The incident in which a 20 year old with iPod headphones in his ears was brutally attacked by an assailant wielding a hammer stunned the city this week. The release of the video led many, including Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, to question the integrity of citizens who stand by and do nothing while such an attack goes down. The argument has been made for the "live to testify another day" concept. But maybe the right buzzword for this kind of crime is "prevention."
Suspect Thomas Scantling has seen charges including counts on rape, robbery, assault, and narcotics. More importantly, as Jill Porter discussed in her Daily News column today, Scantling had been recently 302'd, or involuntarily and temporarily brought in for evaluation by a mental health ward. The behavior sparking the incident must have occurred within the last thirty days. Such an admission lasts a maximum of 120 hours and, after that, a hearing is held to determine the possibility for extension or immediate release. As Porter says in her article, most 302s do not end up beating someone with a hammer on the subway. But the question remains that if we're going to pay for Mr. Scantling's penal incarceration, why not amend the laws to make the chances of paying (far less) for his mental health care greater?
twitter.com/joeross
Philly Blogs
Archive
About the Author
such amendment, to lower the quantum of proof required to involuntary commit someone, would necessarily raise the risk of involuntarily committing persons who were not in fact a danger to themselves or others. it is another iteration of the security/liberty trade off and the question is what level of danger from random crazies should be tolerated to cabin the discretion of the DA in involuntarily committing citizens. hence ms. porters comment that most 302s do not attack people with hammers.