, mentally ill or not. The laws should be clearer, changed if they need to be.

But we don't kill them because our laws are bad! States like Texas often don't provide option of life in prison...it is death or it is 20 years. Many jurors who would not choose death as the penalty given the option of natural life spent in prison will do it just to prevent them from being out on the street again...they are killed because we play legal games like that.

It is sadly amusing that not only are we one of the only Western nation with the death penalty, to find any country that also kills those who were juveniles at the time or are mentally ill we pretty much have to go to "the axis of evil" type countries.

It is even more ironic that right wingers like the death penalty so much...I know the old testament god was harsh but when the first murder occurred he exiled Cain put a mark on him so that no one would injure him or god would smite them for doing it! But...hey that was just god. He didn't understand like they do.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Don't support the DP

The system is too flawed. And, even it weren't, what does it solve?

[BonjourUSA]

51. The death penalty is the barbarity with the good consciousness.

Why Anybody would get the right to be killed just because he/she is mentally "normal" ?

[Deja Q]

52. Only if the mental health providers get the same, if they misdiagnosed.

Given the gaggle of paint-by-numbers toddlers who claim to be professionals, I wouldn't mind if some of them got fired or sued.

[NightTrain]

54. I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances!

Period. End of story.