[Vision2020] Close to 27 Dead

[Joe Campbell]

Great post, Darrell. That is the point. We have an issue, and how do
we deal with it? How do we deal with it in the most economical way,
especially?

You can track recent killing events and mental health is a factor in
all of the ones we know about so far. Economically speaking, we need
to take that into consideration and figure out how to deal with it in
the future. Better mental heath care has got to be part of that
equation.

One more purely economical point: When it comes to insurance and
economics, numbers matter a lot. So much that they matter more than
any other factor. When thinking of this we often focus on risk
factors, and the worry that we are paying for the faults of others
comes up -- including free-rider problems. But ultimately, numbers
will trump even those considerations.

There is the real possibility of a solution here since ultimately the
risks will far outweigh the costs.

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Breaks my heart. And ready availability of guns IS what makes it possible.
> But I look deeper for a cause. I think it goes back to the Reagan era cuts
> in mental health. At the time our nation greatly cut funding for mental
> health institutions (closing many). The idea was to integrate these people
> into the community. Money saved by closing facilities was supposed to go
> into "wrap-around" programs that would help these people live and function
> successfully in the community. Guess what? The facilities were closed, but
> wrap-around programs didn't get the funding. People were put into
> communities without support. And it has been the same ever since...
> And what gets me is that prevention actually costs less! Much cheaper to
> treat the mentally ill than to: A. Ignore them. B. Incarcerate them. Was
> looking at some numbers yesterday. A few years ago Idaho GREATLY cut mental
> health services. Guess what? Costs to the state have greatly increased in
> terms of incarceration and emergency hospitalization. Maybe we shouldn't
> have cut off our nose to spite our face.
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> This can't be the fault of lax gun laws. After all, gun laws only
>> protect criminals. Criminals will get guns whether they are legal or
>> not.
>>
>> If someone else had a gun -- besides the gunman -- lives would have been
>> saved.
>>
>> Even when it is revealed, as it will be revealed -- for only the
>> insane kill people -- that the shooter was insane, the fact that we
>> have lax gun laws had nothing to do with it.
>>
>> For the shooter is responsible.
>>
>> Unless he is insane.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Janesta <janesta at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Elementary school kids, and adults.
>> >
>> >
>> > http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > =======================================================
>> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >                http://www.fsr.net
>> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> > =======================================================
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>
>