Slog - Comments on A Lesson for Legislators from the Harps Murder

Comment by pablocjr

pablocjr — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:20:38 -0800

I'm all for more housing with services. But get it away from residential neighborhoods. Put it downtown in the business district or in industrial areas, where the streets are empty at night.

Comment by Cato the Younger Younger

Cato the Younger Younger — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:22:46 -0800

I have met a few ex-con's and housing employment and a medical care (if needed) is VITAL to ensure what happened on Cap Hill on New Years Eve does not happen.

The reality is many ex-cons (and America is great at locking up people compared to the rest of the industrialized nations) have no family, no friends and no nothing to go to when they get out of prison. Washington State litterally takes them to a bus depot with a ticket and says "you are on your own: good luck with that safety net that does not exist"

And we are shocked that they go back to a life of crime?

Comment by elenchos

elenchos — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:27:03 -0800

The guy who killed Shannon Harps should have been forced to stay on his meds and off other drugs, or else be locked up. He needed more than somebody looking in on him every week.

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:32:44 -0800

I think we should have the lockups be where the population comes from.

The suburbs.

Yup, just look at the stats of where the families are.

Comment by stunk

stunk — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:40:59 -0800

This James Williams guy should not have been released from state supervision given his history of behavior. Linking him to the housing issue is a bit of a stretch.

Comment by Fnarf

Fnarf — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:42:40 -0800

Yes, Pablo, putting HOUSING in RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS -- that's crazy.

Comment by Gitai

Gitai — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:45:28 -0800

@3 It's incredibly difficult to get a court order for medical compliance. The illegal drugs are easy, but there are huge civil rights issues that are not only legal, but ingrained in the official ethics and practices of psychiatrists. It can be really frustrating. Until recently, I was dealing with a kid who wasn't med compliant, and even his probation officer didn't wanna bother trying for a court order, and this was in light of two suicide attempts, several domestic violence convictions, a number of times running away, and several probation violations.

This is just one more area where protections for the majority enable a few horrible people to do horrible things.

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:52:02 -0800

@7,

Then we need to roll back at least some of the protections for the violently mentally ill. As I've mentioned before, it's ridiculous that we have to wait for them to kill someone before we can do anything about them -- in which case they often get sent to prison which is not an appropriate accommodation for someone who is truly crazy.

Comment by pablocjr

pablocjr — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:05:10 -0800

Touch�, Fnarf.

The point I was trying to make is that the importance of public safety far outweighs the need to integrate the James Williamses of the world into dense residential neighborhoods. NIMBY-ism perhaps, but I'd rather have murder-prone psychopaths roaming the streets of SODO than hanging out in the parking lot behind Madison Market.

Comment by Gitai

Gitai — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:07:36 -0800

@8 It's a bitch, yes, but remember, the second we do that, we'll get a cluster of horror stories of people who really shouldn't be on meds being forced to take them, perhaps 16 year olds that write violent fantasies, but would never hurt anyone, and then you'll be screaming about greater protections.

Back and forth, back and forth, rushing into action, reaction, and counteraction based on the notoriety of events. Instead, let's do some quiet deliberation.

Comment by crk on bellevue ave

crk on bellevue ave — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:21:26 -0800

Ohhh, if only it were so simple. I double, triple dog dare you to define "violently mentally ill". Do remember that, for better or for worse, you are about to legislate away a persons rights so please make sure you cover all the edge cases. Remember that groups like the ACLU will come out of the woodwork and pick holes in it. Remember whatever bill you create will have to stand up to state courts and quite possibly even the supreme court.

If it was easy as easy is "force medicine to violently mentally ill people", we'd be doing it already.

BTW, this is actually a similar issue to registered sex offenders. Does the government have the right to restrict your rights even after you are released from "the system" (i.e. jail)?