Hmm, well, he wasn't convicted for just thinking about it -- he was convicted for thinking about it and taking concrete steps toward doing it, including buying guns. And I have to admit, based on this brief account, putting him back out on the street doesn't sound like a good idea -- sounds like he's more than a little likely to kill some people. But I don't know that I can agree that he's actually committed a crime yet.
Seems like exactly the kind of case that involuntary commitment to a mental institution should be available for.
I agree with you- he needs mental help, and locking him for several years and then releasing him probably won't do anything to keep anyone safe. He needs mental help, and if given the option of jail or a mental institution, I think he would have taken the later. Further, while he did purchase guns, I still can't agree that he committed assault, which is what he was convicted of. (Which seems to be in agreeance with yourself, but I wanted to reiterate).
Note, I and my family shop at the store in question frequently. I am keenly aware of the potential threat this was to my family, and I am glad his mother reported it to try to get her son help- but I don't like the way it has turned out.
This is yet another story of why you should always do everything in your power to avoid calling the police in order to "help" with a mental health incident unless you're dealing with a situation where an imminent danger forces your hand.
It's not a question of the police being good or bad. Every aspect of their training is about getting the bad guy off the street; far too often the effects of that training translate poorly towards actually helping the mentally ill in crisis. Some officers receive specialized training for handling the mentally ill, but even though the training is becoming more common, they're still a small minority of LE. But generally speaking, the same stereotypes that lead the general public to errantly assume mental illness means violent can affect how police officers respond. There are way too many stories of officers allowing those mistaken assumptions to lead to sometimes deadly confrontations.
The mental health system in this country is woefully flawed, as is how the justice system handles the mentally ill. When the situation gets to what starts to look like the tipping point, it's no wonder that so many people think that the police are the best option for taking drastic measures to help save a loved one.
Most emergency hospitalizations are for acute emergency incidents. They're not permanent, and the person isn't incorrigible. Emergency treatment works to get them through the initial crisis, stabilized, and in a position where they can engage in their continued treatment by their own choice. In other cases, involuntary commitment might be called for in the short-term.
When that's the only choice available, the door you entered the system through can make all the difference in the world. Assuming commitment was justified in this situation (a big assumption on my part, given lack of details), had the request come from an emergency MH facility it's entirely possible that Blaec Lammers would be receiving proper psychiatric treatment right now. Instead, he's in the criminal justice system and the book is being thrown at him given the charges (assault in the first is incredibly uncommon in a case like this).
The police aren't the only ones empowered to initiate civil commitment proceedings. Regrettably, we don't know what could have happened had things gone differently. Per the story, Lammer's mother is already blaming herself for calling the police. In the future, stories such as this might keep others in similar situations from helping their loved ones seek emergency treatment out of the fear that, instead of being treated, they'll be incarcerated.
In a situation like that, from the mentally ill, to their families, to society in general, nobody benefits.
Seems like exactly the kind of case that involuntary commitment to a mental institution should be available for.