quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

What do you think the cops should have done in the case of Mr. Samurai?

There was an interesting debate related in the article and officers separated along the two obvious lines. You take a risk if you try to seize the man and you take a risk if you walk away and leave him alone. The writer’s point was that at least by having the discussion awareness was raised. That won’t satisfy your question, however. I can understand why. It is a dilemma. Aside from the city being sued which is to my mind really extraneous to any discussion here and now, you have the public safety to consider.
So, let’s examine the risks. In that particular case, late at night in a rather desolate area the risk to public safety is minimal, while there is a high certainty that the mentally ill person will probably end up dead if he is accosted. We have the classical dilemma. Do you sacrifice the one for the many? Another risk element is that the mentally ill are not dangerous unless they are provoked.
The fact that it was early in the morning; there were very few, if any, people around; the likelihood that the behavior patterns of the mentally ill do not predict danger; and given the training that the police had, they probably did the correct thing. But boy! I would imagine they held their breaths the rest of the morning. I guess everything is a gamble in the public safety area.
This particular sort of gamble is unique so we might throw up our hands at it and take the easy way out. I mean after all who would there be to witness some poor bugger being shot at 3 o’clock in the morning down by the river?
What are your thoughts on it?

All that to say you think the "boys in blue" did the right thing?

The article you linked to does not jibe with the Subject line you created.

My thoughts were put out there in Post#7:

quote:

If a bean bag gun and hours of attempting to engage the guy wasn't a good solution, I'm not sure an escalation to a taser would have been acceptable to Vincent, either.

Personally, I'm with you. I'd liked to have seen them attempt to engage without any violence, but then taze the guy when he tried to leave the beach.

And, like you, I'm relieved nothing horrible happened after the police withdrew.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
The point was that the Portland Oregon police reaction is a rarity in dealing with the mentally ill. Elsewhere in the nation the mentally ill do have indeed a police target on their backs because the police do not have a reasoned protocol for dealing with the mentally ill.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003
--FR--
Okay, a couple of ideas on how to subdue without lethal force, made mostly in jest, but to perhaps get the creative ideas flowing.
How about bringing in one or two members of the mounted posse (or whatever they may be called in various precincts.) and lasso the person in question. (Hell, it worked for Roy Rogers!)
How about creating a machine such as bomb disposal might use, but this one designed for persons with possible mental issues. Maybe it shoots out industrial strength silly string to hold the subject.
More seriously, just hit them with a blast from a high pressure fire hose. It's been known to work on rioters.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

quote:

given that, and as an adress to Vincent---the whole notion of "the mentally ill have a police target on their backs" rather paints you as someone who has a problem with police.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

Man, you must be dying from the dichotomy going on in your brain.

You find the way police departments deal with mentally ill people deplorable, so you create a thread about it, but link to a story about a police department dealing in a way that is counter to what you find deplorable, but you're not celebrating that the police department did it "right" in your eyes, but that other departments aren't doing it right.

That's fucked up, Vince.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

The mental health care has to take place before a situation involving the police occurs. Two years
of neglect cannot be fixed in two minutes while someone is pointing a weapon at you. You are demanding
that the police be better shrinks than shrinks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

The mental health care has to take place before a situation involving the police occurs. Two years
of neglect cannot be fixed in two minutes while someone is pointing a weapon at you. You are demanding
that the police be better shrinks than shrinks.

You are right of course. We are a nation with a terribly neglectful mental health system, because basically it has been privatized and there are few centers of triage to identify and refer the mentally ill. I am not asking the police to be therapists, however. I am simply asking that they have sensitivity and protocol to give life a chance. The policeman’s bullet is not acceptable therapy. We have been especially neglectful of our men and women who served in the Armed Forces. So, it falls to the police. That’s the way it is. We are not willing to spend the money nor to develop a system that will triage and refer people who are living in a world of hurt. So when the hallucinations begin the police are encountered and the patient is dead. Pretty sad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

The mental health care has to take place before a situation involving the police occurs. Two years
of neglect cannot be fixed in two minutes while someone is pointing a weapon at you. You are demanding
that the police be better shrinks than shrinks.

You are right of course. We are a nation with a terribly neglectful mental health system, because basically it has been privatized and there are few centers of triage to identify and refer the mentally ill. I am not asking the police to be therapists, however. I am simply asking that they have sensitivity and protocol to give life a chance. The policeman’s bullet is not acceptable therapy. We have been especially neglectful of our men and women who served in the Armed Forces. So, it falls to the police. That’s the way it is. We are not willing to spend the money nor to develop a system that will triage and refer people who are living in a world of hurt. So when the hallucinations begin the police are encountered and the patient is dead. Pretty sad.

That is tragic, but blaming the police for what happen when they are called in after the situation is out of hand is like blaming firemen for
not preventing fires when they aren't called till there is already a fire.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

The mental health care has to take place before a situation involving the police occurs. Two years
of neglect cannot be fixed in two minutes while someone is pointing a weapon at you. You are demanding
that the police be better shrinks than shrinks.

You are right of course. We are a nation with a terribly neglectful mental health system, because basically it has been privatized and there are few centers of triage to identify and refer the mentally ill. I am not asking the police to be therapists, however. I am simply asking that they have sensitivity and protocol to give life a chance. The policeman’s bullet is not acceptable therapy. We have been especially neglectful of our men and women who served in the Armed Forces. So, it falls to the police. That’s the way it is. We are not willing to spend the money nor to develop a system that will triage and refer people who are living in a world of hurt. So when the hallucinations begin the police are encountered and the patient is dead. Pretty sad.

That is tragic, but blaming the police for what happen when they are called in after the situation is out of hand is like blaming firemen for
not preventing fires when they aren't called till there is already a fire.

The situation is not out of hand as long as there is still breath of life in the patient. And, most often these weird events are only temporary. This at least we can expect from the police: keep the patient alive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

IMO, you made that point poorly. Rather than celebrate the PD's actions, it seemed as if you were decrying them while ranting about poor mental health care quality.

You are correct. I was not celebrating police actions when it comes to dealing with mentally ill people. The success of the Portland, Oregon Police Department, seeking new protocols is to be praised, but they are few and far between among the nation’s police departments, so there is no praise nor celebrations for what the police do and how they approach mentally ill people in general. The police record is deplorable. 25% of civilian fatalities at the hands of the police are mentally ill people. What’s to celebrate? I have genuine outrage when I read a story about a mentally ill person who has been killed by the actions of uneducated police behavior.

Man, you must be dying from the dichotomy going on in your brain.
You find the way police departments deal with mentally ill people deplorable, so you create a thread about it, but link to a story about a police department dealing in a way that is counter to what you find deplorable, but you're not celebrating that the police department did it "right" in your eyes, but that other departments aren't doing it right.
That's fucked up, Vince.

DS, of the list of people on this forum that I respect you are right near the top, my good man. So, do not take this in any way as insulting. It is not meant to be.
It is a quite common essay device to present an example of what you think is good so that you can contrast it to everything else that you think is bad. That’s why I praised, or the New York Times praised, the Portland Oregon Police Department for doing it right and then went on to say okay here is one example but it’s rare because the rest of you blunder heads don’t know how to deal with or at least don’t have any protocol to deal with mentally ill people, and it is a damn shame.
Now this is the part I hope will not offend you. You could use some instruction in creative writing or creative reading.
Regards. . .

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
The situation is not out of hand as long as there is still breath of life in the patient. And, most often these weird events are only temporary. This at least we can expect from the police: keep the patient alive.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
Mental Health and the changes in the 1970s... Yep, another old fart lived experience take.
The big mental institution flap in the 70s was over involuntary committeemen of individuals without a court order. You could get your disobeying teenager committed by signing a paper declaring them "uncontrollable".
the moving of mental patients out of state run facilities and releasing them on the street came down to one thing; legal rights. Unless a person had been to a hearing and a judge ruled that per legal statutes the person was "dangerous to himself or others" there was no legal right to keep a person incarcerated in a mental institution against their will. The key thing was it had to be done with a hearing and a lawyer to assure the person's rights were not infringed. A lot of states then passed laws where a court official, such as a District Attorney, could send a person suspected of having mental problems to a facility to be evaluated. Then there would either be a grand jury hearing to prosecure for crimes or a competancy hearing to get the person committed.
No longer could a person be restricted to a mental institution by a parent or other relative signed an affidavit. There had to be a legal process to have a person restricted to a mental institution.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

given that, and as an adress to Vincent---the whole notion of "the mentally ill have a police target on their backs" rather paints you as someone who has a problem with police.

You got me, Bounty. Sometimes I take creative liberties with headline writing to attract readers. In general I have a lot of respect for the police but I don’t say it very often. I don’t think I need to. There are two areas of police behavior that I do have problems with: how they approach and deal with the mentally ill and how they deal with people of color. That’s all I ever criticize. I am not anti-cop; I am hyper-critical.