Another police officer shooting, this time a Detroit P.D. Officer was shot in the head, by a mentally ill 43 yr. old man. His family states that he has mental illness, yet there were two or three firearms in the home, as reported to police by his wife. It was a Domestic Violence call, first by the husband saying that he had assaulted his wife and later, as officers were on their way to the residence, the wife calling stating "shots have been fired". Here is some of the rest that happened: When police arrived, they noticed a man hanging out of a window and he appeared to have a weapon. "Next thing they know, they see the muzzle flash, hear the gunfire," Stair (1st. Asst. Chief) said during a news conference following the shooting. It was at this moment, she said, that officers realized one of their own had been shot. The officer was immediately transported to the hospital by is partner. He is currently in critical condition. The officer's father also works for the Detroit P.D.. The officers explained how they worked to get the wife and the three children out of the house, leaving only the "offender and the dog" inside. Following the shooting, police continued to make efforts to apprehend the suspect, speaking with him through a bullhorn from an armored vehicle. Michigan State Police, the Wayne County SWAT Team, DTE, American Red Cross, the Detroit Fire Department and Detroit EMS were all on hand to assist. Eventually, police used teargas to drive the man out of the home and arrest him. The suspect's family told police that the man has a history of mental illness. According to police, the suspect has faced charges for drugs and assault but has no convictions. He is registered as owning several weapons. So, bottom line is.........what can be done? The family knows, as many families do, that a member of their family has mental illness, but what I can't understand is why the person has firearms. That, in itself, is a "disaster" in the making. My wife's one sister was diagnosed as being "schizophrenic", but had a driver's license and drove. Years ago, she had been both arrested and hospitalized for incidents. She was even working a part-time job at a fast-food place. Today, she is much better, but no longer can live by herself. She lives in a Board & Care house where the resident makes sure she takes her medication for her mental illness.
From what you have written sounds as if family who allowed guns in the home of a mentally ill person are in part to blame. Then whoever sold and registered the guns in his name should take blame. I know this sounds cruel.....but persoanlly ill or not police should shoot to kill when they are attacked.
I think the U.S. is starting to get a small handle on mental illness but is still the most liberal when it comes to simply handing out a bunch of pills instead of trying to get to the roots of the matter. When we say, "mentally ill", it involves such a wide range of conditions and catagories that no one can properly pin point with total certainty what particular malady a person actually suffers from. Matter of fact, the catagory as a whole is the number one cause in the U.S. for disability claims and is a multi-trillion dollar industry for the pharm companies. Schizophrenia, as an example, has so many subcatagories to choose from, I would not be astounded if just about everyone fits into at least one of them. By definition, Schizophrenia consists of someone who may show symptoms of agitation, catatonia, confusion, delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, loss of emotional response, flat line personality, innapropriate actions or feelings, withdrawal from society, occupational disfunction, depression and on and on and on. Each one of those symptoms can then be thrown into a subcatagory such as Bipolar, manic depressive, pseudopsychopathic, incipient, prepsychotic, prodomal, pseudoneurotic etc. The number one common denominator of all of them is the proposal that most of those symptoms started at the childhood level and continued to progress through adulthood. We find that more and more children, particularly males, are all too liberally being diagnosed with A.D.D and A.D.H.D. and for the most part, prescribed medications by clinitions who have no real substantial performance nor education in the psychiatric field. PTSD is another one that psychologists are only now starting to fully study but still, those who suffer from it are being experimentally medicated and treated. Some patients make it, some do not. The bottom line is that there are some people who are noticably ill and really, really need to be sequestered into an environment suitable for their treatment. There are others though, who through improper medication, diet, lack of exercise, or even a bad environment need to be re-evaluated and given a reality check. To say that violent people are mentally ill is the safest diagnosis a person can have because it gives reasoning for their actions and after all, we all have to have a short cut reason for someone's instability just to make sure none of us are guilty of promoting such behavior. I could well write a whole book, chapter by chapter explaining and giving definitions of what I have personally researched and believe to be true at this juncture in time but alas, time is short and so is bandwidth. To me, in short, the psychiatric system in the U.S. and most of the world is filled with nothing more than experimentation on human lab rats by those who have so little qualitative knowledge of how our brains and minds truly work.
At one time mentally ill where in a hospital and not walking the streets. The pharmaceutical companies push to say they can control it with drugs and let them out. I lived in St. Thomas Ontario and just south of there was a large mental hospital that covered probably a mile in length and now it has been 95% closed where did all those people go.
That is definitely a good question. Only the raving lunatic is readily recognized as having a problem. That said, there were times in recent past days when someone could be sequestered for being eccentric or going outside the socially accepted lines of mental awareness. In the right conditions, the Beatle haircut or the mini-skirt could have been construed as a lack of mental stability and might very well be in some countries. The question is: Who is really in control of their own mental acuity and who determines how little or how much control that person possesses? Certainly, what is absolutely sane in one society can be construed as total insanity in another. Who issues the pills and under what qualitative premise are they issued? On the premise issue, I submit that there are none that are substantially proven in order to provide a safe and sure method of treatment for those who exhibit mental illness in any form.
They would only lock up people who where of danger to others. That changed when they said they can control that with drugs. Some drugs cause mental illness and it is in side effects list.
I'm sure they will still find a way to blame this all on the police. Negligent doesn't even begin to describe it.