An Examination Of The "Mentally Ill", "Psychotic", or "Insane" Defense

Insane, Psychotic or Mentally Ill?

We hear these terms tossed around in news and discussions as "reasons" for mass killings. Here is my armchair psychologist opinion worth 2 cents: This is a distinction without a difference. If a person is angered enough by a slow grocery line to stab someone else 10 times, or becomes angry enough over a perceived slight to shoot somebody to death, they are by definition psychotic which is a form of mental illness. 

However, these types should not be able to use the “innocent by reason of insanity” defense, because they were very well aware of what they were doing at the time, and that it was wrong. They are not insane, they simply could not control themselves. This is a classic definition of a psychotic. 

Psychotic, neurotic, insane, schizophrenic or psychopathic, these clinical conditions each present a risk to others because their “switch” can trigger to “attack” at any moment. Anyone who has been diagnosed with these mental illnesses presents a risk. 

Managing the Public Risk

However, any human being could theoretically present a risk so there must be a protocol for cross agency information sharing so that when a potential threat is reported many times and thus becomes a much higher risk/threat, the appropriate agencies can act to protect innocent lives. 

Another thing that must happen is that every school MUST perform a threat assessment and take action to address potential risks to people. Funding should come from cutting overweening and heavy-handed government bureaucracy nearly anywhere in government (bureaucracy which does nothing for the average citizen, describing just about every “alphabet agency”, for example). Then these monies can be apportioned as block grants to school districts to perform the assessments and then take action on findings. 

Let's Not Try The Same Tired Ideas 

After a mass attack we always hear the escalating chants for the same non-solutions. “Lets talk about banning...(name a gun)”.  No, let's not talk about that. How about instead, let’s ban cars, because more people get killed in car accidents than in homicides. If it saves just one life, it’s worth banning cars, right? Think of the children, right? 

If we're really interested in saving lives: Let’s first repeal Roe v Wade which kills millions of mostly black and Hispanic babies, and was based on a lie. Let’s return God to the justice system and return prayer in school. Let’s take better care of mentally ill people. Let’s ban vaccines that cause autism.  THEN if we still have a problem we can analyze the root cause of the problem at its SOURCE instead of reacting with a knee jerk predictable reaction to strip millions of law-abiding citizens of their constitutional freedoms.