Hokay... now let's do a quick catch up, then boil it all down. But first, I want to go on record as saying I'm not really into name calling, it brings out the bullying in people. But when they name call themselves, then I don't have as much of a problem. Add to that a Republican name-calling his own actions and behavior as 'sh*t,' and though it's not quite champagne, I do get a kick out of it.
A New Hampshire Republican seems to be feeling regret after backing a bill to expand the use of mental health courts, lamenting on Facebook that his "name is attached to this turd."
According William Tucker, writer for the blog miscellany: blue, Rep. Kyle Tasker (R-Nottingham) is one of the sponsors of HB 1442, which would allow circuit and superior courts to establish mental health courts. Those courts could lead to treatment for mentally ill, nonviolent offenders rather than incarceration.
Now this house bill in N.H. that Tasker put his name onto sounds like a very fair and compassionate action. After all, mental illness is just that, an illness. It's involuntary and those afflicted don't have the same faculties or abilities to assess and analyze their actions the same was as "sane" folks.
So what's wrong with this bill and Tasker putting his name on it? Logic for one:
But on a Facebook post from Feb. 2 and 3, Tasker commented that "[t]he idea that being crazy is a shield against the full force of the justice system is laughable."
"Crazy people need to face consequences equal or greater than everyone else," Tasker wrote.
"The idea that being crazy is a shield against the full force of the justice system is laughable," he continued. "Texas doesn’t have any problem executing the mentally ill."
"Damn it this is why you need the full language before you sign off on bills like this...now my name is attached to this turd," Tasker said in a separate comment.
A screen grab of his Facebook entry:
So crazy people (Tasker's term, not mine) need equal or GREATER punishment than everyone else? Are you crapping me? One of the great things about our system of justice, flawed as it may be, is that we distinguish between limited or impaired capacity of perpetrators of crimes. Judges and juries must know whether the accused is capable of understanding that they are breaking the law.
Take children for instance. We alter justice for them because of their age and ability to understand right from wrong. Take pornography. If the participants are 18 or older, it's determined they have the ability to understand the consequences of their actions and it's legal. If they are under that age, it's a felony for anyone to have possession of this content.
Now move onto murder even in adults. If a person is not capable of knowing right from wrong, they're not generally punished the same way as a non-crazy person. A defense available is diminished capacities or temporary insanity. (Personally I think most people who commit murder are temporarily insane but that's another story).
So what's Tasker thinking here? It's certainly outside the norms of jurisprudence. He wants to heap additional burdens on the impaired?
Wait -- he does cite precedent: Texas. They execute the mentally challenged. Caution to Rep. Tasker -- don't visit Texas. You might get executed because you won't have your diminished mental capacities defense taken into consideration.
Maybe Tasker is a turd. But because of his own words, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's one of the crazy people who deserve special consideration. He's seemingly afflicted with diminished capacities. So his self-proclaimed guilt for backing this bill will be taken into consideration. But this court mandates that he seek and receive mental health care/treatment until such time as he proves to the court that he's capable of sane decision making. Until then, Mr. Tasker, you will , just like your reference to this bill, be referred to as a turd. Smile. You've earned it.