Do Americans really incarcerate mentally handicaped people together with regular criminals?

Do Americans really incarcerate mentally handicaped people together with regular criminals?

Yes. Thank Reagan for shutting down all state run mental facilities. Those right wing people sure love fucking things up for decades to come!

No, they poison them to death

Yes

The American legal system is so fucked up it hurts

What's the problem with it? Two burdens to society lumped together.

It's funny because right wing people want to bring back forced mental institution, but now liberals are saying that it's inhumane to break up these homeless "communities"

reality is subjective and the crazies have been running the asylum for quit some time which is where i'm assuming your information came from

Yup. We execute them, too.

mental institutions have historically relied on junk science and abuse.

but sure, keep generalizing what "liberals" are saying. I'm sure you're an expert on that.

Wow.
How come the torture of terrorists spawned years of political outrage and controversy but nobody gives a fuck about this? No congressional hearings? No media frenzy? No petitions? How absolutely disgusting!

because crazies aren't people. it's like gay regression and unbirthing camps.

Jesus Christ, that's the mindset of 18th century Europe. How do educated people like judges and lawyers reconcile such practices?

>How do educated people like judges and lawyers reconcile such practices?
putting people into prisons and camps is big $$$$$$$$$$$$

Retards aren't people.
But go ahead, keep crying, soyboy. See if that will convice those judges or anybody in this place.

its all about $

americans incarcerate fucking everybody to provide cheap slave labor

why do you talk like a cuck?

>mental institutions have historically relied on junk science and abuse.
I guess we should thank Reagan then for closing them, not like that's a generalization.

When you two libtards decide whether "mental institutions have historically relied on junk science and abuse," or to blame Reagan for closing them, get back to me.

All courts should be privately owned so the free market will fix ethical problems like this.

Partly true but even more cynical, they are like stocks to be traded and invested in.

You're not seeing the whole picture.
The private prison sector lobies and bribes lawmakers and courts to regulate a steady supply of inmates which generate cash (Government payments), much like cattle that produce milk. The slave labour is just the cherry on top, another incentive used to shape policies.

The war on drugs and subsequent emergence of the prison sector is a beautiful case study of unintended political outcomes and malignant failure.

>The war on drugs and subsequent emergence of the prison sector
You're blaming #based Reagan... FUCK off cuckold soyboy ctr shill make america GREAT AGAIN

There's less of a distinction between regular people and the mentally handicapped in America

we also execute them

Roads

>guy kills a bunch of people
>yeah but he was insane (like obviously)
>o-oh okay let's pamper him for a few years and release him even though freaks like him should be considered worse than a regular criminal who has a chance to actually become a functioning human
Breivik is probably playing ps3 right now and eating pizza good job Yuropeons.

They can't play any unapproved video games because they might inflame violent tendencies. The list is really small and I think the most recent one is on gamecube. Just to burst your hyperbole bubble.

>can't even play PS3
>can play GameCube
Wow, that completely ruins the comfy picture that user painted, Brevik is truly experiencing a fate worse than death.

Well, since no legal sytem is perfect you're pretty much stuck with variations of two approaches:

1. focus on punishment: x number of innocents become collateral damage
2. focus on rehabilitation: x number of guilty people will get away scott-free

Most authoritarian states and also the US chose the first approach, while Europe and most democracies chose the second. It's a matter of political prefference, really.

yes they need to be hung

What? That's idiotic. Whether you focus on punishment or rehabilitation doesn't determine how many innocents or guilty are punished or released. That's entirely determined by the standards of guilt and innocence.

In a system where no capital punishment exists, no innocent will ever be wrongfully killed by the state.

Instead of wasting my time, just of thinking of the most plausible explanations where you're wrong, and if you can't think of any, I'll give you some of my own and call you a double retard.

Except in cases of life sentences, which is effectively a worst fate than being killed.

>t. someone who's never been to prison

I'm at least a tripple retard so maybe I can't really make myself clear, but wouldn't you agree that a system geared towards punishment invites for overly harsh sentences while one focused on rehabilitation tends to be too lenient? I realize I'm painting very broad strokes here, but I think I'm not entirely wrong.

Broadly, probably, though I wouldn't say as American, my system looks too harsh because it focuses on punishment, even if you think it looks harsh. Sorry for my last, aggressive post.