W Post
 
 
The real Navy Yard  scandal

 
 
By Charles Krauthammer
Published:  September 19, 2013 

 
 
< 
In the liberal remake of “Casablanca,” the police  captain comes upon the 
scene of the shooting and orders his men to “round up the  usual weapons.” 
It’s always the weapon and never the shooter. Twelve people are murdered in 
 _a rampage at the Washington Navy Yard_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/police-search-for-active-shooter-on-grounds-of-washington-navy-yard-in-sou
theast-dc/2013/09/16/b1d72b9a-1ecb-11e3-b7d1-7153ad47b549_story.html) , and 
before sundown  _Sen. Dianne Feinstein has called_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obama-laments-navy-yard-shooting-in-heart-of-capital-where-gun-c
ontrol-debate-has-grown-cold/2013/09/16/6fc0d0a8-1f11-11e3-9ad0-96244100e647
_story.html)  for yet another debate on  gun violence. Major opprobrium is 
heaped on the AR-15, the semiautomatic used in  the Newtown massacre.



 
Turns out _no AR-15 was used at the Navy Yard_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/officials-washington-navy-yard-shooter-had-3-firearms-including-a
r-15-assault-rifle/2013/09/16/ea146a8e-1f4a-11e3-9ad0-96244100e647_story.htm
l) . And the shotgun that  was used was obtained legally in Virginia after 
the buyer, Aaron Alexis, had _passed both a state and federal background 
check_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/us/state-law-stopped-gunman-from-buying-rifle-officials-say.html)
 . 
As was the case in the Tucson shooting — _instantly politicized into a 
gun-control_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011106068.html)
  and (fabricated)  tea-party-climate-of-violence issue — 
the origin of this crime lies not in any  politically expedient externality 
but in the _nature of the shooter_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/08/AR2011010803961.html)
 . 
On Aug. 7, that same _Alexis had called police_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/gunman-at-navy-yard-told-police-in-rhode-island-last-month-he-he
ard-voices-in-hotel-room/2013/09/17/f7248084-1fd0-11e3-9ad0-96244100e6
47_story.html)  from a Newport, R.I., Marriott.  He was hearing voices. Three 
people were following him, he told the cops. They  were sending microwaves 
through walls, making his skin vibrate and preventing  him from sleeping. He 
had 
already twice changed hotels to escape the men, the  radiation, the voices. 
Delusions, paranoid ideation, auditory (and somatic) hallucinations: the  
classic symptoms of schizophrenia.  
So here is this panic-stricken soul, psychotic and in terrible distress. 
And  what does modern policing do for him? _The cops tell him_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/before-navy-yard-shooting-alleged-gunman-heard-voices-a
nd-sought-help/2013/09/17/874970d8-1fd2-11e3-94a2-6c66b668ea55_story.html)  
to “stay away from the individuals that  are following him.” Then they 
leave.  
But the three “individuals” were imaginary, for God’s sake. This is  how a 
civilized society deals with a man in such a state of terror?  
Had this happened 35 years ago in Boston, Alexis would have been brought to 
 me as the psychiatrist on duty at the emergency room of the Massachusetts  
General Hospital. Were he as agitated and distressed as in the police 
report, I  probably would have administered an immediate dose of Haldol, the 
most 
powerful  fast-acting antipsychotic of the time. 
This would generally have relieved the hallucinations and delusions, a  
blessing not only in itself, but also for the lucidity brought on that would  
have allowed him to give us important diagnostic details — psychiatric 
history,  family history, social history, medical history, etc. If I had 
thought 
he could  be sufficiently cared for by family or friends to receive regular 
oral  medication, therapy and follow-up, I would have discharged him. 
Otherwise, I’d  have admitted him. And if he refused, I’d have ordered a 14-day 
involuntary  commitment. 
Sounds cruel? On the contrary. For many people living on park benches,  
commitment means a warm bed, shelter and three hot meals a day. For Alexis, it  
would have meant the beginning of a treatment regimen designed to bring him 
back  to himself before discharging him to a world heretofore madly 
radioactive. 
That’s what a compassionate society does. It would no more abandon this man 
 to fend for himself than it would a man suffering a stroke. And as a side  
effect, that compassion might even extend to potential victims of his 
psychosis  — in the event, remote but real, that he might someday burst into 
some 
place of  work and kill 12 innocent people. 
Instead, what happened? The Newport police sent their report to the local  
naval station, where it promptly disappeared into the ether. Alexis 
subsequently  twice visited VA hospital ERs, but without any florid symptoms of 
psychosis and  complaining only of sleeplessness, the diagnosis was missed. (He 
was given a  sleep medication.) He fell back through the cracks.  
True, psychiatric care is underfunded and often scarce. But Alexis had full 
 access to the VA system. The problem here was not fiscal but political 
and, yes,  even moral. 
I know the civil libertarian arguments. I know that involuntary commitment 
is  outright paternalism. But paternalism is essential for children because 
they  don’t have a fully developed rational will. Do you think Alexis was in 
command  of his will that night in Newport? 
We cannot, of course, be cavalier about commitment. We should have layers 
of  review, albeit rapid. But it’s both cruel and reckless to turn loose 
people as  lost and profoundly suffering as Alexis, even apart from any 
potential  dangerousness. 
More than half of those you see sleeping on grates _have suffered mental 
illness_ (http://homeless.samhsa.gov/Resource/View.aspx?id=48804) . It’s a 
national scandal.  It’s time we recalibrated the pendulum that today allows the 
mentally ill to die  with their rights on — and, rarely but unforgivably, 
take a dozen innocents with  them.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to