Our Moloch

[ksinger]

You mean mental health people can't or won't stand in for the precogs in our Minority Report fantasy?

Darn the luck.

 

[cmd2014]

You mean mental health people can't or won't stand in for the precogs in our Minority Report fantasy?

Darn the luck.

Sadly, none of us are psychic. I'd have won the lottery by now (and bought myself some *serious* bling) if I was....

 

[arkieb1]

Sadly, none of us are psychic. I'd have won the lottery by now (and bought myself some *serious* bling) if I was....

Honestly I think the constant deflection that all people who are involved in these shootings (the gunmen) must be all mentally ill and could have been stopped (when paper after paper suggests that would indeed be unlikely) and shifting the blame to other issues like mental illness or terrorism and so on instead of better stricter gun control laws is simply Trump echoing the dogma of the NRA. Every time one of these shootings occur they (politicians and the NRA themselves) launch into campaigns blaming everything else, everyone else in this latest case even making the security guard the scapegoat bombarding your media with so much sh#* it deflects or diverts people's attention from the real issue that being, you need better, stricter gun control laws across the US.

 

[cmd2014]

@arkieb1,

As a fellow non-American, I agree wholeheartedly with you. As an outsider looking in, it just seems like a game of lunatic whackamole.

That said, I'm sure outsiders looking in at my country's social problems would think exactly the same thing (with the only difference being that we'd be talking about a whole set of different issues).

 

[redwood66]

I don't think all of these shooters are mentally ill in the clinical sense. They don't know how to control anger. Which is my concern for young people who are never taught to handle difficult situations. Prisons are loaded with people who cannot control their emotions without being violent.

Edit - I think it makes people feel better if they believe that no one could possibly commit these horrendous crimes without being crazy.

 

[Arkteia]

We, the public, are accepting of speech from national, state and local leaders as well as the general public that 10 years ago would have been considered hate speech, 20 years ago would have been considered physical threats; just what did Cruz do that either institution could respond to and what, within the constraints of law, could they have done? Hand wringers rise up after these events decrying that "someone" should have done "something" and, in our zeal to to find a scapegoat, point to "them".

Exactly. This is basically were I was driving. In our today’s atmosphere hateful utterances against other groups do not raise red flags any longer. It became the new norm.

What specific crime could Cruz have been arrested for preceding the incident? That's the only option law enforcement has.

In my native country, there was a law according to which propaganda of nazism was considered illegal. Here, it seems, First Amendment protects any hate speaker.

BTW, @ksinger, after the shooting, the woman taking care of Cruz’s younger brother, involuntary committed him. (Granted, she might have had own interests). But it is possible?

The way I look at it, with every system admitting own impotence to deal with Cruz, he is perfectly within the right to buy a gun.

 

[Arkteia]

I don't think all of these shooters are mentally ill in the clinical sense. They don't know how to control anger. Which is my concern for young people who are never taught to handle difficult situations. Prisons are loaded with people who cannot control their emotions without being violent.

Edit - I think it makes people feel better if they believe that no one could possibly commit these horrendous crimes without being crazy.

They are probably diagnosable. But to me the situation when someone can get a gun and kill 17 people at random (and some of these kids he definitely did not know because they were freshmen) and then go to a mall and eat ice cream definitely points to Cruz being not normal.

It is my feeling that, Dylan Roof was not normal, either. To walk into a church, pray with people and then kill them - how is it humanely possible? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
I don’t know if Roof got a diagnosis according to DSM V. But he is not normal.

 

[ksinger]

Exactly. This is basically were I was driving. In our today’s atmosphere hateful utterances against other groups do not raise red flags any longer. It became the new norm.



In my native country, there was a law according to which propaganda of nazism was considered illegal. Here, it seems, First Amendment protects any hate speaker.

BTW, @ksinger, after the shooting, the woman taking care of Cruz’s younger brother, involuntary committed him. (Granted, she might have had own interests). But it is possible?

The way I look at it, with every system admitting own impotence to deal with Cruz, he is perfectly within the right to buy a gun.

I didn't know that about the younger brother. I'm not shocked to hear he has some issues, although a parent or guardian committing even an underage person, I would THINK, needs to have a good reason. Saying, "My kid talks back disrespectfully, I want him committed" is not something I think would fly. But it is a strange new world now, and I don't know - it might be a pretty low bar to commit a kid. But if he's over 18? That has a much higher bar. In fact, I'm pretty sure cmd2014 addressed that earlier, both what it takes, and how long you can do it.

I'm outta here! Later!

 

[House Cat]

I’m not sure where everyone is getting their information regarding the Baker act or 5150 hold. Most of it is wrong.

Regarding Cruz, we know he had a diagnosed mental illness because he was receiving services from the school. He refused those services when he turned 18. We also know that he had a history of violence toward his mother and others. We also know that he publicly, on social media, threatened a desire to grave harm toward others. The only other criteria to fill would be to show that he would be unable to keep himself safe on his own, but that would require a health and wellness check by the cops or a Crisis Intervention Team. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. That is where the ball was dropped.

Once the hold was enacted, they have the option to hold him for 180 days if he is that unstable. There is no place where psychics are involved. Just mental health professionals.

I know many people who have been 5150’d. It was for much less than what Cruz did.

I actually know a man who lives in Florida who has a mental illness, who’s been violent toward his mother, who has expressed homicidal thoughts and he receives..court ordered therapy once per week, a nightly wellness call, and a weekly in person check from a social worker. If he doesn’t comply, he will be permanently committed to the mental hospital. It is possible to address these issues.


I would like to clarify that what makes Cruz’s threats to do harm different that the usual hate group member is that Cruz was diagnosed. This is the portion of what qualifies him to be held.

 

[ksinger]

I’m not sure where everyone is getting their information regarding the Baker act or 5150 hold. Most of it is wrong.

Regarding Cruz, we know he had a diagnosed mental illness because he was receiving services from the school. He refused those services when he turned 18. We also know that he had a history of violence toward his mother and others. We also know that he publicly, on social media, threatened a desire to grave harm toward others. The only other criteria to fill would be to show that he would be unable to keep himself safe on his own, but that would require a health and wellness check by the cops or a Crisis Intervention Team. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. That is where the ball was dropped.

Once the hold was enacted, they have the option to hold him for 180 days if he is that unstable. There is no place where psychics are involved. Just mental health professionals.

I know many people who have been 5150’d. It was for much less than what Cruz did.

I actually know a man who lives in Florida who has a mental illness, who’s been violent toward his mother, who has expressed homicidal thoughts and he receives..court ordered therapy once per week, a nightly wellness call, and a weekly in person check from a social worker. If he doesn’t comply, he will be permanently committed to the mental hospital. It is possible to address these issues.


I would like to clarify that what makes Cruz’s threats to do harm different that the usual hate group member is that Cruz was diagnosed. This is the portion of what qualifies him to be held.

This house is wondering if he was special-ed. I've not seen any mention of whether he was or not, in my reading.

 

[House Cat]

This house is wondering if he was special-ed. I've not seen any mention of whether he was or not, in my reading.

What I keep reading is that he “refused mental health services after the age of 18.” Would they refer to special-ed as “mental health services?”

I admit, it’s vague but he had a diagnosis. The school wouldn’t give him services without one.

Only mental illnesses apply for a 72 hour hold.

 

[missy]

This house is wondering if he was special-ed. I've not seen any mention of whether he was or not, in my reading.

What I keep reading is that he “refused mental health services after the age of 18.” Would they refer to special-ed and “mental health services?”

I admit, it’s vague but he had a diagnosis. The school wouldn’t give him services without one.

Only mental illnesses apply for a 72 hour hold.

I don't think he was officially "special ed" but he might have benefited from a special program. There were so many red flags and people knew he was not "normal" yet nothing was done about it before this tragedy occurred. But this is interesting @House Cat - I just found mention of "special ed" services so maybe he was?

https://www.local10.com/news/parkla...munition-left-after-parkland-school-shooting-

School officials said Cruz also revoked the mental health and special ed services that had been provided to him for years by the school district after he turned 18.

http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news...ving-chance-help-cruz/dAg8nhGfNS803Eq34Jrf7M/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/nikolas-cruz-florida-shooting.html

 

[ksinger]

What I keep reading is that he “refused mental health services after the age of 18.” Would they refer to special-ed as “mental health services?”

I admit, it’s vague but he had a diagnosis. The school wouldn’t give him services without one.

Only mental illnesses apply for a 72 hour hold.

Jeez, the thing I just read said he was ADHD, OCD, autistic, AND depressed. Not very vague (and maybe not even correct) and more like the kitchen sink. I bet that kid was on quite a chemical cocktail until he was 18.

I think the SE teachers pretty much stand in for mental health people around here. That's when they can keep them. It is a HORRIBLE job that no one wants for a whole raft of reasons, at least around here in these desperately needy parts.

Anyway, I ask because special ed adds complexity to the already complex mix. While Oklahoma is not Florida, and is ranking near the bottom, they are still operating under the same federal rules as everyone else. And part of those rules mean that depending on how each SE kid's plan is written, they can get away with a lot. (I'm hoping a SE teacher or other will chime in and correct me if necessary - I'm going of my husband's info, but he's not SE, so...)

Just a non-gun related example - one kid at my husband's school, had the SE teacher write his...plan (I don't know the technical term, hubs is out) describing his smoking as a manifestation of his...problems, and once that's done, if the kid lights up IN CLASS, the regular teacher can't do a damn thing about it.
As you might imagine, he and the other teachers were NOT pleased with the person who wrote that up.

Don't know, but if he was SE in middle school, it might explain why he was allowed to stay with 29 "incidents" of fighting and disruptive behavior.

 

[Arkteia]

BTW, in my post I did not imply specific mental health diagnosis. What I meant was that the case was a hate crime, and should be viewed as such.

The newest: swastikas

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swasti...florida-school-shooting-suspect-nikolas-cruz/

Makes me wonder if the family who took in this kid so easily, his guns and all, heard something along the lines of what he posted on the media. About the groups he hated. And were OK with it.

 

[Matata]

 

[ksinger]

Makes me just want to run out and buy something from Dicks. Seriously.

Humanity over profits? I'm flabber AND ghasted.

 

[AGBF]

BTW, in my post I did not imply specific mental health diagnosis. What I meant was that the case was a hate crime, and should be viewed as such.

The newest: swastikas

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swasti...florida-school-shooting-suspect-nikolas-cruz/

Makes me wonder if the family who took in this kid so easily, his guns and all, heard something along the lines of what he posted on the media. About the groups he hated. And were OK with it.

The SPLC put out an alert about his (Cruz') alleged ties to White Supremacist groups immediately after the shooting, but then put out a denial of that alert when more was learned. I have now read that the initial news of his ties with Nazi groups was based on unproven claims of meeting with one individual. The current claims are based on his having magazines with swastikas on them in his possession, not of officially belonging to a group. I may be wrong about the latter part of this posting. I am not wrong about the SPLC initial alert and withdrawal of the alert.

 

[AGBF]

I heard this on television, watching (listening to) MSNBC. Like ksinger, I wanted to go shopping at Dick's! Thanks for posting, Matata.

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I teach special ed, with all of his complications his likely IEP (individualized education program) classification possibly could have been "emotionally disturbed".

I have NEVER seen things saying that a kid could smoke in class, that's insane and should be changed HOWEVER a student can have certain "behaviors" related to their "disability" that are known and generally they are not disciplined in a traditional "consequences" manner. It all depends on the child's individual BIP (behavior intervention plan). That plan is usually developed by the SBST (school based support team) consisting of teachers, related service providers, school psychologist, etc. It takes A LOT to actually expel a kid since they're all entitled to a "free and appropriate public education".

I hope more comes out about how the school handled him while he was there, this is an important examination of how emotionally disturbed students are treated and handled.

 

[doberman]

Citizens United needs to go. Otherwise six million dollars outweighs six million people every time.

 

[Arkteia]

The SPLC put out an alert about his (Cruz') alleged ties to White Supremacist groups immediately after the shooting, but then put out a denial of that alert when more was learned. I have now read that the initial news of his ties with Nazi groups was based on unproven claims of meeting with one individual. The current claims are based on his having magazines with swastikas on them in his possession, not of officially belonging to a group. I may be wrong about the latter part of this posting. I am not wrong about the SPLC initial alert and withdrawal of the alert.

Republic of Florida has first confirmed ties to Cruz, and in two days retracted their statement.
Sort of like ISIS first stated that Steven Paddock, LV shooter, was their agent... Who knows? Cruz is negative publicity now.

We might never know the truth about Cruz ties. But he posted enough statements on the Inet. Anti-black, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-Mexican, anti-Semitic (with a caveat - his birth mother was Jewish but he said she was lucky to never have met him).

And then he had the ammo with swastikas.

What I want to say is that we all - all! - have own opinions. And maybe if a kid in a white community posts anti-Black or - even more today! - anti-Mexican rants, we tend to take it less seriously because it is “not us”? Just label him “a racist”.

Well, maybe the time has come to admit that it is all us, even in our deeply divided country, and that anyone posting about killing or shooting - someone else - might be aiming at us.

 

[ksinger]

"....by seeing more mishaps like dumbass with the gun in her pocket, or some teacher having his gun taken away and being shot with it, or an angry teacher pulling a gun on a kid, etc, before we'll decide to stop the stupid...."

Said I in a previous post. And TADA! As if on cue, an angry teacher shoots a gun in a classroom!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/2...after-reports-shots-fired-at-high-school.html

 

[ksinger]

Oh wait! It's even BETTER! There was another one in Georgia back in August!

https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-second-teacher-of-the-year-fires-a-gun-inside-his-school?ref=home

And for everyone who hopes that this generation will save us, a sobering reminder that parental indoctrination (with the trusty NRA all-or-nothing extremist educational bullet points) is still the most powerful predictor of stance.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...orida-shooting-club-defend-guns-idUSKCN1GB384

Excerpt:
"“You have to either ban all guns or none of them at all,” said Michael Pilch, 18, who has shot at the club for the past four years. “If you don’t ban all of them, people are still going to have them and they’re going to use them.”"

 

[Dee*Jay]

I am buying everything I possibly can from Dick's from this point forward.

Note the use of the phrase "common sense" in the statement. They get it. Hopefully others will too -- and soon.

 

[cmd2014]

I’m not sure where everyone is getting their information regarding the Baker act or 5150 hold. Most of it is wrong.

Since this seems to be directed at me, I’ll answer. While my opinions here are strictly my *personal* opinions and not a representation of my profession (and I do have to be careful about what I post on a public forum and not specifically identify myself by profession so as to avoid the perception of speaking as a representative of my profession rather than as a private citizen), what I can say is that I spent 25 years of my career working in inpatient psychiatry. I also spent the first 5 years of my career working in a maximum security prison doing mental health and offender risk assessments. I have never practiced in Florida, but I worked in a number of US states for a long time before coming home.

The examples you gave would not apply to this situation, and speak more of someone who has been through the criminal justice system not the mental health care system (court ordered treatment by definition means that someone has been convicted of a criminal offense, that their mental health issues were judged central to their risk of reoffending, and that treatment was a condition of their release - and failure to comply would be like breaching conditions of parole and has the same consequences). This does not apply to anyone who has not been convicted of a criminal offense or even those who have but whose mental health issues are not relevant to their crimes.

Sometimes when we hear about people, we don’t necessarily understand all of the ins and outs of their particular case. My guess is that the man you know had a string of assault convictions committed during times when he was well enough to know that his actions were wrong (the standard for criminal culpability) but sick enough to be doing it anyway. Probation conditions typically address offender risk factors - like banning drinking or using drugs if those were factors in the offenses committed, or mandating mental health care. Of these, the latter is typically ineffective unless the mandated treatment is pharmacology. Psychotherapy requires commitment, a certain level of insight, and cooperation - which is not typically present when someone is compelled against their will to attend.

And no, the majority of violent offenders in prison are not diagnosable (at least not in any way that would put their behavior outside of their conscious control - otherwise they would be found not criminally responsible). And no, simply having a diagnosis is not enough to have someone committed. This is a myth that sadly prevents many people from seeking treatment. And at least in every state I have practiced in, when involuntary holds are necessary, they are for a 72 hour evaluation and then the person has to appear before a panel in order to be held on an involuntarily basis any longer, and then they can only be held until they no longer meet the specific conditions needed to do so. We don’t hold people hostage in hospital if they are competent to make their own healthcare decisions and people leave ama all the time (just like we can’t force people to have surgery or have chemotherapy or other treatments recommended to them). I’ve also never seen a 180 day admission unless someone needs to be placed in an extended treatment unit for intractable schizophrenia. Admissions are typically days to weeks, not months, and are intended to stabilize acute issues until outpatient management becomes possible.

I think you are confusing forensic mental health centers for those who have committed criminal offenses with hospitals. But those who commit crimes while sick (usually while psychotic) is a tiny percentage of those who commit violent offenses. They just get the most media attention for the shock value. (As an example, we had one murder here in he last decade that was committed by a man with schizophrenia who was psychotic at the time - and it was in the news multiple times per day as a headline for almost a year through the trial and at every decision point after; we’ve had 100 per year by those without any diagnosis most of which were barely reported on).

And hate speech, while disturbing, is way more common than people want to admit (as is posting guns on Facebook along with hate speech). It’s enough to flag concerns, but not necessary enough to trigger an involuntary mental health hold. I’m not saying that better screening, better services, and people not turning a blind eye to things won’t help, but it’s not as simple as people might like to think.

I know that people are scared. I know that solutions aren’t easy. I hope that you direct your efforts to doing things that will have real impact on keeping people safe. But the mental health argument that gets trotted out every single time these things happen has not worked to date. It’s not that mental health care is somehow so much better in Japan or France or Germany or Canada or Australia than it is in the US or that we have magically solved the puzzle of predicting violent (or suicidal) behavior. I’ve worked in both systems and they are honestly pretty much the same. And yet mass shootings don’t happen in Japan or France or Germany or Canada or Australia...

 

[Arkteia]

Citizens United needs to go. Otherwise six million dollars outweighs six million people every time.

When they leave, can they, please, take their pocket politicians with them? Because they are clearly damaged goods.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/28/news/companies/delta-tax-break-update/index.html

I would try to fly Delta to support the company.

 

[AGBF]

I am so glad you took the time to write out what you did above, cmd2014. Many Americans are frightened and upset by the school shootings, but do not know what to do that will not change the United States as they knew it. They actually know very little about real mental illness, the people who must take psychotropic medications; who have periodic psychiatric hospitalizations; who may reside in halfway houses (if they are lucky enough to be have found housing there); who receive SSI and SSD benefits. When they hear of violent crimes they associate them, quite incorrectly, with people who have psychiatric diagnoses. (I am not claiming that mass murderers are stable people, of course.) Your eloquent posting explained the reality. Thank you.

Deb/AGBF

 

[House Cat]

Since this seems to be directed at me, I’ll answer. While my opinions here are strictly my *personal* opinions and not a representation of my profession (and I do have to be careful about what I post on a public forum and not specifically identify myself by profession so as to avoid the perception of speaking as a representative of my profession rather than as a private citizen), what I can say is that I spent 25 years of my career working in inpatient psychiatry. I also spent the first 5 years of my career working in a maximum security prison doing mental health and offender risk assessments. I have never practiced in Florida, but I worked in a number of US states for a long time before coming home.

The examples you gave would not apply to this situation, and speak more of someone who has been through the criminal justice system not the mental health care system (court ordered treatment by definition means that someone has been convicted of a criminal offense, that their mental health issues were judged central to their risk of reoffending, and that treatment was a condition of their release - and failure to comply would be like breaching conditions of parole and has the same consequences). This does not apply to anyone who has not been convicted of a criminal offense or even those who have but whose mental health issues are not relevant to their crimes.

Sometimes when we hear about people, we don’t necessarily understand all of the ins and outs of their particular case. My guess is that the man you know had a string of assault convictions committed during times when he was well enough to know that his actions were wrong (the standard for criminal culpability) but sick enough to be doing it anyway. Probation conditions typically address offender risk factors - like banning drinking or using drugs if those were factors in the offenses committed, or mandating mental health care. Of these, the latter is typically ineffective unless the mandated treatment is pharmacology. Psychotherapy requires commitment, a certain level of insight, and cooperation - which is not typically present when someone is compelled against their will to attend.

And no, the majority of violent offenders in prison are not diagnosable (at least not in any way that would put their behavior outside of their conscious control - otherwise they would be found not criminally responsible). And no, simply having a diagnosis is not enough to have someone committed. This is a myth that sadly prevents many people from seeking treatment. And at least in every state I have practiced in, when involuntary holds are necessary, they are for a 72 hour evaluation and then the person has to appear before a panel in order to be held on an involuntarily basis any longer, and then they can only be held until they no longer meet the specific conditions needed to do so. We don’t hold people hostage in hospital if they are competent to make their own healthcare decisions and people leave ama all the time (just like we can’t force people to have surgery or have chemotherapy or other treatments recommended to them). I’ve also never seen a 180 day admission unless someone needs to be placed in an extended treatment unit for intractable schizophrenia. Admissions are typically days to weeks, not months, and are intended to stabilize acute issues until outpatient management becomes possible.

I think you are confusing forensic mental health centers for those who have committed criminal offenses with hospitals. But those who commit crimes while sick (usually while psychotic) is a tiny percentage of those who commit violent offenses. They just get the most media attention for the shock value. (As an example, we had one murder here in he last decade that was committed by a man with schizophrenia who was psychotic at the time - and it was in the news multiple times per day as a headline for almost a year through the trial and at every decision point after; we’ve had 100 per year by those without any diagnosis most of which were barely reported on).

And hate speech, while disturbing, is way more common than people want to admit (as is posting guns on Facebook along with hate speech). It’s enough to flag concerns, but not necessary enough to trigger an involuntary mental health hold. I’m not saying that better screening, better services, and people not turning a blind eye to things won’t help, but it’s not as simple as people might like to think.

I know that people are scared. I know that solutions aren’t easy. I hope that you direct your efforts to doing things that will have real impact on keeping people safe. But the mental health argument that gets trotted out every single time these things happen has not worked to date. It’s not that mental health care is somehow so much better in Japan or France or Germany or Canada or Australia than it is in the US or that we have magically solved the puzzle of predicting violent (or suicidal) behavior. I’ve worked in both systems and they are honestly pretty much the same. And yet mass shootings don’t happen in Japan or France or Germany or Canada or Australia...

Yikes, I feel that either i have not made myself very clear in my other post or you are twisting some of what I have said.

First, since my point of view was assumed..forensic psychiatry or whatever..my point of view was coming from a patient’s point of view and the point of view from knowing many people with mental illness over the last 20 years. When you sit and actually listen to them with a caring heart, you hear their stories. I know too many people who’ve been 5150’d for really simple stuff. As a matter of fact there was a patient’s advocate group wanting to interview people in one of my groups due to the fact that 5150’s were being handed out like candy. With that in the back of my mind, I’m thinking “and we couldn’t even give Cruz a health and wellness check?”

I would never, ever try to heap violent crime on the mentally ill. I have mental illness. Stigma hurts me personally. I want to stress that in this particular case, mental illness could be a factor In Cruz’s impaired judgment and I am ok with being honest and addressing that fact. I never said a diagnosis is all that is needed to hold an individual either. But I must know why we are so reluctant with admitting that the ball was dropped on this young man? He had a history of violence, several diagnoses, was making public threats on the internet and people all want to hold hands and sing kumbaya and say it’s ONLY the fault of the guns.

Bullshit.

That mentally ill kid just lost his mom and just went off his meds...he was going to hurt someone if he didn’t receive hospitalization and anyone who really knows mentally ill kids who have a tendency towards violence knows that. Just one of those events COULD have pushed him to hurt himself or others.

No, I’m not talking about all mentally ill people. I am not violent. I don’t have a tendency toward it. But I have met many people who are and when you trigger them with heavy emotion that they can’t handle, they are dangerous. Professional intervention is needed. I’m sure you know this...given your profession. So why are we denying this fact when we address the issue of Cruz?

Do I think that mental health professionals or police are omnipotent, psychic, and see the horrific violence in an individual and can ultimately keep all events like this from happening? No. But who’s to say that one person intervening might not get through to another person? I remember EVERY SINGLE mental health professional that I have ever encountered. That means the good and the bad. Maybe that’s why I feel so strongly about this. The good ones sit in my heart and I hear their words of encouragement during the really rough times. They mean something to me. Maybe someone would have gotten through to Cruz. Idealistic, maybe.

amd, i respect your knowledge greatly. I understand that from a clinician’s point of view, things aren’t always as easy or perfect as I make them out to be. I discussed this with my therapist yesterday and he told me that it would probably have happened that professionals would have gone out to see Cruz and Cruz would have “put on an emotional mask” and lied about his emotional state and at that point, there really isn’t much they could have done. He told me that when people don’t want help, it’s very hard to get it for them. My mind goes back to Cruz’s internet threats...but I concede

In the end it is my desire to look at all contributing factors in this shooting. If we turn a blind eye to cruz’s Illnesses or the fact that the people living with him were negligent, or the fact that police didn’t respond to 45 calls regarding Cruz, then I feel that we are no better than the people who won’t meet us halfway with their guns

 

[cmd2014]

Yikes, I feel that either i have not made myself very clear in my other post or you are twisting some of what I have said.

House Cat, I don't want to argue with you, but I think if you go back and see what you wrote previously, you'll see that you did actually say some of the things that you are now saying that you didn't say.

I know you think you know things from talking to people, but people have a way of telling you a certain version of events, and that may not be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, KWIM?

And rumor and speculation from the media just isn't helpful. In fact it's probably hurtful:
http://www.dontnamethem.org/

 

[House Cat]

House Cat, I don't want to argue with you, but I think if you go back and see what you wrote previously, you'll see that you did actually say some of the things that you are now saying that you didn't say.

I know you think you know things from talking to people, but people have a way of telling you a certain version of events, and that may not be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, KWIM?

And rumor and speculation from the media just isn't helpful. In fact it's probably hurtful:
http://www.dontnamethem.org/

Ok, You don’t want to argue, but you can’t help yourself.


I can.