Man Dies After Live-Streaming Self-Immolation Outside of Ex’s Bar

[yiostheoy]

I believe people have every right to put an end to their lives if they want to.

I think kerosene should be an illegal method however.

 

[yiostheoy]

English please

It had already been moved long before you posted that last message due to the fucking retard that had a knipshit earlier.

Every comment you've made illustrates you haven't a CLUE about mental health issues or the ability to get society to have an open debate about mental health issues.

EVERY comment you have made has been a purely political comment, including a favourite of the Left bringing up Gun Control.

You are a partisan hack who doesn't know a thing about the complex issues involving either mental health or the unfortunate souls in this world who suffer very often in silence.

Great post.

It's basically "You know nothing about this, [insert insult]"

So, if you know so fucking much about this, why does every post you write on this issue end up being an attack on the person, and not talking about the issues?

I am also perfectly capable of discussing this important issue of mental health and suicide with anyone, however when I'm dealing with someone who says that everyone needs to be shown film of people burning themselves alive so people can have their attention drawn to the mental health issue and then says this is basically all a political issue....well I know I'm dealing with a special sort of stupid there and as such it's not a great possibility to have a rational, sensible or constructive discussion with such a person.

You of course in your first post said that people on the Right don't care about mental health and want everyone thrown into prison, an equally absurd set of comments with not a lot of basis in reality, again just a partisan political point.

If you don't like being called on this, you should think of growing a thicker skin.

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

 

[yiostheoy]

So this explains why you [read: Lucy H.] attacked me then with exactly the same attack as you attacked Disir with?

Or hey, how about this, stop attacking people and stick to the topic. Whether you think he knows nothing about the topic or not is neither here nor there.

Do yourself a big favor frigidweirdo :

Just iggy her.

 

[yiostheoy]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

 

[yiostheoy]

Jared McLemore's Facebook Live video starts with him sitting cross legged in the parking lot outside Murphy's bar in Memphis, Tennessee. McLemore gets up after shortly leaving the frame and then returns to once again sit cross legged on the ground. He lifts a red jerry can and starts pouring a liquid—kerosene—on himself. The kerosene splashes around him as he shimmies over slightly.

A man, realizing what McLemore was about to do, flies into the frame in an attempt to kick the lighter out of his hand. His efforts are to no avail, the lighter goes off and the video becomes filled with flames and the screams of onlookers. McLemore, screaming, gets up and runs out of the frame. On camera, the flames from the excess kerosene continue to burn.

McLemore, 33, would die later that night from his burns.

While burning, McLemore allegedly ran into Murphy's where his ex Alyssa Moore, an audio engineer, was running the soundboard. According to WREG, McLemore had reportedly strangled Moore last year and twice threatened to kill her. McLemore was sentenced to probation for domestic assault and ordered to do mental health therapy—Moore also obtained a restraining order against him. On social media, McLemore stated he suffered from bipolar disorder.
Man Dies After Live-Streaming Self-Immolation Outside of Ex’s Bar

I hope they keep the live streaming up because it's the only way folks are going to really see the mental health issue.

But then people will dismiss mental health issues and just demand that such people end up in prison where they rot and then get released, then use this as an example of why you shouldn't be releasing prisoners.

They are dismissing them anyway. At this point, what do we really have to lose?

I'm not really sure what your point is here.

Yes, the right will dismiss mental health issues and use them for their own political advantage. How do you change this? Well, it's hard.

The problem isn't just mental health issues, the problem is the system. Until the system changes, nothing else will change. Until there is one person, one vote, then the main two parties stay in charge and continue their partisan bullshit approach to politics.

That's why I support Proportional Representation, it's a change for real politics to come through, for those who are interested in making the country a better place to be able to get into politics and stand in a party that isn't out for its own interests.

Can you vote away mental illness?

This crazy man tried to strangle his ex girlfriend. His killing himself wasn't a bad thing. Better him instead of an innocent person.

No, you can't vote away mental illness.

However you can make mental illness less of a problem for those that have mental illnesses.

About 2.3 million people in the US are in US prisons.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf

"At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem,"

So that means around 1.15 million people in the US are in prison with mental health problems.

"These estimates represented 56% of State prisoners, 45% of Federal prisoners, and 64% of jail inmates."

Now, take the number of people who have been in prison and struggle to get jobs when they get out, because of their conviction, and you'll see that having a mental illness in the US isn't that easy. This is 1 in 320 people who are locked up in prison with a mental illness. Take the number of people with a mental illness at about 1/4 of the population then this is about 1 in 81 people with mental illness who are in prison. The number who have been through the prison system and come out the other side but struggling because society has branded them is going to increase the number.

Project MUSE - Homelessness and Housing Insecurity Among Former Prisoners

"Beyond the confluence of these two trends, there are strong reasons to expect a connection between incarceration and homelessness."

"They show high rates of shelter use (Metraux and Culhane 2004) and residential insecurity (Geller and Curtis 2011), as well as an elevated risk of recidivism for returning prisoners who do not receive housing and wraparound services upon their release (Lutze et al. 2013)."

"A staggering 700,000 prisoners are released from federal and state prisons each year "

Now, the US has a high prisoner population compared to other countries.

The US has an incarceration rate of 693 per 100,000 people. This means that 346.5 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems.

England and Wales has an incarceration rate of 146 per 100,000 people. This means that 73 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems. So, in the US if you have mental illness you're FIVE TIMES more likely to be in prison.

The US spends $74 billion on its prison systems. Imagine if they transferred some of this money away from prisons and spent it on mental health, then you'd have more productive members of society, rather than people rotting away in prisons.

Another point would be that different states have different levels of prisoner populations

So, people with mental health issues in Louisiana are basically going to have a hard time, but in placed like Maine and Minnesota, they're going to have an easier time. It's not that mental health goes away, it's that it's less likely to turn into a problem.

So, is it a surprise that Louisiana is $75 or less? Is it a surprise that Main is $161 or more?

Places which spend less on mental health will probably end up spending more on their prison system.

According to your various charts, Negroes and Injuns appear to be the problem, not just mental illness frigidweirdo .

 

[frigidweirdo]

It had already been moved long before you posted that last message due to the fucking retard that had a knipshit earlier.

Every comment you've made illustrates you haven't a CLUE about mental health issues or the ability to get society to have an open debate about mental health issues.

EVERY comment you have made has been a purely political comment, including a favourite of the Left bringing up Gun Control.

You are a partisan hack who doesn't know a thing about the complex issues involving either mental health or the unfortunate souls in this world who suffer very often in silence.

Great post.

It's basically "You know nothing about this, [insert insult]"

So, if you know so fucking much about this, why does every post you write on this issue end up being an attack on the person, and not talking about the issues?

I am also perfectly capable of discussing this important issue of mental health and suicide with anyone, however when I'm dealing with someone who says that everyone needs to be shown film of people burning themselves alive so people can have their attention drawn to the mental health issue and then says this is basically all a political issue....well I know I'm dealing with a special sort of stupid there and as such it's not a great possibility to have a rational, sensible or constructive discussion with such a person.

You of course in your first post said that people on the Right don't care about mental health and want everyone thrown into prison, an equally absurd set of comments with not a lot of basis in reality, again just a partisan political point.

If you don't like being called on this, you should think of growing a thicker skin.

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

What?

It helped keep wackos out of the White House? Er... no it didn't, it put a wacko into the White House.

It doesn't protect the smaller states from tyranny of the bigger ones in the slightest. Spending on the US elections goes to swing states.

But, at the very least, I'm calling for Proportional Representation in House, which is divided up almost fairly in the first place and doesn't protect smaller states, as you claim.

The Presidency should also be done like this, because at present it's not one person, one vote, and it doesn't lead to the leader of the US being elected by the people of the US.

It's hardly a check and balance on overpopulation, it's just the right have realized that it favors them, and they don't want to lose their preferential treatment.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

 

[frigidweirdo]

But then people will dismiss mental health issues and just demand that such people end up in prison where they rot and then get released, then use this as an example of why you shouldn't be releasing prisoners.

They are dismissing them anyway. At this point, what do we really have to lose?

I'm not really sure what your point is here.

Yes, the right will dismiss mental health issues and use them for their own political advantage. How do you change this? Well, it's hard.

The problem isn't just mental health issues, the problem is the system. Until the system changes, nothing else will change. Until there is one person, one vote, then the main two parties stay in charge and continue their partisan bullshit approach to politics.

That's why I support Proportional Representation, it's a change for real politics to come through, for those who are interested in making the country a better place to be able to get into politics and stand in a party that isn't out for its own interests.

Can you vote away mental illness?

This crazy man tried to strangle his ex girlfriend. His killing himself wasn't a bad thing. Better him instead of an innocent person.

No, you can't vote away mental illness.

However you can make mental illness less of a problem for those that have mental illnesses.

About 2.3 million people in the US are in US prisons.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf

"At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem,"

So that means around 1.15 million people in the US are in prison with mental health problems.

"These estimates represented 56% of State prisoners, 45% of Federal prisoners, and 64% of jail inmates."

Now, take the number of people who have been in prison and struggle to get jobs when they get out, because of their conviction, and you'll see that having a mental illness in the US isn't that easy. This is 1 in 320 people who are locked up in prison with a mental illness. Take the number of people with a mental illness at about 1/4 of the population then this is about 1 in 81 people with mental illness who are in prison. The number who have been through the prison system and come out the other side but struggling because society has branded them is going to increase the number.

Project MUSE - Homelessness and Housing Insecurity Among Former Prisoners

"Beyond the confluence of these two trends, there are strong reasons to expect a connection between incarceration and homelessness."

"They show high rates of shelter use (Metraux and Culhane 2004) and residential insecurity (Geller and Curtis 2011), as well as an elevated risk of recidivism for returning prisoners who do not receive housing and wraparound services upon their release (Lutze et al. 2013)."

"A staggering 700,000 prisoners are released from federal and state prisons each year "

Now, the US has a high prisoner population compared to other countries.

The US has an incarceration rate of 693 per 100,000 people. This means that 346.5 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems.

England and Wales has an incarceration rate of 146 per 100,000 people. This means that 73 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems. So, in the US if you have mental illness you're FIVE TIMES more likely to be in prison.

The US spends $74 billion on its prison systems. Imagine if they transferred some of this money away from prisons and spent it on mental health, then you'd have more productive members of society, rather than people rotting away in prisons.

Another point would be that different states have different levels of prisoner populations

So, people with mental health issues in Louisiana are basically going to have a hard time, but in placed like Maine and Minnesota, they're going to have an easier time. It's not that mental health goes away, it's that it's less likely to turn into a problem.

So, is it a surprise that Louisiana is $75 or less? Is it a surprise that Main is $161 or more?

Places which spend less on mental health will probably end up spending more on their prison system.

According to your various charts, Negroes and Injuns appear to be the problem, not just mental illness frigidweirdo .

Are you making an argument, or are you just throwing shit into the wind and hoping it sticks?

 

[yiostheoy]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

That was last weekend.

LePen lost.

The girlie-man won.

 

[yiostheoy]

They are dismissing them anyway. At this point, what do we really have to lose?

I'm not really sure what your point is here.

Yes, the right will dismiss mental health issues and use them for their own political advantage. How do you change this? Well, it's hard.

The problem isn't just mental health issues, the problem is the system. Until the system changes, nothing else will change. Until there is one person, one vote, then the main two parties stay in charge and continue their partisan bullshit approach to politics.

That's why I support Proportional Representation, it's a change for real politics to come through, for those who are interested in making the country a better place to be able to get into politics and stand in a party that isn't out for its own interests.

Can you vote away mental illness?

This crazy man tried to strangle his ex girlfriend. His killing himself wasn't a bad thing. Better him instead of an innocent person.

No, you can't vote away mental illness.

However you can make mental illness less of a problem for those that have mental illnesses.

About 2.3 million people in the US are in US prisons.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf

"At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem,"

So that means around 1.15 million people in the US are in prison with mental health problems.

"These estimates represented 56% of State prisoners, 45% of Federal prisoners, and 64% of jail inmates."

Now, take the number of people who have been in prison and struggle to get jobs when they get out, because of their conviction, and you'll see that having a mental illness in the US isn't that easy. This is 1 in 320 people who are locked up in prison with a mental illness. Take the number of people with a mental illness at about 1/4 of the population then this is about 1 in 81 people with mental illness who are in prison. The number who have been through the prison system and come out the other side but struggling because society has branded them is going to increase the number.

Project MUSE - Homelessness and Housing Insecurity Among Former Prisoners

"Beyond the confluence of these two trends, there are strong reasons to expect a connection between incarceration and homelessness."

"They show high rates of shelter use (Metraux and Culhane 2004) and residential insecurity (Geller and Curtis 2011), as well as an elevated risk of recidivism for returning prisoners who do not receive housing and wraparound services upon their release (Lutze et al. 2013)."

"A staggering 700,000 prisoners are released from federal and state prisons each year "

Now, the US has a high prisoner population compared to other countries.

The US has an incarceration rate of 693 per 100,000 people. This means that 346.5 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems.

England and Wales has an incarceration rate of 146 per 100,000 people. This means that 73 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems. So, in the US if you have mental illness you're FIVE TIMES more likely to be in prison.

The US spends $74 billion on its prison systems. Imagine if they transferred some of this money away from prisons and spent it on mental health, then you'd have more productive members of society, rather than people rotting away in prisons.

Another point would be that different states have different levels of prisoner populations

So, people with mental health issues in Louisiana are basically going to have a hard time, but in placed like Maine and Minnesota, they're going to have an easier time. It's not that mental health goes away, it's that it's less likely to turn into a problem.

So, is it a surprise that Louisiana is $75 or less? Is it a surprise that Main is $161 or more?

Places which spend less on mental health will probably end up spending more on their prison system.

According to your various charts, Negroes and Injuns appear to be the problem, not just mental illness frigidweirdo .

Are you making an argument, or are you just throwing shit into the wind and hoping it sticks?

I believe your graphs were the sh!t.

And you are the wind.

 

[yiostheoy]

Every comment you've made illustrates you haven't a CLUE about mental health issues or the ability to get society to have an open debate about mental health issues.

EVERY comment you have made has been a purely political comment, including a favourite of the Left bringing up Gun Control.

You are a partisan hack who doesn't know a thing about the complex issues involving either mental health or the unfortunate souls in this world who suffer very often in silence.

Great post.

It's basically "You know nothing about this, [insert insult]"

So, if you know so fucking much about this, why does every post you write on this issue end up being an attack on the person, and not talking about the issues?

I am also perfectly capable of discussing this important issue of mental health and suicide with anyone, however when I'm dealing with someone who says that everyone needs to be shown film of people burning themselves alive so people can have their attention drawn to the mental health issue and then says this is basically all a political issue....well I know I'm dealing with a special sort of stupid there and as such it's not a great possibility to have a rational, sensible or constructive discussion with such a person.

You of course in your first post said that people on the Right don't care about mental health and want everyone thrown into prison, an equally absurd set of comments with not a lot of basis in reality, again just a partisan political point.

If you don't like being called on this, you should think of growing a thicker skin.

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

What?

It helped keep wackos out of the White House? Er... no it didn't, it put a wacko into the White House.

It doesn't protect the smaller states from tyranny of the bigger ones in the slightest. Spending on the US elections goes to swing states.

But, at the very least, I'm calling for Proportional Representation in House, which is divided up almost fairly in the first place and doesn't protect smaller states, as you claim.

The Presidency should also be done like this, because at present it's not one person, one vote, and it doesn't lead to the leader of the US being elected by the people of the US.

It's hardly a check and balance on overpopulation, it's just the right have realized that it favors them, and they don't want to lose their preferential treatment.

The wacko's that did not make it in were worse wacko's than the ones that did make it.

For all their ineptitude Dubya and Donnie are at least not anti gun. They both love their guns.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

That was last weekend.

LePen lost.

The girlie-man won.

Well, last weekend, oh, and when her father won, and, er, every election since the system was introduced. So... what? You have a problem with the people making such a choice? You have a problem with one person, one vote?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm not really sure what your point is here.

Yes, the right will dismiss mental health issues and use them for their own political advantage. How do you change this? Well, it's hard.

The problem isn't just mental health issues, the problem is the system. Until the system changes, nothing else will change. Until there is one person, one vote, then the main two parties stay in charge and continue their partisan bullshit approach to politics.

That's why I support Proportional Representation, it's a change for real politics to come through, for those who are interested in making the country a better place to be able to get into politics and stand in a party that isn't out for its own interests.

Can you vote away mental illness?

This crazy man tried to strangle his ex girlfriend. His killing himself wasn't a bad thing. Better him instead of an innocent person.

No, you can't vote away mental illness.

However you can make mental illness less of a problem for those that have mental illnesses.

About 2.3 million people in the US are in US prisons.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf

"At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem,"

So that means around 1.15 million people in the US are in prison with mental health problems.

"These estimates represented 56% of State prisoners, 45% of Federal prisoners, and 64% of jail inmates."

Now, take the number of people who have been in prison and struggle to get jobs when they get out, because of their conviction, and you'll see that having a mental illness in the US isn't that easy. This is 1 in 320 people who are locked up in prison with a mental illness. Take the number of people with a mental illness at about 1/4 of the population then this is about 1 in 81 people with mental illness who are in prison. The number who have been through the prison system and come out the other side but struggling because society has branded them is going to increase the number.

Project MUSE - Homelessness and Housing Insecurity Among Former Prisoners

"Beyond the confluence of these two trends, there are strong reasons to expect a connection between incarceration and homelessness."

"They show high rates of shelter use (Metraux and Culhane 2004) and residential insecurity (Geller and Curtis 2011), as well as an elevated risk of recidivism for returning prisoners who do not receive housing and wraparound services upon their release (Lutze et al. 2013)."

"A staggering 700,000 prisoners are released from federal and state prisons each year "

Now, the US has a high prisoner population compared to other countries.

The US has an incarceration rate of 693 per 100,000 people. This means that 346.5 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems.

England and Wales has an incarceration rate of 146 per 100,000 people. This means that 73 per 100,000 are prisoners with mental health problems. So, in the US if you have mental illness you're FIVE TIMES more likely to be in prison.

The US spends $74 billion on its prison systems. Imagine if they transferred some of this money away from prisons and spent it on mental health, then you'd have more productive members of society, rather than people rotting away in prisons.

Another point would be that different states have different levels of prisoner populations

So, people with mental health issues in Louisiana are basically going to have a hard time, but in placed like Maine and Minnesota, they're going to have an easier time. It's not that mental health goes away, it's that it's less likely to turn into a problem.

So, is it a surprise that Louisiana is $75 or less? Is it a surprise that Main is $161 or more?

Places which spend less on mental health will probably end up spending more on their prison system.

According to your various charts, Negroes and Injuns appear to be the problem, not just mental illness frigidweirdo .

Are you making an argument, or are you just throwing shit into the wind and hoping it sticks?

I believe your graphs were the sh!t.

And you are the wind.

If you want to talk to me, start talking properly.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Great post.

It's basically "You know nothing about this, [insert insult]"

So, if you know so fucking much about this, why does every post you write on this issue end up being an attack on the person, and not talking about the issues?

I am also perfectly capable of discussing this important issue of mental health and suicide with anyone, however when I'm dealing with someone who says that everyone needs to be shown film of people burning themselves alive so people can have their attention drawn to the mental health issue and then says this is basically all a political issue....well I know I'm dealing with a special sort of stupid there and as such it's not a great possibility to have a rational, sensible or constructive discussion with such a person.

You of course in your first post said that people on the Right don't care about mental health and want everyone thrown into prison, an equally absurd set of comments with not a lot of basis in reality, again just a partisan political point.

If you don't like being called on this, you should think of growing a thicker skin.

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

What?

It helped keep wackos out of the White House? Er... no it didn't, it put a wacko into the White House.

It doesn't protect the smaller states from tyranny of the bigger ones in the slightest. Spending on the US elections goes to swing states.

But, at the very least, I'm calling for Proportional Representation in House, which is divided up almost fairly in the first place and doesn't protect smaller states, as you claim.

The Presidency should also be done like this, because at present it's not one person, one vote, and it doesn't lead to the leader of the US being elected by the people of the US.

It's hardly a check and balance on overpopulation, it's just the right have realized that it favors them, and they don't want to lose their preferential treatment.

The wacko's that did not make it in were worse wacko's than the ones that did make it.

For all their ineptitude Dubya and Donnie are at least not anti gun. They both love their guns.

Again, are you making an argument? It's hard to tell.....

Your argument would appear to be, you are happy with any system which gives YOU what YOU want, and you're against one person, one vote.

 

[Vandalshandle]

 

[yiostheoy]

I am also perfectly capable of discussing this important issue of mental health and suicide with anyone, however when I'm dealing with someone who says that everyone needs to be shown film of people burning themselves alive so people can have their attention drawn to the mental health issue and then says this is basically all a political issue....well I know I'm dealing with a special sort of stupid there and as such it's not a great possibility to have a rational, sensible or constructive discussion with such a person.

You of course in your first post said that people on the Right don't care about mental health and want everyone thrown into prison, an equally absurd set of comments with not a lot of basis in reality, again just a partisan political point.

If you don't like being called on this, you should think of growing a thicker skin.

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

What?

It helped keep wackos out of the White House? Er... no it didn't, it put a wacko into the White House.

It doesn't protect the smaller states from tyranny of the bigger ones in the slightest. Spending on the US elections goes to swing states.

But, at the very least, I'm calling for Proportional Representation in House, which is divided up almost fairly in the first place and doesn't protect smaller states, as you claim.

The Presidency should also be done like this, because at present it's not one person, one vote, and it doesn't lead to the leader of the US being elected by the people of the US.

It's hardly a check and balance on overpopulation, it's just the right have realized that it favors them, and they don't want to lose their preferential treatment.

The wacko's that did not make it in were worse wacko's than the ones that did make it.

For all their ineptitude Dubya and Donnie are at least not anti gun. They both love their guns.

Again, are you making an argument? It's hard to tell.....

Your argument would appear to be, you are happy with any system which gives YOU what YOU want, and you're against one person, one vote.

It won't matter.

By the way the people don't vote directly.

Only indirectly.

The mentally ill apparently are not a big priority.

 

[yiostheoy]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

That was last weekend.

LePen lost.

The girlie-man won.

Well, last weekend, oh, and when her father won, and, er, every election since the system was introduced. So... what? You have a problem with the people making such a choice? You have a problem with one person, one vote?

Sorry you lost me again.

I get that you were sleeping under a rock for the past week though.

LePen lost.

The French have chosen to go the wimp road.

FYI.

 

[frigidweirdo]

And what about me?

I made a post about how changing the electoral system could have a benefit for mental health.

Your response was "you partisan hack."

Uh huh. This is you being "perfectly capable of discussing the important issue of mental health" is it? By simply dismissing everything you read within 1 minute of reading it without having any clue about what is being spoken about?

Perhaps the OP has a point. Well they've made their point and you can either not discuss it, or you can discuss it. Instead you just attacked. Again. For apparently no reason other than you don't have an argument other than attacking.

You might not have advocated putting those with mental health issues in prison, then again you're not American. A country with one of the highest per capita rates of incarceration and with a 50% rate of prisoners having mental health problems. A country where the Republican states are far more likely to lock people up with mental illness, and far less likely to spend money on dealing with mental illness.

Why would you want to change the electoral system ??

It helped us keep two wacko's out of The White House recently.

It protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger ones.

It is a check and balance on overpopulation.

What?

It helped keep wackos out of the White House? Er... no it didn't, it put a wacko into the White House.

It doesn't protect the smaller states from tyranny of the bigger ones in the slightest. Spending on the US elections goes to swing states.

But, at the very least, I'm calling for Proportional Representation in House, which is divided up almost fairly in the first place and doesn't protect smaller states, as you claim.

The Presidency should also be done like this, because at present it's not one person, one vote, and it doesn't lead to the leader of the US being elected by the people of the US.

It's hardly a check and balance on overpopulation, it's just the right have realized that it favors them, and they don't want to lose their preferential treatment.

The wacko's that did not make it in were worse wacko's than the ones that did make it.

For all their ineptitude Dubya and Donnie are at least not anti gun. They both love their guns.

Again, are you making an argument? It's hard to tell.....

Your argument would appear to be, you are happy with any system which gives YOU what YOU want, and you're against one person, one vote.

It won't matter.

By the way the people don't vote directly.

Only indirectly.

The mentally ill apparently are not a big priority.

You do realize that's why I'm calling for direct elections, don't you?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The problem is, the right see giving money to mental health as a "give-away".

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

That was last weekend.

LePen lost.

The girlie-man won.

Well, last weekend, oh, and when her father won, and, er, every election since the system was introduced. So... what? You have a problem with the people making such a choice? You have a problem with one person, one vote?

Sorry you lost me again.

I get that you were sleeping under a rock for the past week though.

LePen lost.

The French have chosen to go the wimp road.

FYI.

So, you're just taking the piss, right?

You said you don't want Proportional Representation because crazies would win. I point out that in France crazies don't win.

 

[yiostheoy]

The far right are anarchists and the far left are communists.

Case in point: Cruz and Bernie.

N'ary the twain shall ever meet.

France has a PR presidential election with a run off. Do you see the far right getting into power? No, neither do I.

Many countries have PR, and they have more political choice.

That was last weekend.

LePen lost.

The girlie-man won.

Well, last weekend, oh, and when her father won, and, er, every election since the system was introduced. So... what? You have a problem with the people making such a choice? You have a problem with one person, one vote?

Sorry you lost me again.

I get that you were sleeping under a rock for the past week though.

LePen lost.

The French have chosen to go the wimp road.

FYI.

So, you're just taking the piss, right?

You said you don't want Proportional Representation because crazies would win. I point out that in France crazies don't win.

You are belaboring your bad position.

Just give up.