Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Decades ago Mentally ill people were locked up on involuntary commitment orders all the time whether they'd committed a crime or not. Their families had them committed and authorities like the courts had them committed. All it took was a diagnosis from someone in authority to keep them in an institution.
Was it right to do that. In some cases no, in some cases yes but the fact remains that it did go a long way to protecting society whether we agree with it or not. Now, that we've allegedly become a much kinder society when it comes to dealing with the mentally ill, we've shut down those horrible institutions and put the problems out on the streets. So your claim that she shouldn't be punished for possible crimes is right but only if you can answer me this.
Will she be better off wandering the streets with her current mental condition or would she be better served if she was institutionalised and received proper treatment because I know which one I'd prefer.
There is no known treatment for psychopathy that I am aware of, especially this severe. Possibly you could train a psychopath that it's to their own advantage to live within the law and find a less destructive outlet - maybe.
She won't wander the streets. She's not delusional, her rational thinking is not impaired, she just doesn't feel any empathy. So this is much different than someone with florid psychosis "wandering the streets." Prowling the streets might be apt tho.
So she'd just be locked up for life for crimes that may be abhorrent, but we usually deem as less serious than hurting humans. All based on her diagnosis and what she may do. I don't think it's good for our justice system to go down that road.
CKA Uber 
