sigh”

Okay, now that you’ve straightened me out, let’s proceed to consider how we hope to accomplish this task. Some always say, “He wasn’t like this back then,” and some always say, “He’s always been like this. It finally caught up with him.”

So, assuming there ARE signs of mental instability early on, how are we going to deal with the parents who insist, “There’s nothing wrong with my baby!”? I don’t think we want the state taking over the upbringing of our children so that looks like an immovable barrier to your hopes for early mental health care.

Or going the other way, assuming everything WAS hunky-dory up until recently due to recent improper drug use, how are we going to deal with people who decide to break the law and alter their brain chemistries with illicit drugs?

We already made it illegal, yet it continues to happen. How are we going to deal differently with the ones who insist there is nothing wrong with them?

Until they have been caught committing crimes, it’s pretty much outside our power to handle. After they’ve been caught, the expenses you decried earlier still kick in and you still have people who don’t think they have a problem; they think they have a SOLUTION. Point to successful mental health and drug abuse therapies in these cases and we will all be happy. Just saying something like, “I gave him lots of treatment,” don’t get it if the problem remains.

I’m sure you’ve given it more study than I have and we all want working solutions.

David for positive progress

I repeat DAVE….
What time did he turn himself in??????

You’re sure you didn’t suggest that? My bad.”

no, this is what i suggested:

“we as a society have to wake up and decide to put our precious time and resources into mental health care from childhood on.”

sigh

was it Judge Ronald Swanson who turned him loose ?

You’re sure you didn’t suggest that? My bad.

It read that way to me when you griped about all the expenses and acted like the people were just fodder for the system, as if you were reading “The Bonfire of The Vanities” which claimed the folks in the justice system just looked at it as a machine to keep them employed.

Still – - – whenever I consider a high expense, it’s to see if I can reduce it somehow.

We could cut law enforcement and suffer the cost of doing so.

We could cut judicial expenses and risk wrongful convictions or releases.

We could cut corrections, in which case why bother with any of the previous?

We could give those wishing drugs better access to drugs as long as they didn’t hurt others in their use. I favor that practice while recognizing the associated costs.

Regarding feeding prisoners, I worked in a country once in which inmates were only fed fish heads and rice unless friends and family brought them something else. It strongly encouraged people to keep people caring about them and discouraged getting in legal trouble.

David for friends in times of need

i never suggested saving money by not enforcing laws or arresting people…your words.