General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy family is not "shielding" a dangerous person and I will not tolerate those who imply otherwise
I said I was going to log out of this site last night and I did, but this morning I woke up and had the really bad idea to log back in and found a post which implies that my family may be shielding a dangerous person from authorities.
Here is what was said to me...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5000829
I don't care if the person used an "if" statement, implying that my family may be shielding a dangerous person from authorities based solely on the fact that I have a brother with schizophrenia is not something that I should have to tolerate on this site or anywhere else.
Let me be clear: my brother is not a dangerous person and he has not been shielded from authorities. I should not even have to say this because there was never anything I posted which suggests he is a dangerous person, schizophrenia does not automatically make a person dangerous.
The jury let that post attacking my family stand with a 7-0 vote which means not only does the direct attack on my family remain but I am unable to alert on the person's follow up post which says "reality can be harsh" when I attempt to stand up for my family.
Maybe this will get locked as meta, but I feel that when implications are made to suggest my family is shielding a violent person I should be able to do whatever I need to do to defend my family. Because the jury decided 7-0 that attacks on my family are acceptable as long as they include "if" statement I am left with no defense against those who imply my family just might be shielding a dangerous person.
If anyone is still wondering why I don't feel welcome at this site right now the fact that a jury let a post stand which implies my family may be shielding a dangerous person with a 7-0 vote and took away my ability to defend my family against such attacks for the next 24 hours should tell you something.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The NRA would like very much to use the issue of patient rights to continue
to clean their hands of responsibility for their twisted love of guns..for PROFIT.
Fuck them. On edit, and all their apologists too.
JJChambers
(1,115 posts)Elliot killed 6 victims, half he killed using a knife. This is about mental health. By making it about guns we are ignoring the very real probl of poor mental healthcare in our country. There is NO reason that Elliot should have been out on the street after his obvious mental break and homicidal ideations over the last month.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)JJChambers
(1,115 posts)By making this about the NRA. He shot three people to death. He also stabbed three people to death. And he left rambling videos and a manifesto in which he appears extremely mentally ill and deranged.
This is about mental illness. To make it about NRA is a disservice to the victims and the mentally ill people who need our help.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Wake the hell up. Do the God damn math, the NRA wants to infringe on mental health patient
rights, they are willing to throw these people unfairly under the bus so they can continue
their guns for profit.
Who perpetuates the violent gun culture, those afflicted with mental health issues? NO
Who perpetuates the availability of guns, the mental health profession? NO
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Is everyone who thinks otherwise guilty of throwing people with mental health issues "under the bus"?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)the NRA would prefer to avoid, and that is gun legislation, overall. They are willing to circumvent
the right to privacy and make our gun violence culture about the mental health of a small percentage of
Americans.
I don't know, are you willing to throw them under the bus? I am not. The prevailing issue is
why our gun laws allow easy access to guns, period. The answer is lobby money.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)be barred from purchasing assault weapons. And I don't view this as throwing them under the bus.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)that your opinion would not likely coincide with the advantage that the NRA is looking for
in scapegoating those who have mental health issues. The NRA needs to be held responsible
for their positions, all they're trying to do now is find an out that will not decrease too much
their bottom line. We all need to demand an end to the easy access to guns for good.
You had a thread earlier today I posted in and as I said there, this recent case we still
do not have many questions answered, we need more information.
This is one snapshot at the NRA's agenda but there is much more available on the subject:
Guns and the mentally ill
Why the NRA keeps talking about mental illness, rather than guns
http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2013/03/guns-and-mentally-ill
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)With his refusing to take anti-psychotics more than a year ago, along with the youtube videos, there should have been a way to stop him from accumulating his arsenal.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)How was he financing his life? Only through his family as far as we know now.
As I said earlier, there is much we do not know yet.
No comment on the NRA agenda I see. You support their efforts or not?
There should be a way to stop many arsenals, there are gun tragedies consistently in the US
and yet the NRA wants to focus on only people with mental health issues through slippery
slope legislation.
The two young brothers yesterday, one shot the other over a clothing argument, the shooter
then killed himself. What label of crazy does that fit into in your opinion or is there much
more nuance when it comes to gun violence in America?
Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)should be able to legally buy guns, unless or until he has been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility. At least that's what I gathered from a post of his on another thread.
I replied with a suggestion that the threshold for taking away someone's gun rights should be slightly lower than that for involuntary committment, but I never got a response back from him.
That idea, though, did not seem to evoke a great deal of enthusiasm from the "gun rights" crowd here.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)In my opinion, if a Doctor treating any person with a mental health issue places them on major medications that prescription- should tag a ban on guns sales.
If the meds contradict drinking, then alcohol sales should also be tagged as banned.
This leaves the family to care for their family member as they wish.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)There will always be people with ill will and violent inclinations.
We can maybe create a better system for helping people who
are suffering from mental illness, and supporting their families,
and investing in more research, better facilities.
It will probably take a long time to change the system, and
the consciousness of the people as well.
In the meantime, making it MUCH MUCH HARDER for EVERYBODY
mentally ill or not to get a gun is a GOOD IDEA>
People who want guns enough should be willing to go through
their hoops. If they aren't, something is wrong. They fall into
the mentally ill with possible egomaniacal violent tendencies
category, and should not be allowed any guns at all except
cap pistols and bb guns.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)I have said almost the same thing on other threads. So many just don't get it.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)NO restrictions on gun ownership whatsoever, and the resulting mayhem.
Fuck the NRA.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Fuck the NRA.
Fuck the NRA.
Fuck the NRA.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Why is it the NRA and other lunatics vehemently oppose the registration of firearms (i.e. guns and their owners being put on a database) claiming some violation of their rights ..... yet .... they promote the idea that putting folk with specific medical conditions (mental health diagnosis) as a perfectly acceptable idea.
How does this even make sense ... it is OK (and necessary) to share the most personal data ... yet ownership of an inanimate object (or objects) crosses all lines and violates all human and privacy rights ....
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)If not, then you are pulling the mentally ill claim out of your ass.
JJChambers
(1,115 posts)elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)Even a family with $ can't keep their kid locked up in treatment, rehab, or the psych ward without the child's permission once the kid is 18.
With ACA now rehab and mental health coverage is there for millions - but they must USE it.
And there's too much gun love in this country
jwirr
(39,215 posts)specific illness to turn to violence in this country. We have a culture that encourages us to solve our problems through violence. There are many people who reject the use of violence as a means of solving them and that includes many persons who are mentally ill. Think of all the ways we teach violence and ask yourself if this might be one of the causes of all these killings.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)It entertains us on TV, in the movies and even in our games.
And they will tell you that it is just a movie or a game and it has no effect on our children that watch thousands of murders, explosions and mayhem by the time they reach puberty...they know it is just pretend we are told.
And so it will continue, and we will blame everything on the earth for it but that, because we just love it..it excites us, makes us imagine we are powerfull...and like in Rome it will continue to bring us nothing but trouble.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Not to mention people in other countries watch the same movies and play the same games we do. Yet our murder rate is much higher than any other First World nation.
Though I do agree young children should be shielded from violent entertainment as much as possible.
eridani
(51,907 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)Any links?
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)getting lead out of paints and gasoline being tied to a decrease in violent crimes over the last few decades, but it was so long ago that I can't recall how strong of a correlation it was, or whether they actually implied causation.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)The US is a violent culture. We encourage violence in children, whether it is protecting bullies by blaming their victims (you're too sensitive, he was just "playing around," you need to "get over it," etc.) or protecting adult perpetrators of violence from the consequences of their behavior (again, by victim blaming).
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)I haven't seen the movies myself and don't want to, but
he must have been immersed in those stories, making his
life and identity fairly cartoonish, though not in a funny way.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)killing women by the time he saw The Hunger Games. I read his manifesto. He was well into fascism and wanting to kill women long before he saw The Hunger Games.
onecaliberal
(32,489 posts)Notified police. Police interviewed Elliot, and determined he was "charming" and not a threat.
phil89
(1,043 posts)You appear to be woefully uninformed about this as well as the history of mistreatment of people with mental illness in this country. Most of which is based on similar ignorance and fear.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)You gunnners' "mental health" meme is just a friggin NRA talking point.
And yes aI know he was mentally hill. That is not the point!
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)his mental state. Otherwise, you are just making shit up. Also, you pretend you give a shit about people with mental illness while stigmatizing us further. I, for one, see right through you.
prefunk
(157 posts)You have some very valid points, yet seem (understandably) angry and defensive, and not open to seeing others' POV. Perhaps taking a short break from DU to find some calm and let go of your anger is in order?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Not all points of view deserve respect, I see no reason to be open to points of view which create stigma for my family.
You are in a lot of pain, that is obvious. For your own sake, friend, take a break. You will not find peace here on DU today. Of that I am sure.
polly7
(20,582 posts)JJChambers
(1,115 posts)Take a step back. It's just the internet. I wish your family the best and I hope your brother finds peace and learns how to manage his illness.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Don't tell me to take a step back while you continue to push for locking up mentally ill people who have committed no crime.
JJChambers
(1,115 posts)uppityperson
(115,674 posts)criteria.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia back in the day before there were effective treatments. I had a dear friend who suffered greatly with bipolar disorder. I have a brother, two cousins, a sister in law who all suffer with various mental illnesses. One of those individuals attempted suicide and two of them attempted and succeeded. I remember a couple of them becoming extremely violent during psychotic breaks and acting out. My father would become extremely violent and abusive when he was experiencing a psychotic break. My friend, who weighed all of 105 lbs. soaking wet, heaved a waiting room chair through a window when she had decompensated. I've watched these people go through cycles of decompensation and recovery over the years with great pain for them and us. And each decompensation made recovery all that much more difficult.
I understand the pain you and your family are dealing with but I also understand that if the law would have allowed us to intervene to get help for my family members earlier, we may not have had to attend funerals. I have very mixed feelings in this area. It is not easy nor are there an quick fixes. I just know that there are individuals who would benefit from intervention so that they do not spiral out of control. This is just my opinion and based on my experiences with various individuals in my own life.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Back in the day there were places where the mentally ill could stay and be observed in a nice place. Reagan wanted to save money and closed all the facilities down. Now there are no places left or very few. That one Congressman's son was turned away from a facility due to lack of beds and ended up killing himself (and if I remember others). It is totally Reagan's fault. The thing I find amazing is that we have had two Democratic Presidents since then and they have not opened those facilities back up. Reagan was just awful for the mentally ill.
blm
(112,920 posts)describing what CAN happen. I did not feel disrespected or accused. I understood exactly what the poster was saying because my family lived it.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)gun nutters' viewpoints.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)In the course of a dialogue I have a tendency to make hypotheticals such as, "If you were to do..." Lately I've been catching myself because I know such statements never read well for the other party.
That being said, people have an obligation, morally and in many places legally, to notify authorities if a person in their care is a danger to others. That fact could have been stated without inferring anything on the part of your family.
tblue37
(64,982 posts)scary videos promising to commit violence.
It doesn't matter whether families seek help for their loved ones or not, they are not going to get the support they need. That is true whether the individual in question is homicidal, suicidal, or not even slightly dangerous to himself or others.
And it doesn't matter whether the families of those who *might* harm themselves or others want to keep guns away from their loved ones. Because the NRA fights against even the most reasonable background checks or restrictions on sales, people like Elliot Rodgers will always be able to buy as many guns and as much ammunition as they want, regardless of the scary videos they post.
moriah
(8,311 posts)It took going before a special mental health court with evidence that my friend was a danger to himself or others. All that was required was our testimony of his threats to kill himself, though we had recordings of the threats and proof from the pawn shop that he had been attempting to purchase a firearm before the emergency order to commit him was issued.
We weren't even family.
And now, he can't buy firearms due to having an involuntary commitment for suicidal impulses in his record.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)People say cruel, thoughtless shit on the nets.
He doesn't know you personally, so anything he says doesn't mean much. Slap him on ignore and relax.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)He's talking shite. Even if you had got him the max punishment for that post (a hide), people would still be able to read it.
Main thing right now is to not let him get any more hides on you.
uppityperson
(115,674 posts)and it is upsetting you more. It is obvious what he is doing and saying and I do noth think you will chanage his mind or get him to see what is is really saying. Those of us who understand it is apparent to.
hunter
(38,264 posts)Want to know something dangerous? It's this nation's sick celebration of guns.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)I mean, if you want to own guns, and can pass a background check and afford a license, then I don't have a problem. It's the "celebration" of guns as some holy totem that appalls me.
blm
(112,920 posts)describing what CAN happen in a family. I didn't feel targeted.
I haven't a clue how old you are, but, my family took many years to wrap our own brains and emotions around the actual weighing of my sister's needs and the safety of the many lives around her.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)but he was never a danger to anyone but himself.
blm
(112,920 posts)became a whole other story.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)She cut all the electrical cords to all appliances one day as a teenager, attempted to kill her own parents several times, ran away a couple of times and eventually killed herself. She spent her life in and out of treatment and facilities and broke her parents and relatives hearts over and over again. There were brief periods of promise where we all hoped she would stay on her meds and have a chance at a somewhat normal life.
The only other person I knew who was diagnosed as schizophrenic was a good friend in high school. He also killed himself during his second year of college.
Does this mean all people diagnosed with schizophrenia are dangerous? I'm not qualified to answer that. But I don't think they should be around or have access to guns.
blm
(112,920 posts)When the original post was made that upset the poster above, the word IF was used specifically, and I understood exactly what was being said.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Though I agree the mentally ill should not have guns.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)It was a warning, based upon my observations and experiences having been in a job where I encountered a lot of mentally ill people at their worst.
I didn't accuse you of anything, and that wasn't my intent. It certainly wasn't an attack.
Rather I was hoping you would take a moment to reflect on how your family is handling your brother to make sure you are not making the same mistake I saw in virtually every family dealing with this issue.
If your family is not shielding him and is ensuring adequate measures are taken- great. I congratulate you for being more responsible than most families in your position and doing the right thing for your brother.
A good check on that would be- would your brother pass a background check to buy a gun today? If so, the family should take steps to correct that. I don't expect you to answer if he would or not, I just hope you consider that question.
Once again, that was not intended as an attack and my apologies that it came across as such. I should have been more mindful of your situation and your sensitivities on the issue, but my only intent was to share my experience and hope it made you assess your handling of your situation from that perspective.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)If you are going to continue to question my family when you know nothing about them however and leave your offensive posts up then I am going to stand by my words as well.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)I posted nothing about your family, except a statement that "IF" you were doing something, something I saw in a lot of families in your shoes, it was not a good way to go.
I made no accusations.
I never claimed you were doing such.
I said "IF" in a warning based upon my experience.
And it was as much a statement to any family member who may be in your shoes and reading this, who may not want to post, not just to you. It was based on my experience dealing with this, and I think it needs to stay up because my observations about how families deal with this is still valid- suppressing it doesn't help anybody.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Your if statement does not make it any better, you never had any reason to believe my brother is a threat or that my family is shielding him.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)They are real world, real life experience.
You can say they don't apply in your case, and I will take your word on it as I don't have any reason to doubt you, but that doesn't invalidate my observations.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)You have absolutely zero real world experience in my family life and don't pretend that you do.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)My observations are of many, many families.
I was not, not now not ever, just taking about you or your family nor have I ever claimed to have observed your family.
Your arguing against words I never said and things I never said. No point in debating when your seeing things that are not there.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)So yes, you were talking about my family and you deserve to be called out on it.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)I said IF.
If they are not, then nothing applies.
You have been clear you are not, so case closed.
It's that simple.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... you not being able to grasp the concept of the English word "if."
Really, you need to give this up. You are making yourself look bad.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I really don't care how you think I look, I am doing the right thing in standing up for my family and I am not going to let you make me feel bad about myself for doing it.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The poster stated quite clearly accusatory and inappropriately: Attitudes like your failing to admit that many mentally ill people do pose a problem and danger...
Attitudes like yours....what about that sentiment you don't understand is shameful and you persist
as others have here to defend the remarks.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Wash. state Desk Jet
(3,426 posts)authorities and involuntary commitment in relation to mental health issues and the family structure ,that is just a bit too far. And ignorance is no excuse. You don't understand the laws of this land.And you are clueless to just how the system works.
This has gone on long enough.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)When I was a deputy I was the one they called to take the person in when they were at their wits end and had let a problem go without help way too long, so they were restoring to calling the police.
I've seen first hand the results of not seeking proper treatment early on and sheltering people who need help in a misguided attempt to help them, when people view treatment and the system as something to be avoided.
I don't advocate involuntary commitment next for all, or even most. I do advocate increased monitoring of behavior and more robust and thorough intervention long term by mental health professionals and the community instead of leaving friends and families on their own until they get desperate and call the police or until someone gets hurt, be it the person needing help or somebody around them.
Wash. state Desk Jet
(3,426 posts)and you know only a judge can order involuntary commitment . And you know that is a very sensitive and difficult thing for a judge to do.
And if you advocate increased monitoring of mental health patients ,where do you think the money will come from to provide such an operation ?
Here's a hint, most of the homeless persons living on the streets have serious psychological issues that require professional attention, but there is no help for them. The community clinics are over loaded .
The issue you are on is far greater than your experiences in life and far more complicated than you I think are able to get a mind wrap around.
In case you don't know, everything is about passing the buck. You can advocate all you like, the fact of the matter is the system is broken.
For crying out loud we do not expect cops to hold masters degrees in psychology, but get a little more educated on the topic before you advocate will ya.
Listen, it is far better to know than it is to think that you know.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Leme
(1,092 posts)it is an assault on the guy's family.
-
calling something into question can be an assault.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)"If you vote republican, you need to have a serious look at what you are doing and quit voting against your own interests."
If I say that to you do you take that to mean I am accusing you of being a rethug and get all bent out of sorts? Or do you say "Hmm, I don't vote that way, so it doesn't apply to me"?
Leme
(1,092 posts)example of "if" as an assault
-
If you had a better grasp of what you are saying, you might be sensible.
blm
(112,920 posts)occurred in my family.
I wasn't offended and didn't feel attacked.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Don't try to tell my that when he said "your family" he was not questioning my family. Your family was never mentioned, mine was. Don't tell me I should not be offended by it.
blm
(112,920 posts)IF your family has been......like many OTHER families with schizophrenic members......
People get what they want to get, imo, and don't when they don't.
Leme
(1,092 posts)suggesting things.
-
if she is a murderer...
-
if he was a communist...
-
if he lied...
-
If she was ....
blm
(112,920 posts)care to realize. Members of my family went through a defensive period, too. Fortunately, for Bjorn's family his brother has NOT posed a great danger. Other families would find the original post and his subsequent replies very accurate.
Leme
(1,092 posts)so it is an assault. And in general it does not apply.. so in general it is an assault.
-
blm
(112,920 posts)Unless you have spent 4 decades living in fear for your life, the lives of your family, and the lives of dozens of children and strangers because of a schizophrenic sibling, you can't judge those of us who HAVE.
You want to put yourselves in one pair of shoes and declare all others null and void.
Move on. Your narrow observations do not make you correct in this case.
Leme
(1,092 posts)that his brother is the cause? I made no observations about your family, or his.
-
Are you saying every schizophrenic sibling causes "fear for your life, the lives of your family, and the lives of dozens of children and strangers". Because if you are... that is what I take issue with.
blm
(112,920 posts)words. My view is that your obtuseness is INTENTIONAL in order to continue your game of pot-stirring.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Leme
(1,092 posts)it was a backhanded attacked couched in "if"
fried eggs
(910 posts)Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Why are you making the Rodger case about you and your brother? When someone does something like this, we are allowed to wonder if they were mentally ill. We are allowed to wonder if perhaps the mentally ill should not have access to firearms. You taking that personally is on you. Do you care about anyone else? Society does.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)JJChambers
(1,115 posts)Then what on earth makes you think these threads are about him? How many threads like this have you brought you brother into??
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)If you can spout your ignorant views then I can speak from my personal experience.
JJChambers
(1,115 posts)You say your brother takes his medication and isn't a danger. So these threads don't have anything to do with him. Why keep inserting him into it if he isn't dangerous?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I know very well that he is not dangerous but I also know that some people like to falsely portray the mentally ill as dangerous and he is harmed by that stereotype.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Come on, man. A reality check is order, no?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)With every post, you further cement this issue to the top of the page, ensuring that nothing will change, that nothing will happen.
Let it go. It's just an anonymous internet message board. Is it really worth all the effort and emotion you are expending?
If you really think so, good luck with that.
I hope you can find the strength, calm and inner peace to Let. It. Go.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Which only contributes to an already existing social stigma.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)Imagine having mental illness that is treated and not being a violent person, but having to read over and over again how I, along with everyone else who has mental illness that is treated, should be rounded up and involuntarily committed just because of mental illness because we are assumed dangerous. I've never been a danger to anyone. I don't get this witch hunt mentality suggesting people with mental illness be rounded up and involuntarily committed and other nonsense that is being suggested and that is exactly what this mob scene on DU is, a witch hunt.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)That poster and too many others are posting with the attitude that the mentally ill must be 'dealt with' somehow besides leaving it to actual doctors. It's very creepy and ridiculous to have to deal with on DU.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The implications may seem benign to you, but they were not to the poster, who
was understandably offended. Yet you are here to further the bruise with a question
about their motives regarding caring about society..shameful, truly.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)alphafemale
(18,497 posts)They should not have access to guns or pointy things.
ever
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)Yes, a diagnosis of schizophrenia does up the risk for commission of a violent act (as compared to general populations).
But not by anything even remotely approaching 15 gazillion percent.
Also, schizophrenia isn't really the diagnosis you should be worried about:
violent behavior were significantly increased (p < 0.05) among individuals with substance use
disorders, pathological gambling, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorders, panic disorder with
agoraphobia, specific phobia, and paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, and obsessive-compulsive
personality disorders.
The majority of individuals with psychiatric disorders do not engage in violent
behavior, and public perception associated with stereotypic violence among individuals with
psychiatric disorders appears unwarranted. Elevated risks and burden of violent behavior were not
equally shared across the spectrum of psychiatric disorders, with particular disorders, especially
substance use disorders, contributing disproportionately to the burden.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2922980/pdf/nihms225216.pdf
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Whether one has a diagnosis of mental illness or not (I have been posting this "all over the board"
uppityperson
(115,674 posts)others. Is that really what you mean?
"They should not have access to guns or pointy things ever". So they should not have scissors or be allowed to use a knife to cut up food? Seriously? Pencils are pointy as are pens so they can not have those either. Pruning shears are also pointy so no gardening. Screwdrivers are pointy so no tools allowed beyond hammers and saws.
Seriously?
moriah
(8,311 posts)Might as well just go ahead and pre-emtpiely lock up the 0.7% of the population diagnosed with schizophrenia, if they are *soooooo* violent.
And Elliott Rodger was not schizophrenic. I read all 130 pages of his "manifesto", and he'd been violent before. He tried to throw women off of a balcony because he saw them having fun, assaulted women because they didn't smile back at him. To me his motivations sound a lot like what motivated the Zodiac killer (considering his pattern of killing couples on lover's lanes) and Ted Bundy, who always chose a specific "type", the ones who resembled the woman he thought he should have had (who rejected him).
All sick fucks, but not the type of sick that medication can cure.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)Medication would not have helped him.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)That is what the vast majority of you on this witch hunt are doing when you talk about mental illness and make up statistics as you go along.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)You and your family are shielding a person that is more likely to be the victim of physical and /or emotional violence. You are shielding a person that is very vulnerable to exploitation by others. You are shielding a person that is likely to be the victim of (other people's ) ignorance and bigotry.
Sadly, the historical view of mental illness = demonic possession, has new proponents with new names and new faces
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)The vast number of posters in this and the other thread are expressing compassion and understanding
deafskeptic
(463 posts)I think assault rifles should be limited to the various branches of the military.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I have posted my views on gun control all over this board ... gun violence is a significant issue in the US ... treatment for the mentally ill is a significant problem in the US. They are two separate and distinct issues (that occasionally overlap in horrific and tragic ways).
I am willing to address and talk about both issues ... but, I will not lay the blame for one of the issues on the other.
hunter
(38,264 posts)"...that occasionally overlap in horrific and tragic ways"
Yep. The gun lovers are using "mental illness" as a distraction.
The fact is mentally ill people are frequently shot by violent cops and other "responsible" gun owners, but then too it's never about the guns.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)Thank you. I'm glad to see more people standing up to the ignorance and attempting to educate people. Most mentally ill people are nonviolent. We sure seem to attract people who want to lock us away and people who are violent toward us us though.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Such is life. Peace.
DesertDiamond
(1,616 posts)high-functioning, value-creating members of society. I think people who think all schizophrenics should be given over to the authorities are easily frightened. They're the same kind of people who think certain types of dogs should be banned just because a very small percentage of them have attacked people. My answer to this is -- Cars can be dangerous -- shall we ban them? Water can be dangerous -- shall we ban it? What else do you think is dangerous that you would like to ban? People can be dangerous -- shall we ban people? I mean really, where does the fear stop? It stops with getting all the facts and using our wisdom to sort through it.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)I personally would rather have a public transit system since I was hit by a car as a pedestrian.
That is all, carry on.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Thank you for this post. Seriously, thank you.
TeamPooka
(24,156 posts)davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)I very much feel your anger and am 110% with you. I believe it's time to make my own OP. Please understand that the people who are judging such things in a way to paint the mentally ill as "the real danger" here - are primarily ignorant, not intentionally cruel or deliberately offensive. They simply do not understand the nature of mental illness. Not as those of us who have lived it, or have lived with someone with it do.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)It is very poignant and very worth reading.
It is a summer holiday (we are all outside ... or doing whatever / not the computer) and I am afraid it won't get the exposure it deserves.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)JVS
(61,935 posts)On Mon May 26, 2014, 10:27 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Any limits are only as good as what the government knows about a person in order to judge
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5000829
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
I signed back into DU just to alert on this post as this implies that my family may have been "shielding" my brother from authorities. My brother is not dangerous, there is nobody shielding him from the authorities. To blame the problem of violence on people with mental illness and suggest that those of us who have mentally ill family members may be shielding them is pure bigotry. I don't feel I should have to respond to this person and defend my family when my family did nothing wrong, my brother is not dangerous nor are most people with schizophrenia and I do not appreciate being told that I am part of the problem based on my brother's disability. This is bigotry and should be hidden.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 26, 2014, 10:42 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The idea that you owe the authorities information about your family is wrong, stupid, and about par for the course considering the number of authoritarian stooges running about here these days, but that does not mean that acknowledging that it is possible for a mentally ill person to pose a danger to people is bigotry.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I sympathize with the OP/alerter's struggle to help his brother and sympathize with the battle against stigmatization and prejudice against the mentally ill, but this post is not the source of the problem.
Poster uses the word "if" referring to OP's family, which makes it conditional and can be simply countered in a post just as the alerter does here when he or she says nobody is shielding his brother. The posts statement "your failing to admit" is blunt but not over the top. The poster is NOT blaming violence on people with mental illness because the poster uses the word "many" which does not mean a majority. "Many" can be tens of thousands and out of a couple million people mentally ill in various degrees that might be 1 percent, which is nothing like blaming all mentally ill people.
This is an emotional topic and nerves are raw and it is hard to make reasoned points crystal clear in a perfectly soothing way so some statements are going to seem hurtful to the OP without rising to meet DU standards for hiding.
After having raised the whole topic AND drawn his own family into it, the alerter should not be surprised that his brother is being discussed, and the alerter is best advised to rebut the points in posts.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post says: And if.....your family has been shielding your brother from the system in any way, not allowing authorities a full and accurate picture of his mental state, you are part of the problem even if your intent it well meaning. To me, the qualifier AND IF is important. The poster does not imply that the family has shielded, the poster states IF the family has shielded. These are hard topics, and I understand the sense of outrage, but to me, there is truth in what the poster is saying.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This issue has to be seen both ways. And I say that from a POV that includes experience of 4 decades of my family dealing with a sibling's schizophrenia.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster makes a point. Sorry if it disagrees with the POV of another DUer.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)but herself. As is the case with most schizophrenics.
But it's a crying shame that we ignore the need to exert control over those who ARE a public danger.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)Which is both shameful and hazardous, for society as a whole.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Have you taken every step possible to prevent him from having access to firearms?
If the answer to these question is yes, then you are "shielding" him from authorities.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I could not even imagine my brother buying a gun, he is not violent and he has no interest in guns at all. I am sure that he would never even touch a gun if someone asked him to, he is the absolute last person anyone needs to worry about when it comes to guns.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Is he mentally unfit to own firearms?
Is he legally prohibited from buying firearms?
Have you taken every step possible to prevent him from buying firearms?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)There are hell of a lot of people who are far more dangerous than my brother that are not mentally ill and can get guns. I am all for stricter gun control to limit the people who can access firearms.
Whether or not my brother could buy a gun I honestly don't know, I do know that many people including authority figures know about his illness so it is very likely it would show up in a background check. As I said however my brother has no interest in guns at all. There is absolutely no reason to call the authorities and tell them to keep guns away from a person who has no interest in guns.
Do you support keeping guns away from people who drink alcohol? Many of them are far more dangerous than my brother, but I bet you won't tell their families they are shielding them from authorities if they don't call and warn the authorities that guns should be kept away from them.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)He should be prevented from buying firearms, but he isn't because of the actions of your family. You are "Shielding" him from the legal requirements of his mental condition.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)You have no fucking business speaking this sort of shit about my family.
You are a gun advocate, I see you advocating for gun ownership for damn near everyone on this board all the fucking time. Yet when it comes to my brother who does not even want a gun anywhere near him you expect us to call and report him to the authorities.
Well the authorities already know about him, we have not hidden is illness from anyone and in fact my brother has even delivered public speeches about his illness to medical professionals.
As a person that advocates guns to act is if my brother is more dangerous than the NRA nut jobs is absurd.
Screw you for even suggesting that my family is in the wrong for not treating my brother as a criminal, you should be ashamed of your bigotry.
Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #114)
Post removed
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)The NRA nuts are a hell of a lot more dangerous than my brother will ever be.
My family never hid my brother's illness, the authorities are well aware of his illness. I am not doing anything wrong by trusting my brother and not feeling like I need to call the authorities and warn them of a threat that is not even existant
You are an awful person for attacking my family this.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Why are you attacking me for discussing the fact that you are not taking the necessary steps to prevent him from having access to firearms?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #119)
Post removed
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I said the authorities are well aware of his illness, I am his brother and it is not my responsibility to know the details of what is in the background check databases on him, it is my responsibility to treat him like family. I know my brother is not a danger and I am not going to treat him like a criminal, I am going to give him support.
I will tell you however that my family has worked very hard to give my brother a better life and to educate the public about mental health issues. My father has held a full time job as a mental health advocate for nearly two decades now and has helped countless mentally ill people get the resources they need.
Again you know JACK SHIT about my family, stop your bigoted attacks against them.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)You should know!
I really support you giving him a better life. I support your father helping other people live a more fulfilling life. I can't support letting the mentally unfit purchase/own firearms. I can't support the people in their lives being willfully ignorant to their ability to purchase firearms.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I have never even considered whether he could buy a gun because the thought of him buying a gun is so absurd, there is no way in hell he would ever even try to buy a gun. He is frightened of guns, you know jack shit about him or our family. I may not know every last detail of his life, but he is my brother and I have known him my entire life. I would guess you probably don't know every last detail of your family's database records either, but knowing them personally is a lot more important than knowing what is stored in a database. It is not like our family has tried to hide anything about him, but we don't treat him like a criminal and pull up background checks on him either.
Don't even pretend to claim you support my brother in any way, you have very clearly shown you are are judgmental against him. You are a bigot against mentally ill people.
uppityperson
(115,674 posts)is "mentally unfit" as that description could cover a hell of a lot of people.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Now tell me how irresponsible my family is, will you? Tell me how violent I am and how I'm a danger to society because I was diagnosed with a mental illness. Tell me how I should be locked away forever because I have a mental illness, and I own a collection of knives so I'm extra dangerous! I could go unregulated and go off my medicine, so I cannot be trusted with my pills! And if I am off my pills, I'm more likely to go on a rampage with a gun because I am the problem, not the gun, because I believe that the gun will protect me, protect me from strangers who look at me funny.
If this is your reality then I have to say someone has paranoia problems.
Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)In fact, he's a master at baiting, but not on this thread anymore.
Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)I think that you're projecting onto his brother, things that you really see in yourself.
I think that you need to do something about yourself if, as it appears, you believe that your own possession of firearms may represent a threat to others. You need to stop "shielding" yourself and get yourself the help, and the restrictions, that you know you need. JMHO.
liberalhistorian
(20,809 posts)because my adult son is an aspie, so the assumption from too many people now is that he's somehow "dangerous" and should be "dealt with", never mind that he's never been violent to anyone, ever, or had any intentions of being so or any similar ideations. THIS is the kind of thing that will happen if a knee-jerk "lock them all up" attitude is allowed to prevail, it will assuredly be a slippery slope, it will NOT stop with just those who have actually been violent and dangerous, and it will become an excuse to put away anyone who doesn't conform to rigid standards of "normalcy", whatever the fuck that is.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)that they'll be doing it in the name of protecting Freedumb.
I have a five year old autistic son. I hope the Freedumb brigade doesn't get the kind of influence they're looking for by the time he's old enough for them to decide he's some sort of threat.
And these guys are calling other people "crazy".
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I just read this thread and i am embarassed. I don't know why but i feel like a jerk. Maybe jerkness is catching. I just read you being accused of allowing your brother access to firearms that he doesn't want access to and sort of treated like a criminal.
Something is very wrong with the way you are being attacked for - you know what, to be honest, i'm not quite sure what crime you are accused of. Setting your brother loose on the street with a machine gun??
He sound like a person more likely to be a victim than a violent criminal.
Doesn't sound like he has an interest in guns.
This is weird.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)It is messed up and I am quite saddened by the bigotry that has been shown, but I have been grateful for several people including you who have stood up for me.
Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)by using people like your brother as scapegoats.
They're scared of having their toys taken away, and fear makes people lash out. I'm sorry that you and your family got caught in the crossfire.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)but they fight background checks for all gun sales? Good grief, are we supposed to "turn in"family members who have never demonstrated any violence towards others to satisfy the nra trying to avoid more gun legislation? I have taken care of some folks who should not have access to weapons, yet gun rights groups start foaming at the mouth when you want to include access to weapons in a health assessment. I frankly don't understand any logic behind the statements made by some gun rights advocates, as far as I can tell they want some kind of data base of the mentally ill, yet they don't want law enforcement or healthcare professionals to ask if someone has access to guns, yet they don't want the government to know who owns a gun, yet they want to know if mentally ill people own a gun? Does any of this make sense to anyone? And these open carry folks walking around shopping malls would be the 1st to scream like a stuck pig if a cop asked them what the heck they're up to. How are we going to protect society from dangerous people if we can't find out who is buying guns? The nra and gun groups are not that stupid, they say nonsensical things to divert attention to a group they can scapegoat.
I have worked with mentally ill people for decades and I have a family member who is bipolar, there are a handful of people I've met in that capacity who actually even want a gun. The mentally ill are citizens who also have rights to not be placed on a data base list based on a diagnosis. How could anyone who supports the 2nd amendment agree with Wayne Lapierre when he supports a data base of the mentally ill? I find that terrifying. He didn't clarify people adjudicated by a court where they have their rights protected, he says a database of mentally ill people.
We need more legislation to restrict the sale of guns and we need better mental health care, I don't see how you do one without the other.
LeftOfWest
(482 posts)Well said. Your words stand on their own.
Bigoted and racist hypocrites are the NRA.
On edit, spelling and remembering being told correctly the NRA is Nothing but Racist Assholes.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Crunchy Frog
(26,548 posts)4Q2u2
(1,406 posts)You must turn over the possible dangerous being to the nearest decontamination facility for a full screening and total re-education
of his Core intellect. The Collective will not stand by and allow you to not Obey what we want. We do not care what you and your family believe of your Brother, we know better than you.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)I think someone accusing you of doing something illegal simply because you point out that your brother is not violent should get that person tombstoned. That is truly horrible to accuse someone of "shielding" a nonviolent person.
It's like a mob scene on DU lately with the way so many people seem to think people with mental illness are all shooters and should be rounded up and locked away or worse. It's preposterous. What makes them think they have the right to go after innocent people like that? Something is incredibly wrong on a site when someone can make such accusations against you when you KNOW your own brother and know he is not violent, for crying out loud, and the jury lets it stand. I still think that should be grounds to PPR them, but of course, admins here probably will not do that.
I'm sorry you have been caught in the crossfire simply because you are educated on mental illness and know that most mentally ill people are nonviolent, unlike the ignorant (and in some cases willfully stupid) mob around here on DU lately. It is downright scary on this site lately with the witch hunt mentality toward people with mental illness.
looks like hysteria here on this