Then it SHOULD be against the law to be "CRIMINALLY INSANE". If you've been diagnosed, and even if you are receiving medication, perhaps you should be under house arrest and under the care/observation of a legal guardian (who could be a family member).
We take pre-emptive measures against drunks (both drunk drivers and those who are drunk in public). The police don't wait for them to "do wrong", it is a crime merely to BE. And there is zero tolerance for those who break that law.
Why should someone be "excused" and left as a livewire merely because it is diagnosed that his brain chemistry is at fault (as opposed to alcohol or some other intoxicant)? Because it is "natural"?
Nature isn't always doing positive things.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Jeffrey Dahmer without the taste for american food.
Explain this to me. If a person is mentally ill, goes into the hospital, gets effective treatment, is put on medication and a schedule of couseling, leaves the hospital, resumes normal life... how is that a crime? Mental illness is not illegal. Mental illnes is a psychological problem, and not every person who is mentally ill is psychotic.
40 years ago (or so) it was "decided" that the mentally ill should not be confined to asylums. This ensured that many were "free" to become homeless derelicts.
I have often found it ironic that, as a society, we will "pick up" homeless animals yet ensure the "rights" of mentally ill humans to wander free until such time as they demonstrate that they are a "danger to society or themselves"! Even then, they will shortly be released from confinement and just told to "take their meds...", which, of course rarely will occur.
It is (of course) a "win-win" proposition! "Progressive Thinkers" get to prevail in guaranteeing "rights" and society gets to no longer have the expense of maintaining asylums...