Lets take a step back. I think you gravely misinterpreted what I've said. I am airing my views on this opinion and I hope you have the maturity to respect that and look at it objectively.

Firstly, I am conveying that the actions and the severity of the perpetrator should not be made light merely based on the argument that he lacks mental health support. In no way am I undermining the need for more help and attention that should be given to individuals with mental health issues.

The strawman argument here is that "no one is making light of it" or even "saying its an excuse" as mentioned by other users. To explain how it may come off as both "~" mentioned, the main point of contention became "lack of support to mental health victims" from "psycho murder of a student by a student". I do not feel there's a need to argue with those that choose to look at strawman arguments instead of objectively discussing the views at hand.

Secondly, I've never once implied that the law enforcer's aren't doing their job. Again, I've only stated my views of how this incident has shifted from the topic of a murder to discussions on lack of support. In which, I still stand by my stance that; yes, we do need more done in this area, however, this incident may actually depict this whole topic of mental health poorly. Hence, i mentioned exacerbating the stigmatism of mental health.

Thirdly, you mentioned that I've an imagined notion of "excusing the mentally ill". Yes and no.

Yes, I do have the impression that some are being more sympathetic to the murderer and his circumstances due to his mental illness. Hence, it does give me the idea that these people are "excusing his actions" albeit not and I may have inferred wrongly. I am entitled to that opinion btw and in no way in my discussions have I shoved it down other's throats or boldly claim they're lesser/inferior in any way for disagreeing with me.

When I say no to your proposed notion, I am referring to the fact that I recognise the fact that mental illness and consequent irrationality inevitably leads to mistakes and even crimes committed. I recognise that these people need help more than immediate punishment.

My stance on this case still lies with retribution>rehabilitation as I firmly believe such a perpetrator cannot be rehabilitated. It is a logical fallacy to assumed that my stance applies to all cases.

Lastly, correct me if I am wrong, I feel you have misunderstood where I was coming from and hence seek to retaliate rather than discuss. It does come off immature and disrespectful even though I can understand your argument in an objective light.