basquebromance
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2015
- 109,396
- 27,046
- 2,220
- Banned
- #1
Congress forces the VA to offer mental health screenings
- Thread starter basquebromance
- Start date
Moonglow
Diamond Member
No thanks...
Did they allocate more money? Did they cut the severe shortage of qualified health care providers in the VA? I seriously doubt it, if they did they wouldn't have the VA to beat up on when they (the politicians) fuck up or are looking to get reelected.........
Tijn Von Ingersleben
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2018
- 8,558
- 2,592
- 290
- Banned
- #4
IDK...troops who deploy to hostile fire areas are required to be screened upon return and then receive followup screenings at 6 months and 1 year. The military really takes PTSD/TBI very seriously. Most of the guys who get less than honorable discharges were shitheads (fighting/DUI/domestic) or just had a bad luck incident.
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,718
- 13,425
- 2,280
From the article link above-
Congress last month directed the VA to immediately offer screenings and care to ex-service members with “bad paper” discharges, a step that advocates believe could open the door to wider care to tens of thousands of ex-service members denied VA services because of how they separated.
Provisions tucked into a catch-all spending bill were the product of a bipartisan compromise after House members and senators weighed mounting proof of the relationship between post-traumatic stress disorder and bad conduct discharges.
The VA is required to provide an initial mental health assessment for veterans in question who deployed in a combat zone, including drone operators, or who took part in a contingency operation. Victims of sexual assault dismissed from the military also could get help.
Then, based on those assessments, the VA would be required to treat the veterans’ conditions.
Related: San Antonio part of study finding speedier PTSD therapy
Services would remain unavailable for those with dishonorable discharges or discharges by court-martial.
Congress last month directed the VA to immediately offer screenings and care to ex-service members with “bad paper” discharges, a step that advocates believe could open the door to wider care to tens of thousands of ex-service members denied VA services because of how they separated.
Provisions tucked into a catch-all spending bill were the product of a bipartisan compromise after House members and senators weighed mounting proof of the relationship between post-traumatic stress disorder and bad conduct discharges.
The VA is required to provide an initial mental health assessment for veterans in question who deployed in a combat zone, including drone operators, or who took part in a contingency operation. Victims of sexual assault dismissed from the military also could get help.
Then, based on those assessments, the VA would be required to treat the veterans’ conditions.
Related: San Antonio part of study finding speedier PTSD therapy
Services would remain unavailable for those with dishonorable discharges or discharges by court-martial.
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
That's probably a good thing. The last thing society needs running around and not receiving treatment is mentally "unstable" folks who've got lots of training on how to kill people. I don't know how many such vets there may be in such a situation, but, frankly, one is one too many.
JGalt
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2011
- 72,126
- 87,751
- 3,635
I've already witnessed the extent of the VA's "mental health screenings"..
Them: "Do you feel like hurting someone?"
Me: "No."
Them: "Do you feel like hurting yourself?"
Me: "No."
Them: "What year is this?"
Me: "2018."
Them: "Who is the President of the United States?"
Me: "President Donald J. F*cking Trump, motherf*ckers. MAGA, you sumbitches."
Them: "Ok. Your not crazy."
Them: Do you feel like hurting someone?
I've already witnessed the extent of the VA's "mental health screenings"..
Them: "Do you feel like hurting someone?"
Me: "No."
Them: "Do you feel like hurting yourself?"
Me: "No."
Them: "What year is this?"
Me: "2018."
Them: "Who is the President of the United States?"
Me: "President Donald J. F*cking Trump, motherf*ckers. MAGA, you sumbitches."
Them: "Ok. Your not crazy."
Me: The wife, on occasion...... But the feeling is occasionally mutual.
Them: Do you feel like hurting yourself?
Me: Define "hurting".......
Them: What year is this?
Me: The year of the Dog.
Them: Who is the president of the United States?
Me: We have a president?
Them: You're not crazy.
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
In order to 'get it" ya might try to look beyond your fear........
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Oh, and it's not a double take.......
Last edited:
Look at the reality not the made up fear.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Are military veterans more likely for shooting sprees?
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
Whether they are or are not more or less prone than anybody else really isn't the point. What is the point is that Congress has stipulated that vets be offered mental health screening. It's my assertion that do doing is a good thing, in and of itself, and for the benefit of veterans, and that it's a good thing for the rest of us not to have undiagnosed and mentally unstable veterans running around.
Fear has nothing to do with my remarks or line of thinking. The fact that mental health screenings can identify instances of mental imbalances is what drives my thinking. The fact that mentally imbalanced people -- vets or not -- do "stupid sh*t" is what drives my thinking. I'm not afraid of mentally imbalanced people doing "stupid shit." I would see them treated so they don't do such things and ruin not just someone else's life, but their own and their loved ones. Vets are people in whom the country, taxpayers have invested a lot of resources. I don't want vets behind bars where they aren't maximally useful. I want them in society contributing and bringing to bear (after their service) the skills they got from the military.
- What is there to object to about military vets being offered mental health screenings?
- How many of them having mental imbalances must the mental screening identify and attempt to treat, for doing so to be "worth it?"
- AIR FORCE
- Robert James Acremant -- Killed 3 people (1995)
- William Andrews and Dale Selby Pierre -- Killed 3 people (1974)
Committed their crimes while in the service. Pierre was suspected in another killing where the victim was a fellow airman. - Donald Jay Beardslee -- Killed 3 people (1969-81)
Also went to a military school, where he was regularly humiliated, beaten and tortured by upperclassman as part of standard abuse and hazing. - Rudy Bladel (aka “The Railway Sniper”) -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly up to 7 (1963-78)
- William Bonin (aka “The Freeway Killer”) -- Killed at least 21 people, possibly up to 43 (1979-80; some with accomplices)
Vietnam veteran gunner. Was awarded a good conduct medal. - Thomas Richard Bunday -- Killed 5 people (1979-81)
Was in the service at the time of his crimes and was seeing a military psychologist. The psychologist committed a murder of his own, the hired killing of his own wife, which was done in a manner to look like part of Bunday’s then-unsolved string of killings, with the psychologist unaware that the killer was one of his own patients. Bunday hid at least one body on the base where he was stationed. - Peter C. Contos -- Killed 3 people (1997)
Air National Guard. Committed his crime while in the service. Hid the bodies of two of his victims in a locker at the Air Force base where he served. According to a court appeal, he blamed his crimes on stress causing him to mentally go into “‘the zone,’ in which he reverted to his military training and eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat.” James - Michael DeBardelben -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly 8 or more (1971-83)
- Richard Eugene Dickens -- Killed 2 people (1990)
- Dennis Thurl Dowthitt-- Killed 2 people (1990; with accomplice)
- Robert Garrow -- Killed 4 people (1973)
During service, was ridiculed for bed-wetting. - Donald Harvey -- Killed at least 37 people, possibly 57 or more (1970-87)
Committed some of his crimes at a Veterans Affairs hospital while working there. - John Joseph Joubert IV (aka “The Woodford Slasher”) -- Killed 3 people (1982-85)
Committed some of his crimes while living on a base. Also attended military college. - Patrick Wayne Kearney (aka “The Trash-Bag Killer,” “The Freeway Killer”) Killed at least 21 people, possibly 28 or more (1975-77; possibly with accomplice)
His possible accomplice was an Army veteran. - Barton Kay Kirkham Killed 2 people (1956) Was discharged after committing a robbery while AWOL.
- Randy Kraft (aka “The Freeway Killer,” “The Scorecard Killer”) -- Killed at least 16 people, possibly up to 67 (1970-83)
Was entrusted with a “secret” security clearance. A former ROTC member who demonstrated in favor of the Vietnam War. - Gary Lewingdon Killed at least 10 people, possibly up to 11 (1977-78; with an accomplice) Vietnam veteran.
- Dean A. Mellberg -- Killed 4 people and unborn child (1994)
Committed his crimes at the base where he previously served. - Joseph Naso (aka “The Alphabet Murderer”) -- Killed at least 4 people, possibly 6 or more (1970s-1990s)
- Simon Peter Nelson -- Killed 6 people (1978)
- John Leonard Orr (aka “The Pillow Pyro”) -- Killed 4 people (1984)
- Kelsey Patterson -- Killed 2 people (1992)
- Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) Killed 10 people (1974-91)
- Larry Keith Robison -- Killed 5 people (1982) Had paranoid delusions of being hunted by various government authorities, including the Air Force.
- Daniel Harold “Danny” Rolling (aka “The Gainesville Ripper”) -- Killed at least 5 people, possibly up to 8 (1990-91)
Worked in the former Strategic Air Command and as base security police. Honorably discharged. Used a Marine Corps Ka-Bar combat knife in his crimes. Also attempted and failed to enlist in the Navy. Pat Sherrill (see Marines listing) - Michael Alan Silka -- Killed at least 9 people (1984)
- Ronald Gene Simmons -- Killed 16 people (1987) Decorated Vietnam veteran who earned a marksmanship medal and retired as a master sergeant after 22 years. Also served in the Navy.
- John Floyd Thomas Jr. (aka “Westside Rapist”) -- Killed at least 7 people, possibly up to 30 (1972-1986)
- Richard Lee Tingler Jr. -- Killed at least 6 people, possibly up to 7 (1968-69)
Began committing lesser crimes while in the service with a fellow airman as an accomplice. - Thomas Warren Whisenhant Killed 3 people (1975-76)
While in the service, attempted to murder a member of the Air Force WAF. - Andrew Paul Witt -- Killed 2 people (2004)
Committed his crimes on a base while in the service and while wearing full battle dress uniform worn for the purpose of the attack. Victims included a fellow airman. Later apologized for the impact of his crimes on the Air Force. - Yahweh ben Yahweh (aka Hulon Mitchell Jr.) -- Killed at least 14 people (c. 1980s)
- Edward J. Zakrzewski II -- Killed 3 people (1994) Was in the service at the time of his crimes.
- AIR FORCE
The above are just the Air Force vets. and the ones who committed murders, not any other violent or otherwise criminal offenses. You can examine the site for yourself to identify those from the other services. The Air Force is just a snippet of the total quantify of listed murderers who were/are vets.
You're still missing the point, it's called reality in the overall sense. Think about that statement and all aspects of it.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Whether they are or are not more or less prone than anybody else really isn't the point. What is the point is that Congress has stipulated that vets be offered mental health screening. It's my assertion that do doing is a good thing, in and of itself, and for the benefit of veterans, and that it's a good thing for the rest of us not to have undiagnosed and mentally unstable veterans running around.
Fear has nothing to do with my remarks or line of thinking. The fact that mental health screenings can identify instances of mental imbalances is what drives my thinking. The fact that mentally imbalanced people -- vets or not -- do "stupid sh*t" is what drives my thinking. I'm not afraid of mentally imbalanced people doing "stupid shit." I would see them treated so they don't do such things and ruin not just someone else's life, but their own and their loved ones. Vets are people in whom the country, taxpayers have invested a lot of resources. I don't want vets behind bars where they aren't maximally useful. I want them in society contributing and bringing to bear (after their service) the skills they got from the military.
Is it plausible in your mind that the above noted individuals may have or did/do have mental imbalances?
- What is there to object to about military vets being offered mental health screenings?
- How many of them having mental imbalances must the mental screening identify and attempt to treat, for doing so to be "worth it?"
- AIR FORCE
- Robert James Acremant -- Killed 3 people (1995)
- William Andrews and Dale Selby Pierre -- Killed 3 people (1974)
Committed their crimes while in the service. Pierre was suspected in another killing where the victim was a fellow airman.- Donald Jay Beardslee -- Killed 3 people (1969-81)
Also went to a military school, where he was regularly humiliated, beaten and tortured by upperclassman as part of standard abuse and hazing.- Rudy Bladel (aka “The Railway Sniper”) -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly up to 7 (1963-78)
- William Bonin (aka “The Freeway Killer”) -- Killed at least 21 people, possibly up to 43 (1979-80; some with accomplices)
Vietnam veteran gunner. Was awarded a good conduct medal.- Thomas Richard Bunday -- Killed 5 people (1979-81)
Was in the service at the time of his crimes and was seeing a military psychologist. The psychologist committed a murder of his own, the hired killing of his own wife, which was done in a manner to look like part of Bunday’s then-unsolved string of killings, with the psychologist unaware that the killer was one of his own patients. Bunday hid at least one body on the base where he was stationed.- Peter C. Contos -- Killed 3 people (1997)
Air National Guard. Committed his crime while in the service. Hid the bodies of two of his victims in a locker at the Air Force base where he served. According to a court appeal, he blamed his crimes on stress causing him to mentally go into “‘the zone,’ in which he reverted to his military training and eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat.” James- Michael DeBardelben -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly 8 or more (1971-83)
- Richard Eugene Dickens -- Killed 2 people (1990)
- Dennis Thurl Dowthitt-- Killed 2 people (1990; with accomplice)
- Robert Garrow -- Killed 4 people (1973)
During service, was ridiculed for bed-wetting.- Donald Harvey -- Killed at least 37 people, possibly 57 or more (1970-87)
Committed some of his crimes at a Veterans Affairs hospital while working there.- John Joseph Joubert IV (aka “The Woodford Slasher”) -- Killed 3 people (1982-85)
Committed some of his crimes while living on a base. Also attended military college.- Patrick Wayne Kearney (aka “The Trash-Bag Killer,” “The Freeway Killer”) Killed at least 21 people, possibly 28 or more (1975-77; possibly with accomplice)
His possible accomplice was an Army veteran.- Barton Kay Kirkham Killed 2 people (1956) Was discharged after committing a robbery while AWOL.
- Randy Kraft (aka “The Freeway Killer,” “The Scorecard Killer”) -- Killed at least 16 people, possibly up to 67 (1970-83)
Was entrusted with a “secret” security clearance. A former ROTC member who demonstrated in favor of the Vietnam War.- Gary Lewingdon Killed at least 10 people, possibly up to 11 (1977-78; with an accomplice) Vietnam veteran.
- Dean A. Mellberg -- Killed 4 people and unborn child (1994)
Committed his crimes at the base where he previously served.- Joseph Naso (aka “The Alphabet Murderer”) -- Killed at least 4 people, possibly 6 or more (1970s-1990s)
- Simon Peter Nelson -- Killed 6 people (1978)
- John Leonard Orr (aka “The Pillow Pyro”) -- Killed 4 people (1984)
- Kelsey Patterson -- Killed 2 people (1992)
- Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) Killed 10 people (1974-91)
- Larry Keith Robison -- Killed 5 people (1982) Had paranoid delusions of being hunted by various government authorities, including the Air Force.
- Daniel Harold “Danny” Rolling (aka “The Gainesville Ripper”) -- Killed at least 5 people, possibly up to 8 (1990-91)
Worked in the former Strategic Air Command and as base security police. Honorably discharged. Used a Marine Corps Ka-Bar combat knife in his crimes. Also attempted and failed to enlist in the Navy. Pat Sherrill (see Marines listing)- Michael Alan Silka -- Killed at least 9 people (1984)
- Ronald Gene Simmons -- Killed 16 people (1987) Decorated Vietnam veteran who earned a marksmanship medal and retired as a master sergeant after 22 years. Also served in the Navy.
- John Floyd Thomas Jr. (aka “Westside Rapist”) -- Killed at least 7 people, possibly up to 30 (1972-1986)
- Richard Lee Tingler Jr. -- Killed at least 6 people, possibly up to 7 (1968-69)
Began committing lesser crimes while in the service with a fellow airman as an accomplice.- Thomas Warren Whisenhant Killed 3 people (1975-76)
While in the service, attempted to murder a member of the Air Force WAF.- Andrew Paul Witt -- Killed 2 people (2004)
Committed his crimes on a base while in the service and while wearing full battle dress uniform worn for the purpose of the attack. Victims included a fellow airman. Later apologized for the impact of his crimes on the Air Force.- Yahweh ben Yahweh (aka Hulon Mitchell Jr.) -- Killed at least 14 people (c. 1980s)
- Edward J. Zakrzewski II -- Killed 3 people (1994) Was in the service at the time of his crimes.
The above are just the Air Force vets. and the ones who committed murders, not any other violent or otherwise criminal offenses. You can examine the site for yourself to identify those from the other services. The Air Force is just a snippet of the total quantify of listed murderers who were/are vets.
As for psychiatric screenings all returning (war zone) vets receive screenings, what this is for is givinging non qualified vets (dishonorably discharged) VA psychiatric screening which is already stretched beyond it's limits due to lack of proper funding and a severe shortage of qualified care givers. Pretty much a BS political move by congress critters so they can show it off at election time. It's not going to help, it's a band-aide on an arterial bleed........
Last edited:
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
You're still missing the point, it's called reality in the overall sense. Think about that statement and all aspects of it.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Whether they are or are not more or less prone than anybody else really isn't the point. What is the point is that Congress has stipulated that vets be offered mental health screening. It's my assertion that do doing is a good thing, in and of itself, and for the benefit of veterans, and that it's a good thing for the rest of us not to have undiagnosed and mentally unstable veterans running around.
Fear has nothing to do with my remarks or line of thinking. The fact that mental health screenings can identify instances of mental imbalances is what drives my thinking. The fact that mentally imbalanced people -- vets or not -- do "stupid sh*t" is what drives my thinking. I'm not afraid of mentally imbalanced people doing "stupid shit." I would see them treated so they don't do such things and ruin not just someone else's life, but their own and their loved ones. Vets are people in whom the country, taxpayers have invested a lot of resources. I don't want vets behind bars where they aren't maximally useful. I want them in society contributing and bringing to bear (after their service) the skills they got from the military.
Is it plausible in your mind that the above noted individuals may have or did/do have mental imbalances?
- What is there to object to about military vets being offered mental health screenings?
- How many of them having mental imbalances must the mental screening identify and attempt to treat, for doing so to be "worth it?"
- AIR FORCE
- Robert James Acremant -- Killed 3 people (1995)
- William Andrews and Dale Selby Pierre -- Killed 3 people (1974)
Committed their crimes while in the service. Pierre was suspected in another killing where the victim was a fellow airman.- Donald Jay Beardslee -- Killed 3 people (1969-81)
Also went to a military school, where he was regularly humiliated, beaten and tortured by upperclassman as part of standard abuse and hazing.- Rudy Bladel (aka “The Railway Sniper”) -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly up to 7 (1963-78)
- William Bonin (aka “The Freeway Killer”) -- Killed at least 21 people, possibly up to 43 (1979-80; some with accomplices)
Vietnam veteran gunner. Was awarded a good conduct medal.- Thomas Richard Bunday -- Killed 5 people (1979-81)
Was in the service at the time of his crimes and was seeing a military psychologist. The psychologist committed a murder of his own, the hired killing of his own wife, which was done in a manner to look like part of Bunday’s then-unsolved string of killings, with the psychologist unaware that the killer was one of his own patients. Bunday hid at least one body on the base where he was stationed.- Peter C. Contos -- Killed 3 people (1997)
Air National Guard. Committed his crime while in the service. Hid the bodies of two of his victims in a locker at the Air Force base where he served. According to a court appeal, he blamed his crimes on stress causing him to mentally go into “‘the zone,’ in which he reverted to his military training and eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat.” James- Michael DeBardelben -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly 8 or more (1971-83)
- Richard Eugene Dickens -- Killed 2 people (1990)
- Dennis Thurl Dowthitt-- Killed 2 people (1990; with accomplice)
- Robert Garrow -- Killed 4 people (1973)
During service, was ridiculed for bed-wetting.- Donald Harvey -- Killed at least 37 people, possibly 57 or more (1970-87)
Committed some of his crimes at a Veterans Affairs hospital while working there.- John Joseph Joubert IV (aka “The Woodford Slasher”) -- Killed 3 people (1982-85)
Committed some of his crimes while living on a base. Also attended military college.- Patrick Wayne Kearney (aka “The Trash-Bag Killer,” “The Freeway Killer”) Killed at least 21 people, possibly 28 or more (1975-77; possibly with accomplice)
His possible accomplice was an Army veteran.- Barton Kay Kirkham Killed 2 people (1956) Was discharged after committing a robbery while AWOL.
- Randy Kraft (aka “The Freeway Killer,” “The Scorecard Killer”) -- Killed at least 16 people, possibly up to 67 (1970-83)
Was entrusted with a “secret” security clearance. A former ROTC member who demonstrated in favor of the Vietnam War.- Gary Lewingdon Killed at least 10 people, possibly up to 11 (1977-78; with an accomplice) Vietnam veteran.
- Dean A. Mellberg -- Killed 4 people and unborn child (1994)
Committed his crimes at the base where he previously served.- Joseph Naso (aka “The Alphabet Murderer”) -- Killed at least 4 people, possibly 6 or more (1970s-1990s)
- Simon Peter Nelson -- Killed 6 people (1978)
- John Leonard Orr (aka “The Pillow Pyro”) -- Killed 4 people (1984)
- Kelsey Patterson -- Killed 2 people (1992)
- Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) Killed 10 people (1974-91)
- Larry Keith Robison -- Killed 5 people (1982) Had paranoid delusions of being hunted by various government authorities, including the Air Force.
- Daniel Harold “Danny” Rolling (aka “The Gainesville Ripper”) -- Killed at least 5 people, possibly up to 8 (1990-91)
Worked in the former Strategic Air Command and as base security police. Honorably discharged. Used a Marine Corps Ka-Bar combat knife in his crimes. Also attempted and failed to enlist in the Navy. Pat Sherrill (see Marines listing)- Michael Alan Silka -- Killed at least 9 people (1984)
- Ronald Gene Simmons -- Killed 16 people (1987) Decorated Vietnam veteran who earned a marksmanship medal and retired as a master sergeant after 22 years. Also served in the Navy.
- John Floyd Thomas Jr. (aka “Westside Rapist”) -- Killed at least 7 people, possibly up to 30 (1972-1986)
- Richard Lee Tingler Jr. -- Killed at least 6 people, possibly up to 7 (1968-69)
Began committing lesser crimes while in the service with a fellow airman as an accomplice.- Thomas Warren Whisenhant Killed 3 people (1975-76)
While in the service, attempted to murder a member of the Air Force WAF.- Andrew Paul Witt -- Killed 2 people (2004)
Committed his crimes on a base while in the service and while wearing full battle dress uniform worn for the purpose of the attack. Victims included a fellow airman. Later apologized for the impact of his crimes on the Air Force.- Yahweh ben Yahweh (aka Hulon Mitchell Jr.) -- Killed at least 14 people (c. 1980s)
- Edward J. Zakrzewski II -- Killed 3 people (1994) Was in the service at the time of his crimes.
The above are just the Air Force vets. and the ones who committed murders, not any other violent or otherwise criminal offenses. You can examine the site for yourself to identify those from the other services. The Air Force is just a snippet of the total quantify of listed murderers who were/are vets.
As for psychiatric screenings all returning (war zone) vets receive screenings, what this is for is givinging non qualified vets (dishonorably discharged) VA psychiatric screening which is already stretched beyond it's limits due to lack of proper funding and a severe shortage of qualified care givers. Pretty much a BS political move by congress critters so they can show it off at election time. It's not going to help, it's a band-aide on an arterial bleed........
Why don't you just tell us what exactly you mean by "reality in the overall sense."
Alternatively, you can offer a direct rebuttal of my earlier presented line of argument by answering the questions. I presented in it. To remind you, the questions are:
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
Last edited:
Sound/cogent argument eh? When was the last time you were able to read someone's mind? I don't mean seeing (the oft hard to determine) signs of violent, potentially violent psychiatric problems? It's not always that easy until someone reaches the apex of their problems and even then it can be difficult in most. Mental screening can in most cases tell us there's a potential issue but as the vast majority of people with mental/emotional problems are not and never will be violent how can we say "that person is a danger to society"? Psychiatric screening can weed out the obviously troubled but only give us an inkling that a problem may be present in most of those screened.You're still missing the point, it's called reality in the overall sense. Think about that statement and all aspects of it.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Whether they are or are not more or less prone than anybody else really isn't the point. What is the point is that Congress has stipulated that vets be offered mental health screening. It's my assertion that do doing is a good thing, in and of itself, and for the benefit of veterans, and that it's a good thing for the rest of us not to have undiagnosed and mentally unstable veterans running around.
Fear has nothing to do with my remarks or line of thinking. The fact that mental health screenings can identify instances of mental imbalances is what drives my thinking. The fact that mentally imbalanced people -- vets or not -- do "stupid sh*t" is what drives my thinking. I'm not afraid of mentally imbalanced people doing "stupid shit." I would see them treated so they don't do such things and ruin not just someone else's life, but their own and their loved ones. Vets are people in whom the country, taxpayers have invested a lot of resources. I don't want vets behind bars where they aren't maximally useful. I want them in society contributing and bringing to bear (after their service) the skills they got from the military.
Is it plausible in your mind that the above noted individuals may have or did/do have mental imbalances?
- What is there to object to about military vets being offered mental health screenings?
- How many of them having mental imbalances must the mental screening identify and attempt to treat, for doing so to be "worth it?"
- AIR FORCE
- Robert James Acremant -- Killed 3 people (1995)
- William Andrews and Dale Selby Pierre -- Killed 3 people (1974)
Committed their crimes while in the service. Pierre was suspected in another killing where the victim was a fellow airman.- Donald Jay Beardslee -- Killed 3 people (1969-81)
Also went to a military school, where he was regularly humiliated, beaten and tortured by upperclassman as part of standard abuse and hazing.- Rudy Bladel (aka “The Railway Sniper”) -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly up to 7 (1963-78)
- William Bonin (aka “The Freeway Killer”) -- Killed at least 21 people, possibly up to 43 (1979-80; some with accomplices)
Vietnam veteran gunner. Was awarded a good conduct medal.- Thomas Richard Bunday -- Killed 5 people (1979-81)
Was in the service at the time of his crimes and was seeing a military psychologist. The psychologist committed a murder of his own, the hired killing of his own wife, which was done in a manner to look like part of Bunday’s then-unsolved string of killings, with the psychologist unaware that the killer was one of his own patients. Bunday hid at least one body on the base where he was stationed.- Peter C. Contos -- Killed 3 people (1997)
Air National Guard. Committed his crime while in the service. Hid the bodies of two of his victims in a locker at the Air Force base where he served. According to a court appeal, he blamed his crimes on stress causing him to mentally go into “‘the zone,’ in which he reverted to his military training and eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat.” James- Michael DeBardelben -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly 8 or more (1971-83)
- Richard Eugene Dickens -- Killed 2 people (1990)
- Dennis Thurl Dowthitt-- Killed 2 people (1990; with accomplice)
- Robert Garrow -- Killed 4 people (1973)
During service, was ridiculed for bed-wetting.- Donald Harvey -- Killed at least 37 people, possibly 57 or more (1970-87)
Committed some of his crimes at a Veterans Affairs hospital while working there.- John Joseph Joubert IV (aka “The Woodford Slasher”) -- Killed 3 people (1982-85)
Committed some of his crimes while living on a base. Also attended military college.- Patrick Wayne Kearney (aka “The Trash-Bag Killer,” “The Freeway Killer”) Killed at least 21 people, possibly 28 or more (1975-77; possibly with accomplice)
His possible accomplice was an Army veteran.- Barton Kay Kirkham Killed 2 people (1956) Was discharged after committing a robbery while AWOL.
- Randy Kraft (aka “The Freeway Killer,” “The Scorecard Killer”) -- Killed at least 16 people, possibly up to 67 (1970-83)
Was entrusted with a “secret” security clearance. A former ROTC member who demonstrated in favor of the Vietnam War.- Gary Lewingdon Killed at least 10 people, possibly up to 11 (1977-78; with an accomplice) Vietnam veteran.
- Dean A. Mellberg -- Killed 4 people and unborn child (1994)
Committed his crimes at the base where he previously served.- Joseph Naso (aka “The Alphabet Murderer”) -- Killed at least 4 people, possibly 6 or more (1970s-1990s)
- Simon Peter Nelson -- Killed 6 people (1978)
- John Leonard Orr (aka “The Pillow Pyro”) -- Killed 4 people (1984)
- Kelsey Patterson -- Killed 2 people (1992)
- Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) Killed 10 people (1974-91)
- Larry Keith Robison -- Killed 5 people (1982) Had paranoid delusions of being hunted by various government authorities, including the Air Force.
- Daniel Harold “Danny” Rolling (aka “The Gainesville Ripper”) -- Killed at least 5 people, possibly up to 8 (1990-91)
Worked in the former Strategic Air Command and as base security police. Honorably discharged. Used a Marine Corps Ka-Bar combat knife in his crimes. Also attempted and failed to enlist in the Navy. Pat Sherrill (see Marines listing)- Michael Alan Silka -- Killed at least 9 people (1984)
- Ronald Gene Simmons -- Killed 16 people (1987) Decorated Vietnam veteran who earned a marksmanship medal and retired as a master sergeant after 22 years. Also served in the Navy.
- John Floyd Thomas Jr. (aka “Westside Rapist”) -- Killed at least 7 people, possibly up to 30 (1972-1986)
- Richard Lee Tingler Jr. -- Killed at least 6 people, possibly up to 7 (1968-69)
Began committing lesser crimes while in the service with a fellow airman as an accomplice.- Thomas Warren Whisenhant Killed 3 people (1975-76)
While in the service, attempted to murder a member of the Air Force WAF.- Andrew Paul Witt -- Killed 2 people (2004)
Committed his crimes on a base while in the service and while wearing full battle dress uniform worn for the purpose of the attack. Victims included a fellow airman. Later apologized for the impact of his crimes on the Air Force.- Yahweh ben Yahweh (aka Hulon Mitchell Jr.) -- Killed at least 14 people (c. 1980s)
- Edward J. Zakrzewski II -- Killed 3 people (1994) Was in the service at the time of his crimes.
The above are just the Air Force vets. and the ones who committed murders, not any other violent or otherwise criminal offenses. You can examine the site for yourself to identify those from the other services. The Air Force is just a snippet of the total quantify of listed murderers who were/are vets.
As for psychiatric screenings all returning (war zone) vets receive screenings, what this is for is givinging non qualified vets (dishonorably discharged) VA psychiatric screening which is already stretched beyond it's limits due to lack of proper funding and a severe shortage of qualified care givers. Pretty much a BS political move by congress critters so they can show it off at election time. It's not going to help, it's a band-aide on an arterial bleed........Why don't you just tell us what exactly you mean by "reality in the overall sense."
Alternatively, you can offer a direct rebuttal of my earlier presented line of argument by answering the questions. I presented in it. To remind you, the questions are:
You've seen the case I've presented, and all you've said in response amounts to, "You're wrong." But you have yet to deliver a sound/cogent argument in defense of that assertion/conclusion.
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
I'm former military but afterwards went to college for 12 years, strong background in psychology, (one of my minors) my wife is a psychologist, I think I know a little bit about this subject.
As for the case you've presented is the same case I've seen for decades, "I'm scared so we need to do something about this" argument. Please, I wasn't born yesterday.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
I disagree with #3. Interviewing friends and relatives confidentially would be the best way in a lot of cases, but mental health people will turn around and rat them out to the patient so people wouldn't be as honest anyway. My former sister in law was and is bat-shit crazy but when evaluated, she convinced them she was perfectly normal and her daughter was the one who was bat-shit crazy and they believed her and not the daughter.
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
Sound/cogent argument eh? When was the last time you were able to read someone's mind? I don't mean seeing (the oft hard to determine) signs of violent, potentially violent psychiatric problems? It's not always that easy until someone reaches the apex of their problems and even then it can be difficult in most. Mental screening can in most cases tell us there's a potential issue but as the vast majority of people with mental/emotional problems are not and never will be violent how can we say "that person is a danger to society"? Psychiatric screening can weed out the obviously troubled but only give us an inkling that a problem may be present in most of those screened.You're still missing the point, it's called reality in the overall sense. Think about that statement and all aspects of it.
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Whether they are or are not more or less prone than anybody else really isn't the point. What is the point is that Congress has stipulated that vets be offered mental health screening. It's my assertion that do doing is a good thing, in and of itself, and for the benefit of veterans, and that it's a good thing for the rest of us not to have undiagnosed and mentally unstable veterans running around.
Fear has nothing to do with my remarks or line of thinking. The fact that mental health screenings can identify instances of mental imbalances is what drives my thinking. The fact that mentally imbalanced people -- vets or not -- do "stupid sh*t" is what drives my thinking. I'm not afraid of mentally imbalanced people doing "stupid shit." I would see them treated so they don't do such things and ruin not just someone else's life, but their own and their loved ones. Vets are people in whom the country, taxpayers have invested a lot of resources. I don't want vets behind bars where they aren't maximally useful. I want them in society contributing and bringing to bear (after their service) the skills they got from the military.
Is it plausible in your mind that the above noted individuals may have or did/do have mental imbalances?
- What is there to object to about military vets being offered mental health screenings?
- How many of them having mental imbalances must the mental screening identify and attempt to treat, for doing so to be "worth it?"
- AIR FORCE
- Robert James Acremant -- Killed 3 people (1995)
- William Andrews and Dale Selby Pierre -- Killed 3 people (1974)
Committed their crimes while in the service. Pierre was suspected in another killing where the victim was a fellow airman.- Donald Jay Beardslee -- Killed 3 people (1969-81)
Also went to a military school, where he was regularly humiliated, beaten and tortured by upperclassman as part of standard abuse and hazing.- Rudy Bladel (aka “The Railway Sniper”) -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly up to 7 (1963-78)
- William Bonin (aka “The Freeway Killer”) -- Killed at least 21 people, possibly up to 43 (1979-80; some with accomplices)
Vietnam veteran gunner. Was awarded a good conduct medal.- Thomas Richard Bunday -- Killed 5 people (1979-81)
Was in the service at the time of his crimes and was seeing a military psychologist. The psychologist committed a murder of his own, the hired killing of his own wife, which was done in a manner to look like part of Bunday’s then-unsolved string of killings, with the psychologist unaware that the killer was one of his own patients. Bunday hid at least one body on the base where he was stationed.- Peter C. Contos -- Killed 3 people (1997)
Air National Guard. Committed his crime while in the service. Hid the bodies of two of his victims in a locker at the Air Force base where he served. According to a court appeal, he blamed his crimes on stress causing him to mentally go into “‘the zone,’ in which he reverted to his military training and eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat.” James- Michael DeBardelben -- Killed at least 3 people, possibly 8 or more (1971-83)
- Richard Eugene Dickens -- Killed 2 people (1990)
- Dennis Thurl Dowthitt-- Killed 2 people (1990; with accomplice)
- Robert Garrow -- Killed 4 people (1973)
During service, was ridiculed for bed-wetting.- Donald Harvey -- Killed at least 37 people, possibly 57 or more (1970-87)
Committed some of his crimes at a Veterans Affairs hospital while working there.- John Joseph Joubert IV (aka “The Woodford Slasher”) -- Killed 3 people (1982-85)
Committed some of his crimes while living on a base. Also attended military college.- Patrick Wayne Kearney (aka “The Trash-Bag Killer,” “The Freeway Killer”) Killed at least 21 people, possibly 28 or more (1975-77; possibly with accomplice)
His possible accomplice was an Army veteran.- Barton Kay Kirkham Killed 2 people (1956) Was discharged after committing a robbery while AWOL.
- Randy Kraft (aka “The Freeway Killer,” “The Scorecard Killer”) -- Killed at least 16 people, possibly up to 67 (1970-83)
Was entrusted with a “secret” security clearance. A former ROTC member who demonstrated in favor of the Vietnam War.- Gary Lewingdon Killed at least 10 people, possibly up to 11 (1977-78; with an accomplice) Vietnam veteran.
- Dean A. Mellberg -- Killed 4 people and unborn child (1994)
Committed his crimes at the base where he previously served.- Joseph Naso (aka “The Alphabet Murderer”) -- Killed at least 4 people, possibly 6 or more (1970s-1990s)
- Simon Peter Nelson -- Killed 6 people (1978)
- John Leonard Orr (aka “The Pillow Pyro”) -- Killed 4 people (1984)
- Kelsey Patterson -- Killed 2 people (1992)
- Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) Killed 10 people (1974-91)
- Larry Keith Robison -- Killed 5 people (1982) Had paranoid delusions of being hunted by various government authorities, including the Air Force.
- Daniel Harold “Danny” Rolling (aka “The Gainesville Ripper”) -- Killed at least 5 people, possibly up to 8 (1990-91)
Worked in the former Strategic Air Command and as base security police. Honorably discharged. Used a Marine Corps Ka-Bar combat knife in his crimes. Also attempted and failed to enlist in the Navy. Pat Sherrill (see Marines listing)- Michael Alan Silka -- Killed at least 9 people (1984)
- Ronald Gene Simmons -- Killed 16 people (1987) Decorated Vietnam veteran who earned a marksmanship medal and retired as a master sergeant after 22 years. Also served in the Navy.
- John Floyd Thomas Jr. (aka “Westside Rapist”) -- Killed at least 7 people, possibly up to 30 (1972-1986)
- Richard Lee Tingler Jr. -- Killed at least 6 people, possibly up to 7 (1968-69)
Began committing lesser crimes while in the service with a fellow airman as an accomplice.- Thomas Warren Whisenhant Killed 3 people (1975-76)
While in the service, attempted to murder a member of the Air Force WAF.- Andrew Paul Witt -- Killed 2 people (2004)
Committed his crimes on a base while in the service and while wearing full battle dress uniform worn for the purpose of the attack. Victims included a fellow airman. Later apologized for the impact of his crimes on the Air Force.- Yahweh ben Yahweh (aka Hulon Mitchell Jr.) -- Killed at least 14 people (c. 1980s)
- Edward J. Zakrzewski II -- Killed 3 people (1994) Was in the service at the time of his crimes.
The above are just the Air Force vets. and the ones who committed murders, not any other violent or otherwise criminal offenses. You can examine the site for yourself to identify those from the other services. The Air Force is just a snippet of the total quantify of listed murderers who were/are vets.
As for psychiatric screenings all returning (war zone) vets receive screenings, what this is for is givinging non qualified vets (dishonorably discharged) VA psychiatric screening which is already stretched beyond it's limits due to lack of proper funding and a severe shortage of qualified care givers. Pretty much a BS political move by congress critters so they can show it off at election time. It's not going to help, it's a band-aide on an arterial bleed........Why don't you just tell us what exactly you mean by "reality in the overall sense."
Alternatively, you can offer a direct rebuttal of my earlier presented line of argument by answering the questions. I presented in it. To remind you, the questions are:
You've seen the case I've presented, and all you've said in response amounts to, "You're wrong." But you have yet to deliver a sound/cogent argument in defense of that assertion/conclusion.
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
I'm former military but afterwards went to college for 12 years, strong background in psychology, (one of my minors) my wife is a psychologist, I think I know a little bit about this subject.
As for the case you've presented is the same case I've seen for decades, "I'm scared so we need to do something about this" argument. Please, I wasn't born yesterday.
That's not exactly a credential that augurs favorably for you...Taking 12 years to get a four year degree doesn't suggest you're a quick study.
And don't try telling me that some share of those 12 years were grad school. Nobody who went to and/or earned a post-baccalaureate degree refers to grad school as "college." One might come by someone who does one of those comob-degrees -- BS/JD, BA or BS plus MBA, etc. -- might call the whole process "college" because of the unique aspects of those programs and how most folks come to enroll in them.
All of that notwithstanding, I really don't care what your credentials are. What you bother to write, the remarks' substance, the coherence of the ideas and their presentation/organization, and the soundness and cogency of the reasoning you offer will say all that need be said. One need not have any grand credentials to adeptly and facilely make one's points and present sound/cogent arguments.
So far in this discussion, the only thing that's clear from your remarks is that you take exception with my opening post in this thread. You haven't even been explicit about the nature of your objections. To wit:
So, dude, if, after "12 years of college," that's the best you can, over the course of four posts, muster to express the nature of your thinking vis-a-vis, mine, then I suspect you need to go back to college for 12 more years because it's clear to me you didn't learn half of what you should have in the dozen years you were there.
Well, why have you refrained from being immensely more cogent, sound, coherent, and expositive in sharing your objections to my remarks?
Having a psychology minor, presumably you are aware of this:
Having a psychology minor, you've surely read papers such as:
- Early Detection and Prevention of Mental Health Problems: Developmental Epidemiology and Systems of Support
We tend to assume, probably with reason, that it is better to detect a problem or its cause earlier rather than later in the course of the disorder and that that systems of support will be strengthened if detection occurs early. A case can be made against this argument for early intervention (think of all those tonsillectomies and umbilical hernia operations later shown to be a complete waste of resources). But until proven otherwise, epidemiology is ethically bound to operate on the assumption that early detection is a service that it can and should provide to the health care system.
- Research on Clinical Preventive Services for Adolescents and Young Adults [AYAs]: Where Are We and Where Do We Need to Go?
Clinicians' efforts can be augmented by digital tools, such as self-guided online-based mental health disease prevention and treatment modules that are assigned to patients and/or their families in addition to provider interactions. AYAs' nearly universal access to, and facility with, computers, mobile technology, and the Internet coupled with a burgeoning of information technologies—encompassing social networking tools, mobile, and wearable devices—offers numerous options for extending clinical preventive service delivery and access beyond the clinical setting.
- Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption—II
Early intervention is a new approach to the pre- to identify persons with hazardous or harmful vention and management of alcohol-related problems. It is a pro-active technique which aims to identify persons with hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption before dependence and serious harm have occurred, and to provide brief therapy, typically at the point of first contact. The primary goal of intervention is to facilitate reduction in alcohol intake to non-hazardous levels, and thereby lessen the risk of harmful consequences of drinking. There is increasing evidence for its efficacy in this regard.
- Screening for lifestyle and mental health risk factors in the waiting room
Physical and mental health and substance misuse are often interwoven.1 Therefore, preventive care in family practice should involve identifying and addressing both lifestyle and mental health risk factors.
I suspect that with 12 years of college, somewhere along the way you learned that while on TV folks can just say "Oh, BS" and offer whatever lameass excuse comes to mind, in the real world among real people who are well trained/read on a topic, one can't do that and expect to be taken as credible, let alone actually believed.
Yes. That would be quite nice. Try it. It may be a change of pace you actually enjoy.
I can assure you that the world is much more pleasant and one has far more time to enjoy it when one embraces soundness and cogency in evaluating stimuli and information one encounters. To wit, sound/cogent thinking will prevent one from inferring others have said or implied things they have not. You'd be amazed at how much that alone will avail one of time, to say nothing of disabuse one of frustration and stress.
I don't read minds. I haven't ever. I don't need to read anyone's mind. Who does or can?
I don't know, given that you've posed it as a question, how to interpret or directly respond to the sentence just above. You, the word "I," is, after all, the subject of the sentence. (Please don't make me diagram the sentence in order for you to see that.)
Twelve years of college? Did you not take English? Did the college not required you have either mastered English composition either prior to matriculating or shortly after having done?
Well, at least we agree on that.
What is the point of your question? Who said there is an immutable and parlous predicate associated with veterans? I damn sure didn't, yet it appears you think I'm asserting/implying as much.
What was my original assertion? This:
In response to what statement did I make that assertion? This one:
Congress didn't force vets to get the screenings. It merely has required the VA offer the screenings. Vets who want them will get them; those who don't, won't.
How can you or anyone argue against that statement? Seriously? At what point does society need "running around and not receiving treatment...mentally 'unstable' folks who've got lots of training on how to kill people?"
(I realize the diagramming of that sentence is a little more challenging than are some, but I checked and it's written on about an eight grade reading level, so I'd expect with your 12 years of college you can handle it.)
For some reason that's not clear, you've expressed opposition to my remarks, yet you've offered nothing coherent as an argument for why:
- Congress forces the VA to offer mental health screenings
- Congress forces the VA to offer mental health screenings -- In the noted post, you tacitly assert that I have fear of some sort, implying that fear somehow drove my comments in this post --http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/19719254/ -- yet fear isn't an express or implicit element in the letter or context of any of my remarks.
What does incidence of mental health problems, or the nature and extent to which any given mental malady manifest itself, have to do with whether Congress' requiring the VA to offer mental health screening to vets be a good thing? That was my assertion/conclusion, you will recall.
- Analysis of my original assertion:
- Mental health screening is useful. I think we both agree that it is.
- Veterans can have mental health issues. I suspect we both agree they can.
- Is knowing one has a mental malday essential to one's obtaining treatment for that malady? My answer to that is "yes." Is your's not?
- Is it, then, not a good thing that the VA offers mental health screening to veterans?
- Analysis of the justification I offered for my original assertion:
- Do some veterans who have mental health issues also have training on how to kill people?
- Are there mental health maladies that are best left undiagnosed and untreated? If so, name them, please, and explain why ignorance is better than discovery and treatment. (I bet that psychology minor you got has given you precisely the specific objective info need to answer that right off the top of your head....)
- With regard to the veterans who have mental health issues and "kill training," please explain:
- ...How society is better off having those guys roaming about not knowing they have mental health issues and not receiving treatment for them.
- ...How society is better off having those guys roaming about and nobody in society knowing those guys have mental health issues.
- As a reminder, my original post is this:
Aside:
Do you notice the condescending "snark" in my tone above? If you didn't, you should have.
I have taken that tone because you deigned to throw credentials at me. With the credentials you claim, I'd have expected far more substantive, rigorous and coherent remarks from you on the matter under discussion. I'd have expected that you display far more rigorous critical analysis/reading comprehension skills than you have. Of course, I'm not looking for you to prove your intellect to me. Merely bringing it to bear in the exposition of your ideas and arguments will do just fine.
It's one thing to say something akin to "anecdotally in the course of obtaining such and such a degree, title, etc., I've observed..." It's wholly another to offer one's credentials as a tacit way to say "I know more than you" or "I know a lot about this" and then not back up that implied claim with something substantive, sound, cogent, testable/verifiable, and rigorous.
Other than my own position on the matter, what have I asked you to accept on the mere basis that I happen to be the person asserting it? Nothing.
I have taken that tone because you deigned to throw credentials at me. With the credentials you claim, I'd have expected far more substantive, rigorous and coherent remarks from you on the matter under discussion. I'd have expected that you display far more rigorous critical analysis/reading comprehension skills than you have. Of course, I'm not looking for you to prove your intellect to me. Merely bringing it to bear in the exposition of your ideas and arguments will do just fine.
It's one thing to say something akin to "anecdotally in the course of obtaining such and such a degree, title, etc., I've observed..." It's wholly another to offer one's credentials as a tacit way to say "I know more than you" or "I know a lot about this" and then not back up that implied claim with something substantive, sound, cogent, testable/verifiable, and rigorous.
Other than my own position on the matter, what have I asked you to accept on the mere basis that I happen to be the person asserting it? Nothing.
You honestly think I'm going to read all that self agrandizing bull shit you just posted on a forum? Really? Twelve years to get one degree......? Is that the limit of your ability to envision? Really?That's not exactly a credential that augurs favorably for you...Taking 12 years to get a four year degree doesn't suggest you're a quick study.
And don't try telling me that some share of those 12 years were grad school. Nobody who went to and/or earned a post-baccalaureate degree refers to grad school as "college." One might come by someone who does one of those comob-degrees -- BS/JD, BA or BS plus MBA, etc. -- might call the whole process "college" because of the unique aspects of those programs and how most folks come to enroll in them.
All of that notwithstanding, I really don't care what your credentials are. What you bother to write, the remarks' substance, the coherence of the ideas and their presentation/organization, and the soundness and cogency of the reasoning you offer will say all that need be said. One need not have any grand credentials to adeptly and facilely make one's points and present sound/cogent arguments.
So far in this discussion, the only thing that's clear from your remarks is that you take exception with my opening post in this thread. You haven't even been explicit about the nature of your objections. To wit:
So, dude, if, after "12 years of college," that's the best you can, over the course of four posts, muster to express the nature of your thinking vis-a-vis, mine, then I suspect you need to go back to college for 12 more years because it's clear to me you didn't learn half of what you should have in the dozen years you were there.
Well, why have you refrained from being immensely more cogent, sound, coherent, and expositive in sharing your objections to my remarks?
Having a psychology minor, presumably you are aware of this:
Having a psychology minor, you've surely read papers such as:
And having that minor, I'm sure you know that if you're going to refute the findings of those papers, you must do so by showing that there are material flaws in their research methodologies, not by merely asserting dissention.
- Early Detection and Prevention of Mental Health Problems: Developmental Epidemiology and Systems of Support
We tend to assume, probably with reason, that it is better to detect a problem or its cause earlier rather than later in the course of the disorder and that that systems of support will be strengthened if detection occurs early. A case can be made against this argument for early intervention (think of all those tonsillectomies and umbilical hernia operations later shown to be a complete waste of resources). But until proven otherwise, epidemiology is ethically bound to operate on the assumption that early detection is a service that it can and should provide to the health care system.
- Research on Clinical Preventive Services for Adolescents and Young Adults [AYAs]: Where Are We and Where Do We Need to Go?
Clinicians' efforts can be augmented by digital tools, such as self-guided online-based mental health disease prevention and treatment modules that are assigned to patients and/or their families in addition to provider interactions. AYAs' nearly universal access to, and facility with, computers, mobile technology, and the Internet coupled with a burgeoning of information technologies—encompassing social networking tools, mobile, and wearable devices—offers numerous options for extending clinical preventive service delivery and access beyond the clinical setting.
- Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption—II
Early intervention is a new approach to the pre- to identify persons with hazardous or harmful vention and management of alcohol-related problems. It is a pro-active technique which aims to identify persons with hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption before dependence and serious harm have occurred, and to provide brief therapy, typically at the point of first contact. The primary goal of intervention is to facilitate reduction in alcohol intake to non-hazardous levels, and thereby lessen the risk of harmful consequences of drinking. There is increasing evidence for its efficacy in this regard.
- Screening for lifestyle and mental health risk factors in the waiting room
Physical and mental health and substance misuse are often interwoven.1 Therefore, preventive care in family practice should involve identifying and addressing both lifestyle and mental health risk factors.
I suspect that with 12 years of college, somewhere along the way you learned that while on TV folks can just say "Oh, BS" and offer whatever lameass excuse comes to mind, in the real world among real people who are well trained/read on a topic, one can't do that and expect to be taken as credible, let alone actually believed.
Yes. That would be quite nice. Try it. It may be a change of pace you actually enjoy.
I can assure you that the world is much more pleasant and one has far more time to enjoy it when one embraces soundness and cogency in evaluating stimuli and information one encounters. To wit, sound/cogent thinking will prevent one from inferring others have said or implied things they have not. You'd be amazed at how much that alone will avail one of time, to say nothing of disabuse one of frustration and stress.
I don't read minds. I haven't ever. I don't need to read anyone's mind. Who does or can?
I don't know, given that you've posed it as a question, how to interpret or directly respond to the sentence just above. You, the word "I," is, after all, the subject of the sentence. (Please don't make me diagram the sentence in order for you to see that.)
Twelve years of college? Did you not take English? Did the college not required you have either mastered English composition either prior to matriculating or shortly after having done?
Well, at least we agree on that.
What is the point of your question? Who said there is an immutable and parlous predicate associated with veterans? I damn sure didn't, yet it appears you think I'm asserting/implying as much.
What was my original assertion? This:
In response to what statement did I make that assertion? This one:
What reason did I give for that assertion? I wrote:Congress didn't force vets to get the screenings. It merely has required the VA offer the screenings. Vets who want them will get them; those who don't, won't.
How can you or anyone argue against that statement? Seriously? At what point does society need "running around and not receiving treatment...mentally 'unstable' folks who've got lots of training on how to kill people?"
(I realize the diagramming of that sentence is a little more challenging than are some, but I checked and it's written on about an eight grade reading level, so I'd expect with your 12 years of college you can handle it.)
For some reason that's not clear, you've expressed opposition to my remarks, yet you've offered nothing coherent as an argument for why:
I guess in 12 years of college, nobody taught you how to do that?
- Congress forces the VA to offer mental health screenings
- Congress forces the VA to offer mental health screenings -- In the noted post, you tacitly assert that I have fear of some sort, implying that fear somehow drove my comments in this post --http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/19719254/ -- yet fear isn't an express or implicit element in the letter or context of any of my remarks.
What does incidence of mental health problems, or the nature and extent to which any given mental malady manifest itself, have to do with whether Congress' requiring the VA to offer mental health screening to vets be a good thing? That was my assertion/conclusion, you will recall.
- Analysis of my original assertion:
- Mental health screening is useful. I think we both agree that it is.
- Veterans can have mental health issues. I suspect we both agree they can.
- Is knowing one has a mental malday essential to one's obtaining treatment for that malady? My answer to that is "yes." Is your's not?
- Is it, then, not a good thing that the VA offers mental health screening to veterans?
- Analysis of the justification I offered for my original assertion:
- Do some veterans who have mental health issues also have training on how to kill people?
- Are there mental health maladies that are best left undiagnosed and untreated? If so, name them, please, and explain why ignorance is better than discovery and treatment. (I bet that psychology minor you got has given you precisely the specific objective info need to answer that right off the top of your head....)
- With regard to the veterans who have mental health issues and "kill training," please explain:
- ...How society is better off having those guys roaming about not knowing they have mental health issues and not receiving treatment for them.
- ...How society is better off having those guys roaming about and nobody in society knowing those guys have mental health issues.
- As a reminder, my original post is this:
Aside:
Do you notice the condescending "snark" in my tone above? If you didn't, you should have.
I have taken that tone because you deigned to throw credentials at me. With the credentials you claim, I'd have expected far more substantive, rigorous and coherent remarks from you on the matter under discussion. I'd have expected that you display far more rigorous critical analysis/reading comprehension skills than you have. Of course, I'm not looking for you to prove your intellect to me. Merely bringing it to bear in the exposition of your ideas and arguments will do just fine.
It's one thing to say something akin to "anecdotally in the course of obtaining such and such a degree, title, etc., I've observed..." It's wholly another to offer one's credentials as a tacit way to say "I know more than you" or "I know a lot about this" and then not back up that implied claim with something substantive, sound, cogent, testable/verifiable, and rigorous.
Other than my own position on the matter, what have I asked you to accept on the mere basis that I happen to be the person asserting it? Nothing.
Enjoy your mental masturbation.
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
??? -- I'm not sure why you're doing the double-take. What did I write? This:
What are your answers to those questions? (If you won't directly answer them, please don't reply.)
- Do you doubt that some military personnel are given lots of training on how to kill people? For example, but not limited to:
- Hand-to-hand combat training
- Knife fighting skills
- Improvised weapons training
- Widowmaker Razing skills for military applications
- Close quarter neutralization techniques
- Are some mental health problems broadly describable as "mental instability?"
- Do you agree that a mental health screening is about as good a way as is available for determining whether one has a mental health problem?
- Do you agree that absent a mental health screening, but for extreme cases, it's possible for one's mental health problem to be unnoticed, undiscovered?
- Do you agree that, for the most part, people of whom it's found by a mental health screening in turn obtain and/or receive treatment for the mental health maladies discovered during the screening?
My answers to those questions are:
Accordingly, if there are military personnel (or former military personnel) running around who've received training on how to kill people and those personnel have not been given a mental health screening yet they have a mental health problem, what we, as a society, would be faced with and in fact have is precisely what I described as "the last thing we need":
- No.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
- Yes.
Say what? [1]
- You think that..."Interviewing friends and relatives confidentially would be the best way in a lot of cases"
and you yet acknowledge that...
"people wouldn't be as honest anyway"
Off-Topic Note:
- It's times like these that make me kinda wish I were having this conversation in person with any one of a few friends of mine, because were I, I truly would have said something I know I should not here write for you people don't know me, and I thus haven't here earned the right to say it.
If you're wondering why I wrote "kinda," read on, but if you're not wondering, don't read on because it'll piss you off and I'm not trying to irk you. I'm just giving a complete picture of why I wrote "kinda." I above write "kinda" because were someone I consider a friend to, in all seriousness, say to me something as incoherent as your statement, I'd find myself questioning whether they can remain my friend. I'd regret having to "downgrade" them to close acquaintance, but, I can't have "crazy" friend-close to me in my life, at least not before we both reach dementia-age.
Similar threads
