> If not, by what means to propose that we do so? >> Quite easy really. Whether a person is a danger to society or not, should be determined by a court jury ba

> If not, by what means to propose that we do so? >> Quite easy really. Whether a person is a danger to society or not, should be determined by a court jury based on his previous actions. A couple of problems with this solution come to mind. You say that the knowledge that psychiatry produces is invalid because it is non-scientific. The process by which the justice system produces knowledge is decidedly non-scientific and inherently subjective. Why do you hold the knowledge produced by the non-scientific process of justice above the non-scientifically produced knowledge of psychiatry? Additionally, by the time the justice system gets involved, a crime against society has already occurred. Surely we can do better than waiting for tragedy before intervening?