I’ve seen kodak live in Miami before
same
she was white
you would've been in those holes for sure
holesss
@Hndrxx_Free they're discussing lindsay too much for my liking
do hndrxx things and link a random 2010-2020 rap song
Its rodeo anniversary today
but they itt riding d*** for political cases instead of travis
Its rodeo anniversary today
but they itt riding d*** for political cases instead of travis
did they make it.... did they survive?? the rodeo...
The thing is nobody can ever say with certainty. We don’t understand mental illness well enough to say anything definitively. And certainly the jury of 12 randoms do not have the ability to assess mental capacity better than us or anyone else.
But heuristically, someone that kills three children in the manner she did should be locked away from society regardless of the circumstances 99.9% of the time. Like I would say if we locked up every child killer, regardless of circumstance, we would be better off as a society. I don’t really care about the details.
Like, it’s a slippery ass slope. Having a mental illness doesn’t remove you from the capacity to consent.
the last paragraph is not true, it absolutely objectively can.
somebody whose dementia is so advance theyre none verbal and dont know who they are, or anybody around them, cannot consent. thats why you cant give them MAID here in canada.
and if she was tried as insane and a team of doctors decided she was most likely in psychosis, she woudl be locked away forever anyway. jsut in a way thats safer for everyone
Et post gets funnier when u remember he is on hawaii
hes with his familly just yearning for an argument
im linet up
I think you underestimate just how not human and out fo your mind you are in psychosis. Obviously youre a danger and you need to be a hospital for a good 25 years before you can be deemed safe or not. but unlike someone who committed first degree murder out of cold blood, people with skitzophrenia is a treatable condition, so we should treat them.
also psychosis is just so, so, so insane. like youre not even human, there really is no morality in the decisions someone makes in psychosis. its just random, youre a human body whose brain is firing off completely random with zero control over any agency or action.
Putting someone like that in general population will just hurt way more people. the poeple around them, the person etc. They belong in a proper psychiatric ward not jsut morally, but for the safety of everybody.
I didnt follow that case and have no opinon if she was in psychosis or not. a team of doctors should decide that and if its a negative, then it should be up to a judge.
No I understand that, but I still think if you had a psychotic break bad enough to murder someone you are just not fit to be in society anymore. We will have to agree to disagree here
hes the stereotype
did they make it.... did they survive?? the rodeo...
@Extraterrestrial just a lil travis scott reference for the thread and thread ragers
feel free to give it a like
Irish Zionism
I have a slightly different opinion than most on this one. I genuinely think she was probably in the midst of a psychotic break when she killed those kids. However I don’t subscribe to the idea that a psychotic episode means you don’t still deserve to be in prison for life. She’s a danger to society and should be locked away for good. People who are on d**** and murder someone are usually in psychotic breaks too, and they still end up in prison. My sympathy for mental health ends when you take a life. Just unfit for society and modern life.
I get this take and think it's more reasonable than most I've seen
But I do think you have to take into account the difference between d***-induced psychosis that's likely to reoccur because they're addicted, and a one-time mental break.
If they think she truly wasn't in control of her actions, and that it was just a tragic, freak occurrence that will never happen again, I can't in good conscious say I think she should be locked up. But if they think there's a non-insignifigant possibility of it happening again, then yeah lock her up.
Killing your own children is absolutely horrific any way you cut it, but I do think you have to weigh moral responsibility against public safety concerns.
But once again, I don't think it's particularly healthy for the general public to try and litigate this.
I think you underestimate just how not human and out fo your mind you are in psychosis. Obviously youre a danger and you need to be a hospital for a good 25 years before you can be deemed safe or not. but unlike someone who committed first degree murder out of cold blood, people with skitzophrenia is a treatable condition, so we should treat them.
also psychosis is just so, so, so insane. like youre not even human, there really is no morality in the decisions someone makes in psychosis. its just random, youre a human body whose brain is firing off completely random with zero control over any agency or action.
Putting someone like that in general population will just hurt way more people. the poeple around them, the person etc. They belong in a proper psychiatric ward not jsut morally, but for the safety of everybody.
I didnt follow that case and have no opinon if she was in psychosis or not. a team of doctors should decide that and if its a negative, then it should be up to a judge.
I don’t disagree with this. But generally people who are psychotic, it’s obvious and everyone else can tell. Psychosis is literally defined by delusions, hallucinations and disorganized speech/thinking
If you send your husband to the pharmacy, text normally with him the entire time while strangling your kids, and then attempt suicide afterwards while still telling him everything’s ok, it just doesn’t cross the threshold of psychosis for me.
No I understand that, but I still think if you had a psychotic break bad enough to murder someone you are just not fit to be in society anymore. We will have to agree to disagree here
no we actually agree, they obviously are not. and most people in psychosis arent even if theyre none violent.
They just dont belong in general population prison. they belong in a psych ward, under medication and 24/7 watch and security.
if theyre violent enough to kill somebody they belong there for decades
those wards are almost as bad as prison
@Extraterrestrial just a lil travis scott reference for the thread and thread ragers
feel free to give it a like
im surprised thread not cancelling u rn
u lucky the liberals not itt
im surprised thread not cancelling u rn
u lucky the liberals not itt
i cancelled cancel culture.
im surprised thread not cancelling u rn
u lucky the liberals not itt
Camille been libbed out he just doesn't talk about it
the last paragraph is not true, it absolutely objectively can.
somebody whose dementia is so advance theyre none verbal and dont know who they are, or anybody around them, cannot consent. thats why you cant give them MAID here in canada.
and if she was tried as insane and a team of doctors decided she was most likely in psychosis, she woudl be locked away forever anyway. jsut in a way thats safer for everyone
You can be mentally ill and lack consent, yes. But not automatically is what I meant. You can be mentally ill and still retain consent.
Otherwise, anyone with a diagnosis of any mental illness can be assumed to lack consent.
I don’t disagree with this. But generally people who are psychotic, it’s obvious and everyone else can tell. Psychosis is literally defined by delusions, hallucinations and disorganized speech/thinking
If you send your husband to the pharmacy, text normally with him the entire time while strangling your kids, and then attempt suicide afterwards while still telling him everything’s ok, it just doesn’t cross the threshold of psychosis for me.
I figured you would and I dont know anything about the case, so I cant comment.