AZ sheriff blames political rhetoric

[30ashopper]

YouTube - Twitter Users Wish Death on Sarah Palin

The angry left's twitters over the weekend.

 

[Beach Runner]

The Tucson Shooter And The Case For Involuntary Commitment | The New Republic

Interesting read. Is it time to give government more control over our lives, to the point of allowing it to incarcerate someone who has not committed a crime, but is deemed potentially capable of doing so in the future?

Interesting, as are the comments.

But if someone has a tendency to agree with this, shouldn't at minimum the government provide affordable health care insurance to these mentally ill people so that they can get treatment and meds before they are incarcerate them? The treatment and meds are quite expensive. And people with mental illnesses can't get health insurance at any cost unless they work for an employer with group insurance. Then there's the pre-existing condition thing.

The Affordable Health Care Act is supposed to take care of this, but who knows if it will get repealed or declared unconstitutional?

 

[scooterbug44]

Obviously the media was floundering and looked for any details/to fill airtime - they even officially reported the Congresswoman was dead at one point.

And obviously the motivation of the shooter was a question everyone was asking.

But it wasn't just the media jumping to conclusions about the shooter's motivation - which is why that part of Palin's site (already questioned/debated pre-shooting including by the Congresswoman shot) was immediately taken down. They chose to do so because they thought there was a link too.

While it currently seems that THIS shooter did not have a clear or direct link to a certain political philosophy/group, it is quite clear that violence and threats against politicians are dramatically increasing.

Just because it has turned out that there wasn't a clear link IN THIS CASE, doesn't mean it hasn't been, isn't currently, or won't be in the future.

 

[30ashopper]

Interesting, as are the comments.

But if someone has a tendency to agree with this, shouldn't at minimum the government provide affordable health care insurance to these mentally ill people so that they can get treatment and meds before they are incarcerate them? The treatment and meds are quite expensive. And people with mental illnesses can't get health insurance at any cost unless they work for an employer with group insurance. Then there's the pre-existing condition thing.

The Affordable Health Care Act is supposed to take care of this, but who knows if it will get repealed or declared unconstitutional?

I think we already do. I'd guess most mental wards are state run and state funded, so the state would be paying for treatment. If these folks were out on the streets, medicaid would cover them assuming they were within the income levels and knew how to get signed up.

I don't know how well we fund such things here in florida, it's an interesting question.

 

[30ashopper]

Obviously the media was floundering and looked for any details/to fill airtime - they even officially reported the Congresswoman was dead at one point.

And obviously the motivation of the shooter was a question everyone was asking.

But it wasn't just the media jumping to conclusions about the shooter's motivation - which is why that part of Palin's site (already questioned/debated pre-shooting including by the Congresswoman shot) was immediately taken down. They chose to do so because they thought there was a link too.

While it currently seems that THIS shooter did not have a clear or direct link to a certain political philosophy/group, it is quite clear that violence and threats against politicians are dramatically increasing.

Just because it has turned out that there wasn't a clear link IN THIS CASE, doesn't mean it hasn't been, isn't currently, or won't be in the future.

Purely more speculation on your part. Maybe they just felt it was inappropriate to keep a political sign like that up at a time like this?

 

[Linda]

Purely more speculation on your part. Maybe they just felt it was inappropriate to keep a political sign like that up at a time like this?

I agree - they also might have guessed (correctly) that the left would use it against her no matter what the facts were.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

Purely more speculation on your part. Maybe they just felt it was inappropriate to keep a political sign like that up at a time like this?

And this is purely speculation on your part. Point being, everyone is speculating on this. Doesn't mean one side is speculating better than the other.

 

[Beach Runner]

I think we already do. I'd guess most mental wards are state run and state funded, so the state would be paying for treatment. If these folks were out on the streets, medicaid would cover them assuming they were within the income levels and knew how to get signed up.

I don't know how well we fund such things here in florida, it's an interesting question.

A person with a mental illness shouldn't be "put in a mental ward" unless that's a last resort.

S/he should get therapy and meds to help him/her live a normal life. Unfortunately there are many people with mental illnesses who do not qualify for medicaid yet cannot afford any type of medical care, including psychiatric care, because they can't get private insurance.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

A person with a mental illness shouldn't be "put in a mental ward" unless that's a last resort.

S/he should get therapy and meds to help him/her live a normal life. Unfortunately there are many people with mental illnesses who do not qualify for medicaid yet cannot afford any type of medical care, including psychiatric care, because they can't get private insurance.

According to an article I read earlier today, Arizona's budget for mental health was cut 45 percent in 2010. I've been reading some really sad stuff about people dying due to the transplant list funds being cut as well.

 

[scooterbug44]

Purely more speculation on your part. Maybe they just felt it was inappropriate to keep a political sign like that up at a time like this?

And maybe, just maybe, this last incident (one of many violent attacks against those on her "hit list" BTW) was the one they thought was going to be the final straw.

Vandalism (including of Gifford's office 24 hours after that was posted), some idiot cutting a gas line at what he thought was another targeted Congressman's house (the posted address was wrong), and death threats and violence against other Congresspeople didn't make them take it down.

Whose opinion will you listen to? How about Congresswoman Giffords? She summed it up pretty effectively back in March:

?We?re on Sarah Palin?s targeted list, but the thing is, that the way she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district and when people do that, they?ve gotta realize there?s consequences to that action.?

Palin, meet consequences.

Anyone who knows anything about guns knows you always treat one like it's loaded and you never aim one at anything you don't want to shoot. They also know bullets can travel far beyond their intended targets.

The Congresswoman that Palin drew crosshairs on just got shot, 6 innocent people are dead, and 13 others are injured.

No amount of spin is going to change those facts.

I agree - they also might have guessed (correctly) that the left would use it against her no matter what the facts were.

I could give a rat's arse about the politics. The facts are that when you advocate violence, you run the risk of being responsible for the violent incidents that result.

Maybe its not about left/right, but THAT YOU SHOULDN'T ADVOCATE VIOLENCE.