Guilty verdict reached in "American Sniper" killer trial

Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

emax10000
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2015
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 178

26 Feb 2015, 11:41 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
I really hope he gets mental health care in prison, because even though the jury didn't give him a pass with his insanity defense, this guy is obviously three or four cans short of a six pack.

The issue is that so many seem to believe that giving someone mental health treatment necessarily means not holding someone accountable for their actions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Proper mental health treatments means that individual prisoners and/or suspects who have special needs with regards to mental illness get these needs met. It is about both giving them proper treatment and ensuring the safety of others around them. And in many cases, giving suspects and/or prisoners proper mental health treatments means drastically lowering the possibility that those with mental health needs, which does include those on the autism spectrum, end up causing such violence and loss of life in the first place.

If anything, I think proper mental health treatments make it less attractive to use mental illness as a sort of get out of jail free card. Because then, if someone is classified as mentally ill, they will spend substantial amounts of time getting treated for it along with others who also have severe mental health issues. In most cases they will spend at least as long there as they would in conventional prison. So someone who wants a get out of jail free card is not gonna be inclined to use mental illness. And without these mental health centers, it seems like the possibility of mentally ill suspects getting back on the streets increases, as does the attractiveness of mental illness as a get out of jail free card.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,563
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

26 Feb 2015, 11:43 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
In fact, a British sniper had had the chance to pop George Washington, but had thought it would have been ungentlemanly.


IIRC, because he would have had to shoot him in the back, and that just wouldn't do. Oops...


Imagine such rules and sentiments staying the hands of soldiers today. :lol:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


em_tsuj
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,786

26 Feb 2015, 11:46 pm

Prof_Pretorius wrote:
em_tsuj wrote:
I don't all the facts. Only the two dead soldiers and the killer know what happened for sure. However, it sounds like the killer was psychotic. I don't think it is fair to hold someone accountable for something they did when they were literally out of their heads. You can't really distinguish right from wrong when you are psychotic. I hope the sentence is reversed on appeal.


I'm not certain, but I believe the US newspapers were never told the details of how the killings took place. Those details were probably revealed in the court proceedings.
On a personal note, if someone is capable of pointing a gun at me and firing it, they are not insane.


Have you ever interacted with someone who is psychotic?



heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

01 Mar 2015, 1:35 am

I'm unclear on all the details but the whole thing is very ironic. Chris Kyle tries to treat a fellow veteran for PTSD (when he probably isn't qualified to) and ultimately pays the price in an ironic twist of fate. (edit: it's unclear whether this was actually Kyles intention to "treat" his comrade - probably not). Anyway, taking someone to a gun range who suffers from war-related PTSD sounds like a rather perverse sort of idean. One can only guess why Chris Kyle thought this was a good idea. I have my opinions on this that others can probably guess if they read between the lines.

All in all, very sad. Really horrible mistake to release that movie before the end of the trial.

So we either have to say this man was evil or he was suffering from PTSD or somewhere in between. Chris Kyle certainly though he was suffering from PTSD (right or wrong?). Who are we to say he was wrong? And even if he was right, is PTSD a legitimate defensel? Maybe, maybe not.

I don't think the general public gets a hold of all the relevant details so I don't think we're really qualified to judge.

Maybe someone who knows more details can say.



Protogenoi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 817

02 Mar 2015, 11:34 pm

em_tsuj wrote:
I don't all the facts. Only the two dead soldiers and the killer know what happened for sure. However, it sounds like the killer was psychotic. I don't think it is fair to hold someone accountable for something they did when they were literally out of their heads. You can't really distinguish right from wrong when you are psychotic. I hope the sentence is reversed on appeal.


That would be dependent entirely on what is right and wrong or if such concepts actually exist. And does psychosis actually diminish one's ability to distinguish right from wrong or does it warp the extraneous circumstances around the event in such a way as to distort the proper course of action to preserve the line between good and bad.


_________________
Now take a trip with me but don't be surprised when things aren't what they seem. I've known it from the start all these good ideas will tear your brain apart. Scared, but you can follow me. I'm too weird to live but much too rare to die. - a7x