Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (251099)	5/26/2014 5:41:09 PM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541679

My proposal is for CIVIL liability only. I wish to incorporate into law a "duty" to act or face the threat of being held negligent for the ensuing damage. As long as they took, or attempted to take, reasonable steps, to solve the problem they would have complied with the duty to act. They wouldn't actually have to have solved the problem (although I think that in some cases, even a lot of them, this would happen). I'm not up on Calif law on the matter, but in NC anyone can have anyone committed to a 24 hour hold for mental evaluation just by filling out a form and alleging that they are a danger to themselves or others (with a space for the details provided on the form). IMHO we should be encouraging people to file these things given the state of how often they (mass shootings) appear to be happening. I think the larger duty is to society at large rather than worrying about "stigma" fall out. We need to take the stigma out of the equation and the way to do that is making someone get treatment be the norm--and this is a way to do that.