There is a lot wrong with this article

[Flewda]

Cops push to clean streets of dangerous nuts - NYPOST.com

This is downright scary on so many accounts. Gotta love this quote: "In the past, the city Department of Health would ask cops for help finding mentally ill people who aren’t taking their court-mandated meds so they could be taken to clinics."

 

[Younggun]

Better not skip your re-education classes and anti-thinking pills.


There are some crazies out there, but that sounds like something out of an Orson Wells book.

 

[Doc Roe]

So, wanting to get potentially dangerous, mentally unstable people off the street is a bad thing? Or did I misinterpret you/the article?


As for court-ordered drugs; If those drugs help to keep a person from doing stupid/dangerous shit or from having a psychiatric break, and the person refuses to take those drugs, they become a threat to the public as well as to themselves, and need to be taken care of, for reasons that should be pretty damn obvious.

 

[Younggun]

Didn't you recently say you hadn't taken your meds for a few days or a week or something.


Should you have been hauled in???

 

[Doc Roe]

And now that I'm back on my meds, you'll notice that I'm a metric fuckload calmer and less irritable.

And if you actually read the article, the cops are trying to find these people to get them the help they need, NOT because they're guilty of a crime.


Edit: And since you brought it up, Young. The only reason I was even off my meds in the first place is because my insurance got fucked up and I couldn't afford to pay for them. Since that got fixed, I'm currently waiting on a second refill to go through so I can have a 30 day reserve in case that happens again.

By comparison (and as deemus said), the people NYPD are "targeting" are those who have, for some reason or another, refused court-ordered treatment which they are required to comply with, for their safety and ours. There's a pretty fucking big difference between what happened to me and someone who deliberately refuses treatment.

 

[deemus]

Having a family member who had a break down and could have killed people, while off meds, I'm ok with it.

There is a reason people have "court-ordered" meds.

 

[AngeliaH]

The only problem I have with this is that the system is so messed up that half of the people on meds are on the wrong ones.
They are all to often mis-diagnosed and just have the medicine shoved down their throat and let loose. I think real treatment would include someone actually listening to what they are saying and trying to help instead of the way things are now. If more people actually listened to mentally ill people and paid attention to their actions I think there would be a lot less crime by the mentally ill. They are shouting to be heard and to be helped but sometimes nobody is there to listen.

 

[Younggun]

And now that I'm back on my meds, you'll notice that I'm a metric fuckload calmer and less irritable.

And if you actually read the article, the cops are trying to find these people to get them the help they need, NOT because they're guilty of a crime.

You didn't really answer my question.

My point being is would someone like you deserve to be hauled in and who will decided if the person should be taken in it not.

I don't trust New York to do anything with a level of common sense. It just sounds like something from 1984.

Someone with a history a violence I can easily see but this doesn't say anything about that, it doesn't seem that they are going after dangerous people but anyone with even a minor disorder.

I don't know what all is required to be out on court ordered meds but the article does state that this includes people who have never been found guilty of any crime.

 

[Doc Roe]

The only problem I have with this is that the system is so messed up that half of the people on meds are on the wrong ones.
They are all to often mis-diagnosed and just have the medicine shoved down their throat and let loose. I think real treatment would include someone actually listening to what they are saying and trying to help instead of the way things are now. If more people actually listened to mentally ill people and paid attention to their actions I think there would be a lot less crime by the mentally ill. They are shouting to be heard and to be helped but sometimes nobody is there to listen.

You just earned a shitload of respect in my book. Think that's one of the best replies we'll see in this thread, and I couldn't agree more with it.

 

[Doc Roe]

You didn't really answer my question.

My point being is would someone like you deserve to be hauled in and who will decided if the person should be taken in it not.

I don't trust New York to do anything with a level of common sense. It just sounds like something from 1984.

Someone with a history a violence I can easily see but this doesn't say anything about that, it doesn't seem that they are going after dangerous people but anyone with even a minor disorder.

I don't know what all is required to be out on court ordered meds but the article does state that this includes people who have never been found guilty of any crime.

IIRC, court-ordered treatment is typically given instead of a criminal charge and the inherent fines/prison time. It's like with drunk drivers, kinda. **** up bad enough, a judge will order you into rehab.


And in all honesty, yes, I would have been perfectly fine with getting "hauled in" when I was off my meds. Y'know why? Because I KNOW that I'm dangerous, I KNOW that I'm a threat, and I don't want to risk hurting or killing someone simply because a certain chemical in my brain got fucked up.

 

[Younggun]

IIRC, court-ordered treatment is typically given instead of a criminal charge and the inherent fines/prison time. It's like with drunk drivers, kinda. **** up bad enough, a judge will order you into rehab.


And in all honesty, yes, I would have been perfectly fine with getting "hauled in" when I was off my meds. Y'know why? Because I KNOW that I'm dangerous, I KNOW that I'm a threat, and I don't want to risk hurting or killing someone simply because a certain chemical in my brain got fucked up.

So you don't always take you meds and you say your dangerous when you don't.

Why do you have a gun?

 

[TexasRedneck]

Um....is it necessary to drop an "F-bomb" in about every post? There are women and kids that read this board, and frankly, it comes off as being somewhat juvenile.

And if you need meds to maintain composure, I would submit that having a gun at hand would be something I'd be VERY careful with. Dunno how, but it'd seem like you'd want someone you can trust COMPLETELY that'd be ready to take "custody" of 'em if need be until you're back on level.

 

[J. Fred]

Doc, I've been reading your posts for awhile and your use of language. Doesn't seem to matter if you're on your drugs or not,it doesn't change any.

Are you a 16 y/o high school dropout or do you just like sounding ignorant ?
Maybe a complete lack of home training ?

If you aren't just an ignorant punk kid,how about using language you'd use around your own mother ?

 

[deemus]

IIRC, court-ordered treatment is typically given instead of a criminal charge and the inherent fines/prison time.

This was our experience. Could have been locked up for a very long time. But off to the mental ward instead. Well he was locked up there, but, you know what I mean.

 

[Doc Roe]

@ Young: ..... You can't read very well, can you? I'm taking precautions to prevent myself from being without my meds, and so long as I'm on them (it's really a single drug that I take for bipolar disorder and better mood control), I'm a decent guy. I'm also smart enough to keep all the guns somewhere I don't have access to when I do go off my meds (which, by the way, is a pretty rare occurrence).


Would you keep a friend from owning a gun if that friend were a violent/angry drunk, though he rarely if ever drinks because he knows and understands what the shit does to him? Or would you simply take precautions to keep the gun out of his hands when he's had a few? It's really the same concept.


@ J. Fred: Any "offensive language" I use is simply because I don't believe in censoring myself just because there's a slim chance that what I say may or may not offend someone whose opinion I may or may not respect. I also tend to get a bit heated whenever a topic comes up for discussion that hits home for me, i.e shit like this. If that offends you, then just don't read my posts. Simple problem, simple solution.

 

[TexasRedneck]

..... You can't read very well, can you? I'm taking precautions to prevent myself from being without my meds, and so long as I'm on them (it's really a single drug that I take for bipolar disorder and better mood control), I'm a decent guy. I'm also smart enough to keep all the guns somewhere I don't have access to when I do go off my meds (which, by the way, is a pretty rare occurrence).


Would you keep a friend from owning a gun if that friend were a violent/angry drunk, though he rarely if ever drinks because he knows and understands what the shit does to him? Or would you simply take precautions to keep the gun out of his hands when he's had a few? It's really the same concept.

Y'see - comebacks like these are what gets folks up in your face....

But yeah - if I had a friend that got violent when drunk, I'd refuse to make a gun available to him. I've actually done so on more than one occasion. and "lost" a "friend" that had a drinking problem when I refused to sell a gun to him.

On the mental side.....that's a call for a doctor to make. But if being off-meds could cause them to lose the ability to KNOW they were headed into trouble, then I'd have to say that they shouldn't have a gun. If they're capable (and mature enough) to be able to know that they're "losing it", and will get any firearms out of their reach of their own accord.....maybe. Again - I'd want a "gun-friendly" doctor to make that call - one that wouldn't do so simply because he doesn't like guns, but because he professionally sees a significant, real risk.

 

[Younggun]

@ Young: ..... You can't read very well, can you? I'm taking precautions to prevent myself from being without my meds, and so long as I'm on them (it's really a single drug that I take for bipolar disorder and better mood control), I'm a decent guy. I'm also smart enough to keep all the guns somewhere I don't have access to when I do go off my meds (which, by the way, is a pretty rare occurrence).


Would you keep a friend from owning a gun if that friend were a violent/angry drunk, though he rarely if ever drinks because he knows and understands what the shit does to him? Or would you simply take precautions to keep the gun out of his hands when he's had a few? It's really the same concept.


@ J. Fred: Any "offensive language" I use is simply because I don't believe in censoring myself just because there's a slim chance that what I say may or may not offend someone whose opinion I may or may not respect. I also tend to get a bit heated whenever a topic comes up for discussion that hits home for me, i.e shit like this. If that offends you, then just don't read my posts. Simple problem, simple solution.

I got a friend who has/ had a drinking problem and would not sell him a gun.

I read just fine. You show a complete lack of maturity in your posts, say you go off you meds sometimes, never mentioned what precautions you take to prevent going off your meds, and never mentioned before now anything preventing your access to firearms.

 

[Doc Roe]

So instead of asking about any of those things, you simply assumed that they didn't exist? 'Cause that's what it seemed like to me.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Doc R., did I read in one of your posts that you were 20?

Just curious, that's all....

 

[Younggun]

I made an educated guess based of the content of your previous posts in this thread and others.