marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
SGT Jensen wrote:
Right on.
SGT Jensen wrote:
+100
Right on.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Should this guy be allowed to OC?
- Thread starter derf
- Start date
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
derf wrote:
What does the white-robed man in the news report have to do with OC?
No offense, but this seems to be a thinly-veiled attempt at discrediting OCers.
Why OC? Why not "own a gun?" Why not, "carry a gun?" Why not, "be issued a CC permit?"
Any number ofpossibilities present themselves. To tell the truth, I think it more appropriate to ask,
"Should government have the power to step into this situation and take action against the man?"
"How might government abuse that power across time?"
"Is it worth the price in danger toliberty to give government the power to forcibly psycho-evaluate and possibly commit someone like this?"
But none of those are really on-topic for this forum.
derf wrote:
Derf,
What does the white-robed man in the news report have to do with OC?
No offense, but this seems to be a thinly-veiled attempt at discrediting OCers.
Why OC? Why not "own a gun?" Why not, "carry a gun?" Why not, "be issued a CC permit?"
Any number ofpossibilities present themselves. To tell the truth, I think it more appropriate to ask,
"Should government have the power to step into this situation and take action against the man?"
"How might government abuse that power across time?"
"Is it worth the price in danger toliberty to give government the power to forcibly psycho-evaluate and possibly commit someone like this?"
But none of those are really on-topic for this forum.
imported post
My opnion, and the general consensus so far is "yes". He should be allowed to OC if he has not broken any laws. It is kinda like the 1A thing, free speech. You can say what you want, within reason, but then you may hear something you don't like when someone else exercises their rights.
For the most part we can agree the guy has not yet done anything wrong so his OC rights are still his.
Next, if (yes, speculation here) he was to start OCing and walking around the neighborhood, in your opinion would the cops have RAS to stop him and question him?
What you say is true, except for the "thinly-veiled attempt at discrediting OCers." part. This thread does have an OC angle as it relates to the perceived threat of the guy who is obsessed with the girl. See below.
My opnion, and the general consensus so far is "yes". He should be allowed to OC if he has not broken any laws. It is kinda like the 1A thing, free speech. You can say what you want, within reason, but then you may hear something you don't like when someone else exercises their rights.
For the most part we can agree the guy has not yet done anything wrong so his OC rights are still his.
Next, if (yes, speculation here) he was to start OCing and walking around the neighborhood, in your opinion would the cops have RAS to stop him and question him?
XD-GEM
Campaign Veteran
imported post
derf wrote:
derf,
The part in red is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of law. I posted the appropriate legal rulings for you in another thread, but perhaps you missed them. In Louisiana, it is settled law that simply OCing (even if looking like a looney) is not in and of itself RAS for a stop. Admittedly this guy is an extreme example, but until and unless he commits a crime or is ruled mentally unstable enough to be harmful to himslef or others, there's really nothing that can be done.
I am not a psychiatrist nor a psychologist, but I do remember reading somewhere about a mental illness which causes its victims to write all sorts of stuff on the walls. So THAT might actually be cause for someone from one of those professions to take a look at the guy. But until he actually does something which the courts can use, they cannot order a psych evaluation.
I suppose someone could falsely report that he did something. Then the local sheriff, acting in good faith on the false report, might come take him by force for an evaluation. I would not be surprised, however, if anyone so falsely accused refused to cooperate with the doctors and insisted upon seeing a lawyer and filing for habeus corpus. This would , of course, result in the mental professionals stating that the subject was hostile and uncooperative and would lengthen his stay. It does not necessarily follow that he would be judged mentally incompetent.
derf wrote:
derf,
The part in red is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of law. I posted the appropriate legal rulings for you in another thread, but perhaps you missed them. In Louisiana, it is settled law that simply OCing (even if looking like a looney) is not in and of itself RAS for a stop. Admittedly this guy is an extreme example, but until and unless he commits a crime or is ruled mentally unstable enough to be harmful to himslef or others, there's really nothing that can be done.
I am not a psychiatrist nor a psychologist, but I do remember reading somewhere about a mental illness which causes its victims to write all sorts of stuff on the walls. So THAT might actually be cause for someone from one of those professions to take a look at the guy. But until he actually does something which the courts can use, they cannot order a psych evaluation.
I suppose someone could falsely report that he did something. Then the local sheriff, acting in good faith on the false report, might come take him by force for an evaluation. I would not be surprised, however, if anyone so falsely accused refused to cooperate with the doctors and insisted upon seeing a lawyer and filing for habeus corpus. This would , of course, result in the mental professionals stating that the subject was hostile and uncooperative and would lengthen his stay. It does not necessarily follow that he would be judged mentally incompetent.
charlie12
Regular Member
imported post
CaptainDan wrote:
Geat answer.
The LEO walking around the house on the video is a friend of mine, I'll have to ask him about the guy.
Wonder how he got that house, looks like a nice house or was.
CaptainDan wrote:
Geat answer.
The LEO walking around the house on the video is a friend of mine, I'll have to ask him about the guy.
Wonder how he got that house, looks like a nice house or was.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
derf wrote:
Why are trying to connect someone of questionable stability to OC? You are making the connection? I don't recall seeing one in the video.
derf wrote:
What exactly does this guy have to do with OC?
Why are trying to connect someone of questionable stability to OC? You are making the connection? I don't recall seeing one in the video.
CaptainDan
Regular Member
imported post
EXCELLENT QUESTION, how did he get the house?
My guess, well lets see, he is crazy, I'd bet my shoes unemployed, a minority, more than likely recieves some sort of disability check, food stamps.......I got it!!!
Some sort of section 8 or other minority based free housing gov. program the people like us pay for.
One more thing, isn't there some law or another that takes the mentaly unstable out of general population for evaluation if for no other reason than their own safety? Some form of Baker Act or another? If this nut job was seen carrying a gun, preaching to an imaginary congregation , wouldn't that constitute some sort of investigation? A "reasonable suspicion" of some sort? Lets be honest fellas, you want this guy carring a gun, living next door to your 16 year old daughter? Whether allowed or not?
CRAP, and I said I wasn't gonna touch this one!
EXCELLENT QUESTION, how did he get the house?
My guess, well lets see, he is crazy, I'd bet my shoes unemployed, a minority, more than likely recieves some sort of disability check, food stamps.......I got it!!!
Some sort of section 8 or other minority based free housing gov. program the people like us pay for.
One more thing, isn't there some law or another that takes the mentaly unstable out of general population for evaluation if for no other reason than their own safety? Some form of Baker Act or another? If this nut job was seen carrying a gun, preaching to an imaginary congregation , wouldn't that constitute some sort of investigation? A "reasonable suspicion" of some sort? Lets be honest fellas, you want this guy carring a gun, living next door to your 16 year old daughter? Whether allowed or not?
CRAP, and I said I wasn't gonna touch this one!
charlie12
Regular Member
imported post
CaptainDan wrote:
CaptainDan wrote:
I would bet that before long he will be at Greenwell Springs Hospital getting looked at.
CaptainDan
Regular Member
imported post
Oh yea, I'm sure you're right. That much publicity , yea.
Lets hope (allowed or not) this guy doesn't OC before he is "checked out" I can see it now, local man shoots deputy while being escorted to hospital for evaluation...
SHEEESE !
Oh yea, I'm sure you're right. That much publicity , yea.
Lets hope (allowed or not) this guy doesn't OC before he is "checked out" I can see it now, local man shoots deputy while being escorted to hospital for evaluation...
SHEEESE !
charlie12
Regular Member
imported post
I don' know how he would OC wearing all those sheets.
I don' know how he would OC wearing all those sheets.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Fellas,
This thread isn't about OC. There is no connection between the white-robed man in the video and OC beyond the connection the OPer has contrived.
That the OP contrived this connection has me wondering about his motive. Lets not validate his contrivance by discussing it as though there was some merit to it.
Fellas,
This thread isn't about OC. There is no connection between the white-robed man in the video and OC beyond the connection the OPer has contrived.
That the OP contrived this connection has me wondering about his motive. Lets not validate his contrivance by discussing it as though there was some merit to it.
CaptainDan
Regular Member
imported post
charlie12 wrote:
charlie12 wrote:
Yea no kiddin, no belt, thank goodnessI don' know how he would OC wearing all those sheets.
jnmtwo
Founder's Club Member
imported post
It is well knownthere is a non-disclosure agreement concerningthe house. Plus the discount on his laundry: if he wears purple fatigues on 1st street, at dawn , 124 consecutive Mondays, while blowing bubbles on a motorized recliner.
There is no requirement to OC ,or reasons to believe he may OC, but bonuses paid ifhe could or would OC, might OC, done time, moved, I moved, 2A is exempted, the road narrows 1/4 mile down the road, cloudy today or ...!
No OC thread here.At all. No yellow smiley's here.At all.
Sorry, this is not us. At all. My Opinion.
It is well knownthere is a non-disclosure agreement concerningthe house. Plus the discount on his laundry: if he wears purple fatigues on 1st street, at dawn , 124 consecutive Mondays, while blowing bubbles on a motorized recliner.
There is no requirement to OC ,or reasons to believe he may OC, but bonuses paid ifhe could or would OC, might OC, done time, moved, I moved, 2A is exempted, the road narrows 1/4 mile down the road, cloudy today or ...!
No OC thread here.At all. No yellow smiley's here.At all.
Sorry, this is not us. At all. My Opinion.
CaptainDan
Regular Member
imported post
Yea, you guys are right, we might as well be talking about the weather. I was just blown away by how crazy some people are but yea, back to more relavent issues.
Yea, you guys are right, we might as well be talking about the weather. I was just blown away by how crazy some people are but yea, back to more relavent issues.
imported post
OK, so, legally the complaints filed by the girl's family would not have any effect on RAS to justify a stop, if he was OCing?
There can be RAS if a crime has not been committed, right?
At what point does the AS become R?
I know this guy is an extreme example.
And the weather here is extremely hot, BTW.
OK, so, legally the complaints filed by the girl's family would not have any effect on RAS to justify a stop, if he was OCing?
There can be RAS if a crime has not been committed, right?
At what point does the AS become R?
I know this guy is an extreme example.
And the weather here is extremely hot, BTW.
DKSuddeth
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
derf wrote:
derf wrote:
Then there is absolutely no legal or constitutional reason to deny this citizen his rights to bear arms. If the police truly feel that he is mentally unstable, then I believe they have the authority to mandate a psych eval, do they not? But if they do this and a doc clears him, those LEOS and agency should be made to pay a price.
Dustin
Regular Member
imported post
DKSuddeth wrote:
Plus if it were left up to who the government "thinks" should have guns, only the Government would have them. Were already on that road as of now, no need to give them any more help.
DKSuddeth wrote:
Plus if it were left up to who the government "thinks" should have guns, only the Government would have them. Were already on that road as of now, no need to give them any more help.