Proposed redefined ATF mental health regulatrions

[copterdoctor]

http://www.ammoland.com/2014/03/atf...ules-to-infringe-on-gun-rights/#axzz2x9PmlK4i

 

[soloman02]

Here is the proposed rule change:

https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/ag_order0001.pdf

It appears as though it redefines "involuntarily committed to a mental institution" to include inpatient and outpatient facilities.

 

[Lcstyle]

this is really dangerous.

This is the slipperiest of slopes to disarmament.

This might include veterans with a history of PTSD, citizens who have suffered from ergot or other food poisoning, citizens suffering temporary depression following death of a family member or other tragedy that every person experiences from time-to-time.
ATF will claim that they have no intention of applying expanded definitions to cases such as these. Intentions don’t matter. Definitions do. Expansive definitions that are threats to fundamental liberty WILL be used by malicious regulators as soon as the political climate allows.

 

[pdm]

Ahhh, penalties for "mental health problems". Still following the ol' Soviet playbook, I see.

 

[Boghog1]

I have been saying we don't want to go down the mental health road for some time now.

 

[exo]

Ahhh, penalties for "mental health problems". Still following the ol' Soviet playbook, I see.

Comrade, only a crazy person wouldn't trust the state.

 

[center442]

Ahhh, penalties for "mental health problems". Still following the ol' Soviet playbook, I see.

Precisely, it is at least one page from the playbook. Government is wonderful, and exists for our betterment. "Comrade, if you oppose the government you must be mentally deranged." I cannot see any good coming from this proposed rule change.

At what point does paranoia become reality?

 

[seanc]

The Police unions should be out there fight this tooth and nail.

 

[Reptile]

Here is the proposed rule change:

https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/ag_order0001.pdf

It appears as though it redefines "involuntarily committed to a mental institution" to include inpatient and outpatient facilities.

Not exactly.

If you were COMMITTED to or COURT ORDERED to inpatient or outpatient facilities.

Anything VOLUNTARY does not count- wether inpatient or outpatient.

 

[soloman02]

Not exactly.

If you were COMMITTED to or COURT ORDERED to inpatient or outpatient facilities.

Anything VOLUNTARY does not count- wether inpatient or outpatient.

That's what I said.... Maybe you read it too fast? It could be worded a little more verbose I suppose.

Here is the proposed rule change:

https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/ag_order0001.pdf

It appears as though it redefines "involuntarily committed to a mental institution" to include inpatient and outpatient facilities.

 

[exo]

A friend who works in mental health tells me that it doesn't take much to have someone involuntarily committed for up to 72 (?) hours.

 

[soloman02]

A friend who works in mental health tells me that it doesn't take much to have someone involuntarily committed for up to 72 (?) hours.

IIRC there was even a horror story here in NH at Huggins Hospital in Wolfeboro.

 

[Reptile]

That's what I said.... Maybe you read it too fast? It could be worded a little more verbose I suppose.

Sorry, I was thinking that "mental institution" and "outpatient facility" were two different things.

 

[Dench]

Ahhh, penalties for "mental health problems". Still following the ol' Soviet playbook, I see.

only authorized states of mind are allowed to have 2A.

 

[browncoat]

This is one of the things that bugs me. I see guys saying "Don't infringe on our 2A rights, we need more mental health treatment to deal with crazy shooters (like Newtown and etc)". Why should anyone have their rights infringed on before they have done anything wrong? The whole thing is a shell game to keep us off balance while they chip ever more away at our rights. We used to be able to just mail guns in this country. Do you think we'll ever get that back? The NFA, GCA, all they need to do is take things away slowly enough that we grumble but don't do anything about it.

 

[Quiet]

Not exactly.

If you were COMMITTED to or COURT ORDERED to inpatient or outpatient facilities.

Anything VOLUNTARY does not count- wether inpatient or outpatient.

But, you see, judge will happily commit people to outpatient facilities as opposed to inpatient facilities as

1) inpatient facilities are essentially akin to incarceration and the law is (rightfully) abhorrent to depriving people of their liberty, and
2) there aren't enough beds to commit significant numbers of patients to inpatient facilities.

Any question about any defendant? Commit them for long term psych monitoring or face angry voters if they do something crazy

- - - Updated - - -

A friend who works in mental health tells me that it doesn't take much to have someone involuntarily committed for up to 72 (?) hours.

Those are supposed to be psych evaluations, not commitments. LOL

 

[exo]

Those are supposed to be psych evaluations, not commitments. LOL

Regardless of what you want to call it, I imagine all it would take is an improperly checked box, or a form coded wrong when it was digitized, etc. to make your life very difficult the next time you want to buy a gun.

 

[CockedAndLocked]

....

Anything VOLUNTARY does not count- wether inpatient or outpatient.

This week. Next week's rules will be decided next week.




Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk 2

 

[soloman02]

But, you see, judge will happily commit people to outpatient facilities as opposed to inpatient facilities as

1) inpatient facilities are essentially akin to incarceration and the law is (rightfully) abhorrent to depriving people of their liberty, and
2) there aren't enough beds to commit significant numbers of patients to inpatient facilities.

Any question about any defendant? Commit them for long term psych monitoring or face angry voters if they do something crazy

- - - Updated - - -



Those are supposed to be psych evaluations, not commitments. LOL

Regardless of what you want to call it, I imagine all it would take is an improperly checked box, or a form coded wrong when it was digitized, etc. to make your life very difficult the next time you want to buy a gun.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around NH's MH laws but my quick skimming of this doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling:

135-C:28 Involuntary Emergency Admission Examination. –
I. The involuntary emergency admission of a person shall be to the state mental health services system under the supervision of the commissioner. The admission may be ordered upon the certificate of a physician or APRN, as defined in RSA 135-C:2, II-a, who is approved by either a designated receiving facility or a community mental health program approved by the commissioner, provided that within 3 days of the completion of the petition the physician or APRN has conducted, or has caused to be conducted, a physical examination if indicated and circumstances permit, and a mental examination. The physician or APRN must find that the person to be admitted meets the criteria of RSA 135-C:27. The certificate shall state the time and, in detail, the nature of the examinations conducted. The certificate shall also state a specific act or actions the physician or APRN has actually observed or which have been reported to him or her by the petitioner or a reliable witness who shall be identified in the certificate, and which in the physician's or APRN's opinion satisfy the criteria set forth in RSA 135-C:27. The physician or APRN shall identify in the certificate the facility in the state mental health services system to which the person shall be admitted. The admission shall be made to the facility which can best provide the degree of security and treatment required by the person and shall be consistent with the placement principles set forth in RSA 135-C:15. As used in RSA 135-C:27-33, "petitioner'' means any individual, including a physician or APRN completing a certificate, who has requested that a physician or APRN conduct or who has conducted an examination for purposes of involuntary emergency admission. Every certificate shall be accompanied by a written petition signed by a petitioner.

II. Upon request for involuntary emergency admission by a petitioner, if the person sought to be admitted refuses to consent to a mental examination, a petitioner or a law enforcement officer may sign a complaint which shall be sworn to before a justice of the peace. The complaint shall be submitted to the justice of the peace with the petition. The petition shall state in detail the acts or actions of the person sought to be admitted which the petitioner has personally observed or which have been personally reported to the petitioner and in his or her opinion require a compulsory mental examination. If the justice of the peace finds that a compulsory mental examination is necessary, the justice may order the examination.

III. When a peace officer observes a person engaging in behavior which gives the peace officer reasonable suspicion to believe that the person may be suffering from a mental illness and probable cause to believe that unless the person is placed in protective custody the person poses an immediate danger of bodily injury to himself or others, the police officer may place the person in protective custody. Any person taken into protective custody under this paragraph shall be transported directly to an emergency room of a licensed general hospital or to another site designated by the community mental health program serving the area, for the purpose of determining if an involuntary emergency admission shall be ordered in accordance with RSA 135-C:28, I. The period of protective custody shall end when a physician or APRN makes a determination as to whether involuntary emergency admission shall be ordered or at the end of 6 hours, whichever event occurs first.

Sections of the RSA that might be used against someone:

Section 135-C:27 Involuntary Emergency Admission; Criteria.
Section 135-C:28 Involuntary Emergency Admission Examination.
Section 135-C:29 Delivery to Receiving Facility.
Section 135-C:30 Notice.
Section 135-C:31 Involuntary Emergency Admission Hearing; Rules.
Section 135-C:31-a Annulment of Certain Records.
Section 135-C:32 Ten-Day Limitation; Petition for Involuntary Admission.
Section 135-C:33 Discharge.
Section 135-C:34 Involuntary Treatment Standard.
Section 135-C:35 Petition of Responsible Person.
Section 135-C:36 Petition.
Section 135-C:37 Hearing Date.
Section 135-C:38 Copies of Petition.
Section 135-C:39 Custody Prior to Hearing.
Section 135-C:40 Examination by Psychiatrist.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-X-135-C.htm

Also each state is going to have varying degrees of MH laws with some being horrible and some being bad.

 

[hunt4riches]

A friend who works in mental health tells me that it doesn't take much to have someone involuntarily committed for up to 72 (?) hours.

Saw it happen at work during the 2008 layoffs. Guy started screaming at his boss, threw a chair at the wall. Police called. Company agreed to no charges if he went to the funny house for 24-hr observation. If he refused, they would arrest him and cart him off in the paddy wagon.

 

[exo]

Saw it happen at work during the 2008 layoffs. Guy started screaming at his boss, threw a chair at the wall. Police called. Company agreed to no charges if he went to the funny house for 24-hr observation. If he refused, they would arrest him and cart him off in the paddy wagon.

Would that count as voluntary (though clearly coerced)?

 

[hunt4riches]

THIS: "When a peace officer observes a person engaging in behavior which gives the peace officer reasonable suspicion to believe that the person may be suffering from a mental illness and probable cause to believe that unless the person is placed in protective custody the person poses an immediate danger of bodily injury to himself or others". Basically, if YOU are having a bad day, or THEY are having a bad day - say good by to anything that shoots bullets. I translate "reasonable suspicion to believe" as an avenue for CYA, retaliation or other abuses.....

- - - Updated - - -

Would that count as voluntary (though clearly coerced)?

It was voluntary. I forgot to finish my thought, where had the company not offered him to make the choice, he'd have been F'ed....

 

[Quiet]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around NH's MH laws but my quick skimming of this doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling:



Sections of the RSA that might be used against someone:

Section 135-C:27 Involuntary Emergency Admission; Criteria.
Section 135-C:28 Involuntary Emergency Admission Examination.
Section 135-C:29 Delivery to Receiving Facility.
Section 135-C:30 Notice.
Section 135-C:31 Involuntary Emergency Admission Hearing; Rules.
Section 135-C:31-a Annulment of Certain Records.
Section 135-C:32 Ten-Day Limitation; Petition for Involuntary Admission.
Section 135-C:33 Discharge.
Section 135-C:34 Involuntary Treatment Standard.
Section 135-C:35 Petition of Responsible Person.
Section 135-C:36 Petition.
Section 135-C:37 Hearing Date.
Section 135-C:38 Copies of Petition.
Section 135-C:39 Custody Prior to Hearing.
Section 135-C:40 Examination by Psychiatrist.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-X-135-C.htm

Also each state is going to have varying degrees of MH laws with some being horrible and some being bad.

You'd have to be crazy to try and understand that.

 

[jron]

My anxiety makes me anxious, not a murderer.

they should implement mental testing before people vote or reproduce if you really want to save the world.

 

[Glockster30]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around NH's MH laws but my quick skimming of this doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling:


Also each state is going to have varying degrees of MH laws with some being horrible and some being bad.

Wow, #2 and/or #3 is scary if it allows an untrained police officer to petition that someone requires mental treatment. Who petitions a police officer if they see him/her doing something that provides a reasonable suspicion to believe that the LEO may be suffering from a mental disorder?

"II. Upon request for involuntary emergency admission by a petitioner, if the person sought to be admitted refuses to consent to a mental examination, a petitioner or a law enforcement officer may sign a complaint which shall be sworn to before a justice of the peace. The complaint shall be submitted to the justice of the peace with the petition. The petition shall state in detail the acts or actions of the person sought to be admitted which the petitioner has personally observed or which have been personally reported to the petitioner and in his or her opinion require a compulsory mental examination. If the justice of the peace finds that a compulsory mental examination is necessary, the justice may order the examination.

III. When a peace officer observes a person engaging in behavior which gives the peace officer reasonable suspicion to believe that the person may be suffering from a mental illness and probable cause to believe that unless the person is placed in protective custody the person poses an immediate danger of bodily injury to himself or others, the police officer may place the person in protective custody. Any person taken into protective custody under this paragraph shall be transported directly to an emergency room of a licensed general hospital or to another site designated by the community mental health program serving the area, for the purpose of determining if an involuntary emergency admission shall be ordered in accordance with RSA 135-C:28, I. The period of protective custody shall end when a physician or APRN makes a determination as to whether involuntary emergency admission shall be ordered or at the end of 6 hours, whichever event occurs first."

 

[soloman02]

You'd have to be crazy to try and understand that.

 

[LittleCalm]

Didn't NH senate just pass a bill allowing mental health records to be annulled? (And therefore no longer in the NICS system)

 

[soloman02]

Didn't NH senate just pass a bill allowing mental health records to be annulled? (And therefore no longer in the NICS system)

NH doesn't report records to NICS anyway. But yes they did.

Not that it matters since the bill will not leave the house in that form. It will be ****ed with.