Odd question Tourist, what course of actions should be followed by people who observe a person showing the traits and tendencies of a dangerously mentally ill person? What should the people who observed the VT killer and others have done and said in the days and weeks leading up to the attacks? Plenty of people noted these individuals were unbalanced. Should people who see such suspicious and troubling activities not do anything because they may start a rumor?
Mental illness diagnosis leads to criminalization?
- Thread starter Creature
- Start date
It's not becoming a witch hunt! It has been a witch hunt for over four decades..................:barf: P.S. As a former mental health professional I feel quite confident in stating that most full blown psychotic episodes can be traced back to a mild case of untreated depression........P.P.S. Or even a treated case of mild depression, Either way mild depression can be a bitch...........
Last edited:
MD_Willington
New member
Polishrifleman said:
Polishrifleman, you're in WA State, read the CPL application, applicants already agree to allow access to ANY mental health records...
FIR-652-007 - State of Washington Concealed Pistol License Application said:
It's simple really, at your place of work, at least for most of us, you do yourself a solid by learning to keep your mouth shut about passionate topics that you know well and good are gonna piss off or alarm sensibilities other than your own! You'll find it very effective at maintaining your equillibrium...
The Tourist
Moderator
Musketeer said:
I would give the same advice here as I would for a malfunctioning firearm, a leaky pipe, a dull Japanese knife or erectile dysfunction.
Go see a professional!
All of the stupid, bizarre circiumstances I have related concerning the work environment, court, therapy and medication are not from some dime novel. They come from several very personal years of my own life.
Concerning depression, manias and human interaction, I can guaranty you that patients are indeed second class citizens. We are falsely perceived as deviants "ready to snap," and therein lies the all-too-quick remedy by people who don't know any better. "Limit their rights!!"
You cannot believe the idiosy I have heard bandied about by unschooled townies. Seemingly, guys who have trouble making payments on their double-wides all claim to be experts on bipolar disorder.
Well, here's a bit of trivia for all of you experts. When I feel the swell of a mania, I like to go to the gym and play card games like Bridge and Whist.
The only damage I intend to inflict is on your wallet. I'll ensnare you into a "quick game" of Hearts and take away your week's salary.
Be honest, you thought I was going to cackle and use an axe...
MeekAndMild
New member
One strategy which might work is let the present issue pass and refocus on the issue of mental/emotional health of the un-named co-worker who is causing trouble for the friend. One would wonder what would happen if over the course of a few months someone carefully observed for and complained about other episodes of unrelated antisocial behavior?
If she complained about your friend's lunchtime talk chances are she is also doing other things to overcontrol others, violate their privacy and stir up trouble. Sooner or later she'll say or do something which is unarguably "over the edge". All it takes is an effort to be polite, kind and reasonable while watching for other nasty behaviors to crop up. Maybe she's having an affair with another married worker? Maybe she pitches a fit if someone brings a fish sandwich into the break room? Maybe she's spending an hour a day checking ebay on the company computer? Maybe she's a crazy cat lady who smells of cat urine? Somewhere, somehow she's doing something which is against company policy. Then when they fire her you won't have to worry about her complaining about what you're talking about.
If she complained about your friend's lunchtime talk chances are she is also doing other things to overcontrol others, violate their privacy and stir up trouble. Sooner or later she'll say or do something which is unarguably "over the edge". All it takes is an effort to be polite, kind and reasonable while watching for other nasty behaviors to crop up. Maybe she's having an affair with another married worker? Maybe she pitches a fit if someone brings a fish sandwich into the break room? Maybe she's spending an hour a day checking ebay on the company computer? Maybe she's a crazy cat lady who smells of cat urine? Somewhere, somehow she's doing something which is against company policy. Then when they fire her you won't have to worry about her complaining about what you're talking about.
The Tourist
Moderator
MeekAndMild said:
Fair enough. But perhaps she's a supervisor's sister-in-law, as long as we are playing "what if," and undoubtedly she is effective at spreading rumor and innuendo.
I have no problem in dealing with the OP's initial concern. My adjunct is that his exprience is not unique. Most folks, and I mean +75%, know absolutely nothing about mental illness.
For example, as of last night I found out that the real problem Britney Spears has is that she is bipolar. And she very might be.
However, that is not what is driving her present self-destruction. Britney Spears is a drunk, perhaps a drunken bipolar sufferer. One has nothing to do with the other. After all, she might also be a drunken a Kwanis Club member.
My point here is that most townies will now believe her bizarre behavior is 100% sum and substance due to a serotonin issue.
As for the OP, I'd like to hear the flip side. I'd like to see if those malicious comments get him hauled up to the personnel office. Will he now have to be interviewed by a psychiatrist as a condition of his employment. Will he be fired.
You see, all of the TFL members know he's innocent. The supervisors at his company now know him as a gun nut who might have mental issues.
This perceived concept is what is really vital for him.
You guys are over complicating this. We adjust our conversation continuously depending on who we are talking to and who can hear us. I usually don't talk to my girlfriend when my wife is around, although I certainly think I have that right. If the lady doesn't want to hear you talking about guns, talk about something else.
The Tourist
Moderator
ZeroJunk said:
Agreed. You are, after all, on private property and at the workplace. A level of decorum and self-control should be present.
With one proviso. The woman shouldn't be eavesdropping on a private conversation. I have as much trouble with busy-bodies as I do with folks who are rude at work.
The one hole in this entire debate is just how much should lunchroom chat be modulated?
Remember, the outcome of this was a very derogatory label on an innocent person. How are we supposed to know what sets her off?
Here's a wild--but true--example.
In the city of Green Bay, Wisconsin, the ER room doctors have documented that more women seek services for being battered by their husbands when the Packers lose a football game.
For the sake of this debate, let's assume the woman who snooped is a battered wife.
Further suppose that the TFL member in the lunchroom was discussing football scores with his co-worker and delighting in some spectacular bone-crushing blocks.
Would that same woman also falsely assume that our TFL member was a wife beater and also report him for abuse and creating a hostile workplace environment?
You cannot control what people think of you.
True. However, it's not hard to MANAGE perceptions with a little bit of effort.
Example:
Person 1 wears camoed clothing items to work on occasion, hangs an NRA calendar in his cubicle, talks about firearms at work, brings pictures to work from the opening day of deer season, has pictures of his hi-power competition rig for his desktop/screensaver, wears a Ruger ballcap, etc., etc.
Person 2 consistently wears casual business attire to work with no firearms logo items, and doesn't discuss his controversial hobbies with those at work except privately, doesn't display gun-related pictures or items in his work area, etc.
To be perfectly clear, I'm not saying one approach is BETTER than the other. I'm saying that the two approaches will clearly result in very different PERCEPTIONS on the part of these two persons' coworkers.
Here's an example from real life. A coworker of mine is a smoker, but I worked with him for around a decade before I found out. He doesn't smoke at work and makes it a point to limit his smoking around coworkers. Does he CONTROL what his coworkers think about him? Nope, not possible, but he does MANAGE perceptions about him very well.