Richard Feldman sends me e-mails. One he sent me today links to this piece (read the whole thing it is really good) which asks:
…school shootings, such as the nauseating and heartbreaking spectacle we saw yesterday, are seemingly on the rise — as are other mass shootings, such as that which afflicted Aurora, Colo. earlier in the year. As Ezra Klein has observed, “of the 12 deadliest shootings in U.S. history, six have taken place since 2007.” This is a separate problem. What is causing this is not yet known and probably underinvestigated, but it is certainly not guns.
Actually it is known. Eric points out by quoting Clayton Cramer that there is a common thread in many of the recent mass murder episodes.
…the common factor in nearly all these mass murders is mental illness.
There was a time when we locked them all up. I think we have erred too far in the other direction. Richard also sent me earlier this long Cato analysis of what is wrong and what should be done about it. I do not find the “what should be done” entirely satisfactory but it is a start.
From a libertarian’s perspective, successful civil commitment reform would use commitment less, use it only when needed, steer individuals away from the most restrictive forms of commitment to less restrictive forms, and place greater reliance on the systems that require the least amount of government. We know how to do that.
The “danger to self” or “parens patraie” commitment standard is the one most likely to be considered problematic by libertarians. But they are presupposing the individual has the cognitive ability to avoid danger to self if he or she wanted. As the previously cited research shows individuals with schizophrenia become a “danger to self” because they develop delusions and hallucinations combined with anosognosia and neurocognitive impairments that prevent them from accessing treatment. While 5,000 mentally ill individuals commit suicide annually, and while libertarians can defend that, many more become dangerous to self by eating out of garbage cans, sleeping on the streets, letting wounds fester, and other activities their dysfunctional brains lack the ability to avoid.
The “danger to others” or “police powers” commitment standard is accepted by almost all, including libertarians. Quoting John Stuart Mill, “[T]he only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”[30] But Mill doesn’t tell us when to intervene. Should we intervene to prevent harm to others when the hallucinations start, when the person goes off medicines, when the person becomes psychotic again, when the gun is purchased, when the bullet loaded, when the gun is fired, or when the bullet hits its target?
It all depends on how the laws are administered in the end. Because nothing is perfect.
Comments
7 responses to “I Did Notice”
I live with a mother with senile dementia. I assure you there are NO guns in the house (there are weapons, sorry I’m a bit protective – but ones she’d have no idea were weapons – or have any idea how to use even if she did).
I’d say that a lot of the blame (and karma took care of that 🙁 ) lies with a mother who knew her son was nuts, and kept her guns anyway.
I’m not sure where/how the law should read on that. But if (yeah, right) individuals had some sense (sigh, yeah, right again), we wouldn’t have so many of these problems.
Danger to others… and, yes, my mother could be – and not really deliberately. She’s not sane: non-compos-mentose nuts, in common parlance. But her beliefs are REAL – to her. So far, none of those have resulted in danger to others (and if they did it would my danger – I’m first target -which is my choice).
Eh – I’m going libertarian again. We take our lumps. (Literally,in my case, one day, if I hadn’t ducked fast enough.) Why is it when you google “Elder care abuse” it always seems to be about abuse by the care givers and NOT the very much MORE common abuse by the care receivers?
My mother is with the “do something” crowd. I suggested a law against stupidity.
At least she saw the futility in that.
I also have family in the “do something” frame of mind. Specifically, do something about guns. I’m in attack mode these days, though. Or, shall we say, aggressive defense mode.
I’ve started responding by asking how they can ignore the thousands of children who would die because of the increase in violent crime that always seems to follow gun control. Is it, perhaps, that dozens of dead children on TV is unacceptable but thousands of (probably dark-skinned) children dying in anonymous homicides are just a statistic?
That seems to end the conversation, somehow. Which is a pity, since it’s probably worth talking about the way we care for the mentally ill.
The other common thread appears to be the widespread use of drugs on our boys in school – those that do not sit still. There are also problems with the powerful antidepressants used. Perhaps we are at the point where the cure (powerful psychotropic drugs) is worse than the disease. Cheers –
I read this stuff and am trying to figure out whether I did something illegal putting my mother in a nursing home. She definitely didn’t want to be there but it had to be done. I did no legal process whatever. I had support from the medical specialist, public health nurses, family/friends and her personal lawyer and no one challenged me. But was it legal? Are the laws different for old people?
@ Richard – you were lucky – wherever you live – in some states, that would have tied you up in court for quite some if she’d fought it.