Please,every gun owner read this post!!

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
906
Likes
70
Location
southwest
How can they do anything without a warrant? This is still America, right? I'm also curious how stepping outside your house invites any invasion of your rights. You are still on your property, minding your own business. They still have no warrant, and you have the right to say nothing. Shouldn't be able to cuff and detain you with no charges. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some way around it with "its for their own good" type of laws to "protect someone from themselves". I'll let you know from personal experience, if someone is going to kill themselves they WILL do it and you can't stop them. Believing otherwise is simply naive.

Outside I can arrest someone much easier, to be honest. Going into a house is verboten without a warrant unless exigent circumstances exist. Outside, not an issue. The only issue is probable cause.

As far as the other part, you can be put into cuffs and can be Mirandized and still not be arrested. You can also be detained and searched without charges as well (Terry v. Ohio).
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
29,267
Likes
7,777
Outside I can arrest someone much easier, to be honest. Going into a house is verboten without a warrant unless exigent circumstances exist. Outside, not an issue. The only issue is probable cause.

Is this same thing true with a fenced and gated yard as it is for a house?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
906
Likes
70
Location
southwest
Is this same thing true with a fenced and gated yard as it is for a house?

The fence is generally treated the same as a house, except that more is allowed due to "plain view." If it can be seen, then often the warrant requirement will be waived due to the aforementioned exigent circumstances.

Unfenced is all access, except the curtiledge.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
3,435
Likes
401
How can they do anything without a warrant?

He was outside of his home. No warrant needed for anything if you are outside.


This is still America, right? I'm also curious how stepping outside your house invites any invasion of your rights.

Curious to know what rights you believe were violated.

You are still on your property, minding your own business. They still have no warrant, and you have the right to say nothing. Shouldn't be able to cuff and detain you with no charges. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some way around it with "its for their own good" type of laws to "protect someone from themselves".



CHAPTER 123. MENTAL HEALTH

Chapter 123: Section 12. Emergency restraint of dangerous persons; application for hospitalization; examination


Section 12. (a) Any physician who is licensed pursuant to section two of chapter one hundred and twelve or qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist authorized to practice as such under regulations promulgated pursuant to the provisions of section eighty B of said chapter one hundred and twelve or a qualified psychologist licensed pursuant to sections one hundred and eighteen to one hundred and twenty-nine, inclusive of said chapter one hundred and twelve, who after examining a person has reason to believe that failure to hospitalize such person would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness may restrain or authorize the restraint of such person and apply for the hospitalization of such person for a three day period at a public facility or at a private facility authorized for such purposes by the department. If an examination is not possible because of the emergency nature of the case and because of the refusal of the person to consent to such examination, the physician, qualified psychologist or qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist on the basis of the facts and circumstances may determine that hospitalization is necessary and may apply therefore. In an emergency situation, if a physician, qualified psychologist or qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist is not available, a police officer, who believes that failure to hospitalize a person would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness may restrain such person and apply for the hospitalization of such person for a three day period at a public facility or a private facility authorized for such purpose by the department. An application for hospitalization shall state the reasons for the restraint of such person and any other relevant information which may assist the admitting physician or physicians. Whenever practicable, prior to transporting such person, the applicant shall telephone or otherwise communicate with a facility to describe the circumstances and known clinical history and to determine whether the facility is the proper facility to receive such person and also to give notice of any restraint to be used and to determine whether such restraint is necessary.
 

MMF

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
518
Likes
15
Location
Mass
You know Half cocked i think we have a lot in common, we both love to argue! I bet your even right all the time, just like me.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
3,435
Likes
401
You know Half cocked i think we have a lot in common, we both love to argue! I bet your even right all the time, just like me.


No argument. I attempt to educate and find the truth. I have no horse in the race to argue about anything.[grin]

I have been wrong...once I think. I have no problem admitting when I am wrong.
 

MMF

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
518
Likes
15
Location
Mass
No argument. I attempt to educate and find the truth. I have no horse in the race to argue about anything.[grin]

I have been wrong...once I think. I have no problem admitting when I am wrong.

You...wrong once? nevermind we have nothing in common then.
 

richc

NES Member
Rating - 100%
53   0   0
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
25,582
Likes
90,175
Location
metrowest
Years ago my late grandmother was living alone in her home in Dorchester. She was sick. It was really obvious. She was not well nourished. She was peeing in a bucket, and said bucket was also full of blood. She looked like hell.

We called for an ambulance, but she refused to go. They called for a police supervisor. He talked with my grandmother and felt that, although she was obviously not in great shape, she was of coherent enough mind that to make her own decision. For us that was hard, but he was preserving her rights. The folks involved were caring and passionate.

Just thought a somewhat related story might be of interest. In this case the EMT's and LE made a professional evaluation of her mental faculties and, despite the families wishes (and honestly their own wishes), they allowed Grandma to stay in her home. They were very careful to preserve her legal rights.

Best,

Rich

P.S. Fortunately later in the day she agreed to go to the hospital. The same EMT's came back and were relieved to see she had come around.
 
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
3,301
Likes
193
Location
SE MASS
I honestly can't believe the number of you cross examining the OP. I don't give a damn weather you're hauling the "thin blue line", or if you think he might have actually been suicidal, it pisses me off.[angry] The fact that the gestapo can show up at a person's house and haul them off based on a phone call from a couple states south scares the living crap out of me. It is a case I would be willing to donate to every time. This truly could happen to any one of us, and I definitely wouldn't want to be in the OP's position.
 

Bill Nance

Banned
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
4,091
Likes
846
Location
God's Country, WA
I honestly can't believe the number of you cross examining the OP. I don't give a damn weather you're hauling the "thin blue line", or if you think he might have actually been suicidal, it pisses me off.[angry] The fact that the gestapo can show up at a person's house and haul them off based on a phone call from a couple states south scares the living crap out of me. It is a case I would be willing to donate to every time. This truly could happen to any one of us, and I definitely wouldn't want to be in the OP's position.

The laws regarding cops being able to "haul someone off" have actually been drastically in recent decades. Time was, not so long ago, when any physician could have you involuntarily committed forever with no appeals, no court date, no lawyer, no nothing.

What the cops can do at this point, is, if they perceive you as being an imminent threat to yourself or others, have you committed for three days for psychiatric evaluation. That's it, that's the limits of the police's powers.

I've actually never heard of a case where this was genuinely a pattern of abuse. I know it involves a lot of hassle to the cops who would much rather not get involved in this kind of crap. But under most state laws they have a non-waivable duty to act if they see something which would lead them to believe you are suicidal.

Personally I think suicide should be legal and a right of free citizens. But that means the law needs to change, not that the cops are at fault.

As for the OP, I think he's frankly FoS and don't belive his story. Maybe he'll prove his case in court and everyone cab laugh at me for being an over-skeptical ass. But somehow I doubt that's going to happen.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
11
Likes
4
Location
Boston
From a "Shrink's" Perspective

I'm a psychiatrist, and as many have already stated here on the threads, I wonder what the full story may be, so I'm not here to comment on who was right in this situation. I just wanted to throw some points out there....

#1) LEO's have a tough job; and unfortunately their job gets even harder b/c they often have to lend a hand to the mental health field in emergent situations, and they do have a duty to help get someone to a hospital setting for a safety evaluation if a Section 12 if filed my and MD, or as stated before, they feel there is imminent risk of harm to self or others. (Thank you to the officers who put their lives on the line and helping me and my colleagues out in the ER).

#2) Once someone is brought to the ER; it really depends on the particular psychiatrist evaluating the patient, whether they will be involuntarily hospitalized or not on a Section 12, as this decision is SUBJECTIVE (though we try our best to make it as evidenced based as possible) and varies GREATLY from clinician to clinician. In simplified fashion: someone can be sectioned 12'd based off the following

1) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to self
2) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to others
3) Evidence that the patient is unable to protect himself or care for himself reasonably in the community.

(obviously a lot of room for different interpretation of the above)

For example:
Some of my colleagues will see a patient with paranoid schizophrenia and section 12 them immediately without blinking. Based off any of the 3 criteria above.

I personally, as an example, saw a paranoid schizophrenic in the ER earlier this week, and YES, she was paranoid as hell. But, she was not suicidal, she had no history of violence or agression per her family members that I spoke with, and she somehow...has managed to make it in the community (wandering around from relatives house to relatives house and visiting ERs randomly across the city to get food, place to sleep, etc). So in my eyes, she wasn't harming herself, others, and taking care of basic needs. She obviously would benefit from meds and treatment (but she had a 10 year hx of a million hospitalizations and never following through with meds/treatment). So in my eyes, she didn't meet section 12 criteria, she didn't want to come in, and she went along her paranoid....merry way.

As u can see....subjective decision making depending on the clinician.

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case. (This is my experience in MA so far... I don't know how other shrinks are in other states, any NH shrinks around to comment??)

(First off, before I continue, if I had a patient who was severely depressed, psychotic, manic, etc. who had a history of impulsive behaviors, had active suicidal ideation, etc. and had a firearm, YES, i would be concerned as a clinician for their immediate level of risk.)

But, the point I want to make is that 90% (from my experience, maybe more) of psychiatrists and mental health workers will FREAK OUT, when they hear that one of their patients owns a firearm, even if they are NOT suicidal. And sometimes decide to Section 12; or prevent discharge from an inpatient unit solely based off this fact.

here are some reactions I have heard from my colleagues once it is discovered that their patient/client own a handgun... they often come to ask me questions b/c even though I am a NEWB when it comes to firearms, to them I am an Expert in terms of firearms knowledge. Here are TRUE QUOTES from my colleagues when they discover a pt. owns a firearm.

#1) "he said he owns a [email protected]?!? that's like those uzi's that can kill a lot of people quick right????!?!?"

#2) "the patient said he own a .22 rifle....that's like an AK47, don't we have to call the police????!?!?!"

#3) "we were going to discharge him today because he's doing much better, but didn't he say he goes hunting? ....that means he has a gun.... we can't let him go home now, that's too dangerous, we have to call the family to get the gun out of there".

Being realistic, a psychiatric disorder and firearms are NOT a great mix. But, unfortunately, depending on WHICH PSYCHIATRIST you tell, it can overshadow all of the other facts in the case.... rather than owning a firearm being just another FACTOR in a safety risk assessment.

So yes, if a psychiatrist or mental health worker finds out, you own a firearm... beware.... it can definitely impact their viewpoint of your case.

Sorry for the long post, I am at the tail end of my 24 hour shift... and reading this forum has been the only thing keeping me entertained between seeing patients....

Thanks for all the interesting reading tonight!
Andy
 
Last edited:

richc

NES Member
Rating - 100%
53   0   0
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
25,582
Likes
90,175
Location
metrowest
Great post, Doc!

Thanks,

Rich



I'm a psychiatrist, and as many have already stated here on the threads, I wonder what the full story may be, so I'm not here to comment on who was right in this situation. I just wanted to throw some points out there....

#1) LEO's have a tough job; and unfortunately their job gets even harder b/c they often have to lend a hand to the mental health field in emergent situations, and they do have a duty to help get someone to a hospital setting for a safety evaluation if a Section 12 if filed my and MD, or as stated before, they feel there is imminent risk of harm to self or others. (Thank you to the officers who put their lives on the line and helping me and my colleagues out in the ER).

#2) Once someone is brought to the ER; it really depends on the particular psychiatrist evaluating the patient, whether they will be involuntarily hospitalized or not on a Section 12, as this decision is SUBJECTIVE (though we try our best to make it as evidenced based as possible) and varies GREATLY from clinician to clinician. In simplified fashion: someone can be sectioned 12'd based off the following

1) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to self
2) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to others
3) Evidence that the patient is unable to protect himself or care for himself reasonably in the community.

(obviously a lot of room for different interpretation of the above)

For example:
Some of my colleagues will see a patient with paranoid schizophrenia and section 12 them immediately without blinking. Based off any of the 3 criteria above.

I personally, as an example, saw a paranoid schizophrenic in the ER earlier this week, and YES, she was paranoid as hell. But, she was not suicidal, she had no history of violence or agression per her family members that I spoke with, and she somehow...has managed to make it in the community (wandering around from relatives house to relatives house and visiting ERs randomly across the city to get food, place to sleep, etc). So in my eyes, she wasn't harming herself, others, and taking care of basic needs. She obviously would benefit from meds and treatment (but she had a 10 year hx of a million hospitalizations and never following through with meds/treatment). So in my eyes, she didn't meet section 12 criteria, she didn't want to come in, and she went along her paranoid....merry way.

As u can see....subjective decision making depending on the clinician.

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case.

(First off, before I continue, if I had a patient who was severely depressed, psychotic, manic, etc. who had a history of impulsive behaviors, had active suicidal ideation, etc. and had a firearm, YES, i would be concerned as a clinician for their immediate level of risk.)

But, the point I want to make is that 90% (from my experience, maybe more) of psychiatrists and mental health workers will FREAK OUT, when they hear that one of their patients owns a firearm, even if they are NOT suicidal. And sometimes decide to Section 12; or prevent discharge from an inpatient unit solely based off this fact.

here are some reactions I have heard from my colleagues once it is discovered that their patient/client own a handgun... they often come to ask me questions b/c even though I am a NEWB when it comes to firearms, to them I am an Expert in terms of firearms knowledge. Here are TRUE QUOTES from my colleagues when they discover a pt. owns a firearm.

#1) "he said he owns a [email protected]?!? that's like those uzi's that can kill a lot of people quick right????!?!?"

#2) "the patient said he own a .22 rifle....that's like an AK47, don't we have to call the police????!?!?!"

#3) "we were going to discharge him today because he's doing much better, but didn't he say he goes hunting? ....that means he has a gun.... we can't let him go home now, that's too dangerous, we have to call the family to get the gun out of there".

Being realistic, a psychiatric disorder and firearms are NOT a great mix. But, unfortunately, depending on WHICH PSYCHIATRIST you tell, it can overshadow all of the other facts in the case.... rather than owning a firearm being just another FACTOR in a safety risk assessment.

So yes, if a psychiatrist or mental health worker finds out, you own a firearm... beware.... it can definitely impact their viewpoint of your case.

Sorry for the long post, I am at the tail end of my 24 hour shift... and reading this forum has been the only thing keeping me entertained between seeing patients....

Thanks for all the interesting reading tonight!
Andy
 

dwarven1

Appleseed Instructor
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
27,708
Likes
2,088
Location
Starksboro, VT
This thread, and especially responses by some of the LEOs here are REALLY ensuring that a LEO is NEVER going to get invited to pass over my doorstep unless they're a friend and OFF-DUTY. And out of their jurisdiction.

From the posts, they sound kind of like vampires... they can't come in your home unless invited.
ohlord.gif


Oh, and it make a LOT more sense out of the comment in Cross-X's "advice from a cop" thread that everyone loves firefighters. Firefighters can't arrest you.

(sorry, JonJ, Half-Cocked, law dawg... but look over some of your recent responses. I mean, seriously! Those kinds of things are guaranteed to get law abiding citizens to start looking nervously at anyone with a badge and a gun!)

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case.
From what a friend of mine tells me about his case, I'd have to agree with you. He is seeing a pshrink for something (and no, he's not suicidal or dangerous to anyone) and when said shrink found out that he had a gun he told the guy and his wife flatly that he would NOT treat anyone who owned a gun. He wound up selling his guns, including an SKS that he's brought back from Vietnam. [rolleyes]
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Messages
2,466
Likes
615
Location
RI
Personally I think suicide should be legal and a right of free citizens. But that means the law needs to change, not that the cops are at fault.

True enough. I think there's a riddle that goes-

"What's the one crime you can't be prosecuted for if you commit it?" [grin]
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2008
Messages
20,008
Likes
2,671
Location
Metro West
[grin]

I have been wrong...once I think.

[smile]Once I thought I was wrong but I was mistaken. [wink][laugh]

I'm a psychiatrist, and as many have already stated here on the threads, I wonder what the full story may be, so I'm not here to comment on who was right in this situation. I just wanted to throw some points out there....

#1) LEO's have a tough job; and unfortunately their job gets even harder b/c they often have to lend a hand to the mental health field in emergent situations, and they do have a duty to help get someone to a hospital setting for a safety evaluation if a Section 12 if filed my and MD, or as stated before, they feel there is imminent risk of harm to self or others. (Thank you to the officers who put their lives on the line and helping me and my colleagues out in the ER).

#2) Once someone is brought to the ER; it really depends on the particular psychiatrist evaluating the patient, whether they will be involuntarily hospitalized or not on a Section 12, as this decision is SUBJECTIVE (though we try our best to make it as evidenced based as possible) and varies GREATLY from clinician to clinician. In simplified fashion: someone can be sectioned 12'd based off the following

1) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to self
2) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to others
3) Evidence that the patient is unable to protect himself or care for himself reasonably in the community.

(obviously a lot of room for different interpretation of the above)

For example:
Some of my colleagues will see a patient with paranoid schizophrenia and section 12 them immediately without blinking. Based off any of the 3 criteria above.

I personally, as an example, saw a paranoid schizophrenic in the ER earlier this week, and YES, she was paranoid as hell. But, she was not suicidal, she had no history of violence or agression per her family members that I spoke with, and she somehow...has managed to make it in the community (wandering around from relatives house to relatives house and visiting ERs randomly across the city to get food, place to sleep, etc). So in my eyes, she wasn't harming herself, others, and taking care of basic needs. She obviously would benefit from meds and treatment (but she had a 10 year hx of a million hospitalizations and never following through with meds/treatment). So in my eyes, she didn't meet section 12 criteria, she didn't want to come in, and she went along her paranoid....merry way.

As u can see....subjective decision making depending on the clinician.

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case. (This is my experience in MA so far... I don't know how other shrinks are in other states, any NH shrinks around to comment??)

(First off, before I continue, if I had a patient who was severely depressed, psychotic, manic, etc. who had a history of impulsive behaviors, had active suicidal ideation, etc. and had a firearm, YES, i would be concerned as a clinician for their immediate level of risk.)

But, the point I want to make is that 90% (from my experience, maybe more) of psychiatrists and mental health workers will FREAK OUT, when they hear that one of their patients owns a firearm, even if they are NOT suicidal. And sometimes decide to Section 12; or prevent discharge from an inpatient unit solely based off this fact.

here are some reactions I have heard from my colleagues once it is discovered that their patient/client own a handgun... they often come to ask me questions b/c even though I am a NEWB when it comes to firearms, to them I am an Expert in terms of firearms knowledge. Here are TRUE QUOTES from my colleagues when they discover a pt. owns a firearm.

#1) "he said he owns a [email protected]?!? that's like those uzi's that can kill a lot of people quick right????!?!?"

#2) "the patient said he own a .22 rifle....that's like an AK47, don't we have to call the police????!?!?!"

#3) "we were going to discharge him today because he's doing much better, but didn't he say he goes hunting? ....that means he has a gun.... we can't let him go home now, that's too dangerous, we have to call the family to get the gun out of there".

Being realistic, a psychiatric disorder and firearms are NOT a great mix. But, unfortunately, depending on WHICH PSYCHIATRIST you tell, it can overshadow all of the other facts in the case.... rather than owning a firearm being just another FACTOR in a safety risk assessment.

So yes, if a psychiatrist or mental health worker finds out, you own a firearm... beware.... it can definitely impact their viewpoint of your case.

Sorry for the long post, I am at the tail end of my 24 hour shift... and reading this forum has been the only thing keeping me entertained between seeing patients....

Thanks for all the interesting reading tonight!
Andy

Great Post
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
299
Likes
0
How can they do anything without a warrant? This is still America, right? I'm also curious how stepping outside your house invites any invasion of your rights. You are still on your property, minding your own business. They still have no warrant, and you have the right to say nothing. Shouldn't be able to cuff and detain you with no charges. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some way around it with "its for their own good" type of laws to "protect someone from themselves". I'll let you know from personal experience, if someone is going to kill themselves they WILL do it and you can't stop them. Believing otherwise is simply naive.

as an officer you can detain people for your protection and for their protection. aka so they dont hurt themselves.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
906
Likes
70
Location
southwest
I'm a psychiatrist, and as many have already stated here on the threads, I wonder what the full story may be, so I'm not here to comment on who was right in this situation. I just wanted to throw some points out there....

#1) LEO's have a tough job; and unfortunately their job gets even harder b/c they often have to lend a hand to the mental health field in emergent situations, and they do have a duty to help get someone to a hospital setting for a safety evaluation if a Section 12 if filed my and MD, or as stated before, they feel there is imminent risk of harm to self or others. (Thank you to the officers who put their lives on the line and helping me and my colleagues out in the ER).

#2) Once someone is brought to the ER; it really depends on the particular psychiatrist evaluating the patient, whether they will be involuntarily hospitalized or not on a Section 12, as this decision is SUBJECTIVE (though we try our best to make it as evidenced based as possible) and varies GREATLY from clinician to clinician. In simplified fashion: someone can be sectioned 12'd based off the following

1) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to self
2) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to others
3) Evidence that the patient is unable to protect himself or care for himself reasonably in the community.

(obviously a lot of room for different interpretation of the above)

For example:
Some of my colleagues will see a patient with paranoid schizophrenia and section 12 them immediately without blinking. Based off any of the 3 criteria above.

I personally, as an example, saw a paranoid schizophrenic in the ER earlier this week, and YES, she was paranoid as hell. But, she was not suicidal, she had no history of violence or agression per her family members that I spoke with, and she somehow...has managed to make it in the community (wandering around from relatives house to relatives house and visiting ERs randomly across the city to get food, place to sleep, etc). So in my eyes, she wasn't harming herself, others, and taking care of basic needs. She obviously would benefit from meds and treatment (but she had a 10 year hx of a million hospitalizations and never following through with meds/treatment). So in my eyes, she didn't meet section 12 criteria, she didn't want to come in, and she went along her paranoid....merry way.

As u can see....subjective decision making depending on the clinician.

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case. (This is my experience in MA so far... I don't know how other shrinks are in other states, any NH shrinks around to comment??)

(First off, before I continue, if I had a patient who was severely depressed, psychotic, manic, etc. who had a history of impulsive behaviors, had active suicidal ideation, etc. and had a firearm, YES, i would be concerned as a clinician for their immediate level of risk.)

But, the point I want to make is that 90% (from my experience, maybe more) of psychiatrists and mental health workers will FREAK OUT, when they hear that one of their patients owns a firearm, even if they are NOT suicidal. And sometimes decide to Section 12; or prevent discharge from an inpatient unit solely based off this fact.

here are some reactions I have heard from my colleagues once it is discovered that their patient/client own a handgun... they often come to ask me questions b/c even though I am a NEWB when it comes to firearms, to them I am an Expert in terms of firearms knowledge. Here are TRUE QUOTES from my colleagues when they discover a pt. owns a firearm.

#1) "he said he owns a [email protected]?!? that's like those uzi's that can kill a lot of people quick right????!?!?"

#2) "the patient said he own a .22 rifle....that's like an AK47, don't we have to call the police????!?!?!"

#3) "we were going to discharge him today because he's doing much better, but didn't he say he goes hunting? ....that means he has a gun.... we can't let him go home now, that's too dangerous, we have to call the family to get the gun out of there".

Being realistic, a psychiatric disorder and firearms are NOT a great mix. But, unfortunately, depending on WHICH PSYCHIATRIST you tell, it can overshadow all of the other facts in the case.... rather than owning a firearm being just another FACTOR in a safety risk assessment.

So yes, if a psychiatrist or mental health worker finds out, you own a firearm... beware.... it can definitely impact their viewpoint of your case.

Sorry for the long post, I am at the tail end of my 24 hour shift... and reading this forum has been the only thing keeping me entertained between seeing patients....

Thanks for all the interesting reading tonight!
Andy
Well explained, sir. Thank you for the educated perspective.
 

Kicker96FS

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
6,861
Likes
2,327
Location
North Shore, ALMOST in NH!
I have this guy I know that got divorced, nasty, he got screwed over ten times, and then again for good measure. He got depressed, enough to go see a shrink. After talking to him, the shrink asked him what he loved to do for relaxing, he replied "Hunting deer". SO the shrink told him to go and do that. He asked the shrink, "You want me go sit in the woods with a gun in my lap?"

"Yep" he replied. SO he did, and felt better. That was a Mass shrink too!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
181
Likes
5
Personally I feel for the OP. During my divorce awhile back my ex got a restraining order against me. She went to the court and told them I had "held her down and threatened her with a loaded shotgun". This didn't go over to well with the local PD. They called and told me to turn in my weapons and ammo,now. I balked and the PD said they would be at my house in five minutes. I complied as I knew they were doing their jobs and there was nothing I could do.
The story ends ten days later in court. The affadavit was read. I might as well of been holding a running chainsaw in court. Dead silence..At this point she informed the judge that none of what she said had happened. She made it up cause I love to hunt birds with my dogs and knew what would hurt me the most. She didn't tell the judge that part. Female judge made her state three times for the record that it didn't happen, then tore me a new ass thinking I had threatened her. What a joke. I kept my mouth shut and left the court. It took awhile to get back my firearms but I did.
What if she hadn't told the truth? Shouldn't she have gotten in the trouble for wasting the courts,PD's and my time?
Not sure why the OP waited so long but I hope the truth comes out eventually.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 96.8%
30   1   0
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
11,352
Likes
3,361
Location
Texas
Personally I feel for the OP. During my divorce awhile back my ex got a restraining order against me. She went to the court and told them I had "held her down and threatened her with a loaded shotgun". This didn't go over to well with the local PD. They called and told me to turn in my weapons and ammo,now. I balked and the PD said they would be at my house in five minutes. I complied as I knew they were doing their jobs and there was nothing I could do.
The story ends ten days later in court. The affadavit was read. I might as well of been hoding a running chainsaw in court. Dead silence..At this point she informed the judge that none of what she said had happened. She made it up cause I love to hunt birds with my dogs and knew what would hurt me the most. She didn't tell the judge that part. Female judge made her state three times for the record that it didn't happen, then tore me a new ass thinking I had threatened her. What a joke. I kept my mouth shut and left the court. It took awhile to get back my firearms but I did.
What if she hadn't told the truth? Shouldn't she have gotten in the trouble for wasting the courts,PD's and my time?
Not sure why the OP waited so long but I hope the truth comes out eventually.

It's MA, you're a man, you own guns and you had a female judge -ergo you're Satan incarnate. There was no way she was getting hit with abuse of process or perjury.
 
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
3,301
Likes
193
Location
SE MASS
Personally I feel for the OP. During my divorce awhile back my ex got a restraining order against me. She went to the court and told them I had "held her down and threatened her with a loaded shotgun". This didn't go over to well with the local PD. They called and told me to turn in my weapons and ammo,now. I balked and the PD said they would be at my house in five minutes. I complied as I knew they were doing their jobs and there was nothing I could do.
The story ends ten days later in court. The affadavit was read. I might as well of been hoding a running chainsaw in court. Dead silence..At this point she informed the judge that none of what she said had happened. She made it up cause I love to hunt birds with my dogs and knew what would hurt me the most. She didn't tell the judge that part. Female judge made her state three times for the record that it didn't happen, then tore me a new ass thinking I had threatened her. What a joke. I kept my mouth shut and left the court. It took awhile to get back my firearms but I did.
What if she hadn't told the truth? Shouldn't she have gotten in the trouble for wasting the courts,PD's and my time?
Not sure why the OP waited so long but I hope the truth comes out eventually.

Glad you were able to get your "rights" restored. In a perfect world you would see her prosecuted for wasting the courts time, and the taxpayer's money, however this is not a perfect world this is Massachusetts. It is your story, and hundreds like it that I've witnessed over the years that has me leaning on the sympathy for the OP side of this equation.
 

darkstorm

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
210
Likes
17
I'm a psychiatrist, and as many have already stated here on the threads, I wonder what the full story may be, so I'm not here to comment on who was right in this situation. I just wanted to throw some points out there....

#1) LEO's have a tough job; and unfortunately their job gets even harder b/c they often have to lend a hand to the mental health field in emergent situations, and they do have a duty to help get someone to a hospital setting for a safety evaluation if a Section 12 if filed my and MD, or as stated before, they feel there is imminent risk of harm to self or others. (Thank you to the officers who put their lives on the line and helping me and my colleagues out in the ER).

#2) Once someone is brought to the ER; it really depends on the particular psychiatrist evaluating the patient, whether they will be involuntarily hospitalized or not on a Section 12, as this decision is SUBJECTIVE (though we try our best to make it as evidenced based as possible) and varies GREATLY from clinician to clinician. In simplified fashion: someone can be sectioned 12'd based off the following

1) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to self
2) Evidence of Imminent risk of harm to others
3) Evidence that the patient is unable to protect himself or care for himself reasonably in the community.

(obviously a lot of room for different interpretation of the above)

For example:
Some of my colleagues will see a patient with paranoid schizophrenia and section 12 them immediately without blinking. Based off any of the 3 criteria above.

I personally, as an example, saw a paranoid schizophrenic in the ER earlier this week, and YES, she was paranoid as hell. But, she was not suicidal, she had no history of violence or agression per her family members that I spoke with, and she somehow...has managed to make it in the community (wandering around from relatives house to relatives house and visiting ERs randomly across the city to get food, place to sleep, etc). So in my eyes, she wasn't harming herself, others, and taking care of basic needs. She obviously would benefit from meds and treatment (but she had a 10 year hx of a million hospitalizations and never following through with meds/treatment). So in my eyes, she didn't meet section 12 criteria, she didn't want to come in, and she went along her paranoid....merry way.

As u can see....subjective decision making depending on the clinician.

#3) 90% of Psychiatrists FREAK OUT when they find out that a patient owns a firearm; even if suicide is not the main issue in their case. (This is my experience in MA so far... I don't know how other shrinks are in other states, any NH shrinks around to comment??)

(First off, before I continue, if I had a patient who was severely depressed, psychotic, manic, etc. who had a history of impulsive behaviors, had active suicidal ideation, etc. and had a firearm, YES, i would be concerned as a clinician for their immediate level of risk.)

But, the point I want to make is that 90% (from my experience, maybe more) of psychiatrists and mental health workers will FREAK OUT, when they hear that one of their patients owns a firearm, even if they are NOT suicidal. And sometimes decide to Section 12; or prevent discharge from an inpatient unit solely based off this fact.

here are some reactions I have heard from my colleagues once it is discovered that their patient/client own a handgun... they often come to ask me questions b/c even though I am a NEWB when it comes to firearms, to them I am an Expert in terms of firearms knowledge. Here are TRUE QUOTES from my colleagues when they discover a pt. owns a firearm.

#1) "he said he owns a [email protected]?!? that's like those uzi's that can kill a lot of people quick right????!?!?"

#2) "the patient said he own a .22 rifle....that's like an AK47, don't we have to call the police????!?!?!"

#3) "we were going to discharge him today because he's doing much better, but didn't he say he goes hunting? ....that means he has a gun.... we can't let him go home now, that's too dangerous, we have to call the family to get the gun out of there".

Being realistic, a psychiatric disorder and firearms are NOT a great mix. But, unfortunately, depending on WHICH PSYCHIATRIST you tell, it can overshadow all of the other facts in the case.... rather than owning a firearm being just another FACTOR in a safety risk assessment.

So yes, if a psychiatrist or mental health worker finds out, you own a firearm... beware.... it can definitely impact their viewpoint of your case.

Sorry for the long post, I am at the tail end of my 24 hour shift... and reading this forum has been the only thing keeping me entertained between seeing patients....

Thanks for all the interesting reading tonight!
Andy

Thank-You for a great post. I have tried to stay away from this thread as I have had some very nice and some very nasty pm's.

My question very simple. I had to speak with 3 shrinks and see one medical Doctor who was shocked I was being held. If I was such a danger to myself or others,why was I let go in only 1.5 hours? If I was such a danger,you would think I would have been held for observation correct? If my intent was to harm myself there are hundreds of ways to do that.
 
Last edited:

darkstorm

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
210
Likes
17
The laws regarding cops being able to "haul someone off" have actually been drastically in recent decades. Time was, not so long ago, when any physician could have you involuntarily committed forever with no appeals, no court date, no lawyer, no nothing.

What the cops can do at this point, is, if they perceive you as being an imminent threat to yourself or others, have you committed for three days for psychiatric evaluation. That's it, that's the limits of the police's powers.

I've actually never heard of a case where this was genuinely a pattern of abuse. I know it involves a lot of hassle to the cops who would much rather not get involved in this kind of crap. But under most state laws they have a non-waivable duty to act if they see something which would lead them to believe you are suicidal.

Personally I think suicide should be legal and a right of free citizens. But that means the law needs to change, not that the cops are at fault.

As for the OP, I think he's frankly FoS and don't belive his story. Maybe he'll prove his case in court and everyone cab laugh at me for being an over-skeptical ass. But somehow I doubt that's going to happen.


Just one question. If I'm so FOS as you put it,why was I not taken into custody?I'm sorry I ever posted here. The fact that some of you refuse to think this can not happen are in denial. The police report bears out what I'm saying! So who is FOS?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
906
Likes
70
Location
southwest
Thank-You for a great post. I have tried to stay away from this thread as I have had some very nice and some very nasty pm's.

My question very simple. I had to speak with 3 shrinks and see one medical Doctor who was shocked I was being held. If I was such a danger to myself or others,why was I let go in only 1.5 hours? If I was such a danger,you would think I would have been held for observation correct? If my intent was to harm myself there are hundreds of ways to do that.

I can't speak to the totality of your circumstances. Usually there are three versions - yours, theirs and the truth. :)

That said, as a rule cops aren't expected to be experts in this kind of field. They make a best guess as to what's a safety issue, but they're laymen. A professional in the field has the final say-so, but the LEOs on the scene have to make a call, using imperfect experience and training. It's the same if they come across a medical issue - they're not doctors, but they do the best they can until the EMTs get there. They may do the wrong thing sometimes, but LEOs can't carry a EMT or doctor around with them.

Just a standard answer to a standard situation. I cannot comment on your situation as I don't know all the particulars.

Sorry you got nasty PMs tho. Whether someone believes you or not doesn't mean you warrant taking crap.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
12,017
Likes
1,378
Location
Western Mass
Can you quote a single instance of where anyone said that? I'm curious.

I can't. But I think it's been implied here on this board, in places, that "this won't happen to me".

I hear that a lot. It's not so much a statement as an attitude. You know, "this shit happens to ... those kooks".

That is all.
 
Top Bottom