Which means that 72% of those with "schizophrenia" and "substance abuse" haven't been convicted of violent crime. So even there preventive imprisonment of that group would have a high "collateral damage" rate.
My reason, though, for desiring the kind institutionalization (NOT the punitive imprisonment) of severely crazy people is not simply to prevent crime.
Imprisonment is still imprisonment in crucial aspects. It depends on the threat of violence, most notably, as opposed to offering to shelter and feed various "needy" people. In this it differs not from any number of government programs, all designed to help us "for our own good".
It is a kindness to them. They are dependent and helpless.
Their consent would then follow, as it does in homeless shelters and soup kitchens.
Just as I “forcibly” detain and shelter and care for my kids, or we “forcibly” detain and shelter and care for the senile and demented, and the severely mentally impaired - we need to do so for the crazy. They are just as needy of sane adult supervision.
There are many classes and degrees of "mental illness" and "helplessness" and "dependency" that our caring government would kindly provide for in various ways, if only we'd let them. They would of course be tailored to meed the needs and different levels of skills that we have. A lot of this should begin at the earliest ages, which is why it so important to increase funding for mental health professionals in government schools, and so on. Ahem.
“Imprisonment is still imprisonment in crucial aspects. It depends on the threat of violence,”
I agree that we must tread carefully. But we can’t just say the minors, the demented/senile, the mentally handicapped, and the crazy can only be made to stay in a safe place if they consent.
If they are too immature or too out of it to consent, they can’t consent, or won’t perhaps because they think you are Napoleon and they are Josephine.
You mention the government taking everyone over, but that would be last resort in any system I’d design. I just think mature caretakers need to be allowed to “imprison” in the sense of “keep even if against their will” their incapacitated or immature loved ones.
My Great Aunt did not want to be kept at home. She went senile. They had to hide her car keys and alarm the back door. She was “imprisoned.” But if she wasn’t “imprisoned” she drove like a lunatic and wandered lost for miles.
Eventually she went to a nursing home, and she is not allowed to leave there, either. She has not given her consent. Some patients there are tied down at intervals. What else can you do?