ManagingPrime 0 #1 August 21, 2012 Considering the type material and opinions expressed in this section of DZ.COM I'm curious what others think of this bit of news. http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/08/21/military-vet-detained-for-psych-evaluation-over-anti-government-facebook-posts/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #2 August 21, 2012 I think it was a good call. I almost posted on this earlier today, then I read his facebook wall. You can read it here... https://www.facebook.com/brandon.raub?sk=wall This guy really needs help. Good on the authorities for acting before this guy went on a rampage. I hope he gets the help he so clearly needs. P.S Keep clicking on 'Older Posts' he gets more and more detached from reality.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #3 August 21, 2012 I read the posts....the situation still has an odor to it. I've seen where some people think that he knew his account was being monitored and provoked the response we see. or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #4 August 21, 2012 Quote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. True, but I find it hard to believe that he could be sectioned based purely on his online account. How do we know that someone didn't have concerns and contacted mental health workers or the FBI (if he was making crazy comments and threatening to 'sever heads with his axe'.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #5 August 21, 2012 QuoteQuote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. True, but I find it hard to believe that he could be sectioned based purely on his online account. How do we know that someone didn't have concerns and contacted mental health workers or the FBI (if he was making crazy comments and threatening to 'sever heads with his axe'. I'm sure at some point all the information will come out, but one would think that with the story going viral the "authorities" (I use the quotes, because I'm unsure who they would be in this case, local police, state police, FBI, Secret Service) would make a stronger case to the public. So far the case is, this guy COULD be one of those crazy movie theater shooter types...better safe than sorry. Note. He has not been charged with a crime. He made no direct threats to himself or others. The "sharpen axe" comment that seems to be the center of the stir is actually a lyric from a rap group, one that he was a fan of as evidenced by other FB posts. I don't agree or disagree with the guy on all points, but I find this case very interesting. Where is the line? Was there due process? Do I only need to offend one of my facebook friends with my posts and one "intervention" worker to be classified as a potential threat and locked up in a psych ward? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,380 #6 August 21, 2012 > In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis >intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based >solely off of our online positings? If those postings threaten mass murder, then yes - you might get a visit from police, and if they think you're mentally ill they might take you to the hospital. And at that point if a psychiatrist thinks you are a danger to yourself or others you might be "locked up for evaluation." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jinlee 0 #7 August 21, 2012 Quote I read the posts....the situation still has an odor to it. I've seen where some people think that he knew his account was being monitored and provoked the response we see. or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. Or he was a violent drunk posting online rants. I'm anti- a lot of things. I knew of one guy in an online forum being taken away by the FBI for his videos and his threat against politicians during the Obama race. Committed an act of some kind against a ..congressman? don't recall. In his videos the guy was clearly deranged. Had a God complex. Same online forum knew of a guy who made a video he shot himself through the shoulder with a 9mm semi-automatic pistol. He disappeared afterwards. If the guy 'is" crazy, good. However the Facebook page does so effectively what it does. it's almost designed to discredit the person. Maybe he is crazy I don't have enough facts. I'll have to check out what they have to say. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #8 August 21, 2012 Quote> In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis >intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based >solely off of our online positings? If those postings threaten mass murder, then yes - you might get a visit from police, and if they think you're mentally ill they might take you to the hospital. And at that point if a psychiatrist thinks you are a danger to yourself or others you might be "locked up for evaluation." Agreed. I would hope that if someone (myself included) is threatening mass murder online the authorities would get involved. However, the scenario you listed does not jive with the facts of this particular case. The guy never made a threat of mass murder. No crime was commited. Some "intervention workers" decided that he may be a threat and the police (along with the FBI) showed up to escort him to the hospital for evaluation. If you read the FB posts it's almost as if the guy knew it would play out this way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #9 August 22, 2012 Quote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. I work in a community mental health center here in VA. It was probably a peer in a different center in that area who is the "mental health crisis intervention worker" who assessed the person. Here's how the process works--there is an interview and an assessment. Based on that the evaluation work can petition the magistrate for a Temporary detention order. At that point the person can be detained for, I believe, 48 hours, until a more complete hearing before a judge is held. Here is the relevant statute in VA: http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?000+cod+37.2-809 After the Cho shooting the state of Virginia made it easier to have a temporary detaining order issued."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jinlee 0 #10 August 22, 2012 Quote> In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis >intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based >solely off of our online positings? If those postings threaten mass murder, then yes - you might get a visit from police, and if they think you're mentally ill they might take you to the hospital. And at that point if a psychiatrist thinks you are a danger to yourself or others you might be "locked up for evaluation." What I don't like about it are they QuoteCol. Thierry Dupuis, the county police chief, said Raub was taken into custody upon the recommendation of mental health crisis intervention workers. He said the action was taken in accordance with the state’s emergency custody statute, which allows a magistrate to order the civil detention and psychiatric evaluation of a person deemed to be potentially dangerous. His mother says it's political speech and agrees with certain issues he's raised. Once your in the "state" system your rights are violated. The "mental health crisis intervention workers" these are also "state" workers? I can agree somewhat that the current conditions of this country are far removed from what it was supposed to be like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jinlee 0 #11 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. After the Cho shooting the state of Virginia made it easier to have a temporary detaining order issued. Everything has been made easier, saw a video of a guy arrested for using his iPhone in front of a police station on charges it was terror related. He might have been video taping it and was an "ass" to cops, that was his biggest crime. He's in the state system now too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #12 August 22, 2012 Quote Quote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. I work in a community mental health center here in VA. It was probably a peer in a different center in that area who is the "mental health crisis intervention worker" who assessed the person. Here's how the process works--there is an interview and an assessment. Based on that the evaluation work can petition the magistrate for a Temporary detention order. At that point the person can be detained for, I believe, 48 hours, until a more complete hearing before a judge is held. Here is the relevant statute in VA: http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?000+cod+37.2-809 After the Cho shooting the state of Virginia made it easier to have a temporary detaining order issued. Nice to put a "face" on those intervention workers. In the news reports I read, there was no mention of an assessment prior to being detained.Otherwise, it seems established procedures are being followed. Is it possible for a person to be assessed in absentia? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,380 #13 August 22, 2012 > The guy never made a threat of mass murder. “Sharpen my axe; I’m here to sever heads.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #14 August 22, 2012 I've only seen the article on the first post on this situation. I am hesitant to believe that offers anything like the comprehensive detail needed to understand exactly what went on. I've never known the police to go out on their own initiative and take somebody into custody. They do bring people in to be assessed on a somewhat frequent basis (at least weekly) but those are usually happen subsequent to whatever goes on after a parent/neighbor/etc. calls them or something else starts a contact. An emergency custody order can be issued by a magistrate on the basis of testimony only. That is an order which allows the police to pick somebody up for the purpose of assessment."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jinlee 0 #15 August 22, 2012 Quote> The guy never made a threat of mass murder. “Sharpen my axe; I’m here to sever heads.” Song lyrics Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,380 #16 August 22, 2012 >Song lyrics So is "I'm gonna kill you; I'm gonna blow you away." But both might get you a visit from the police. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #17 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuote> The guy never made a threat of mass murder. “Sharpen my axe; I’m here to sever heads.” Song lyrics Most people do not listen to inmature bands and their silly lyrics._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #18 August 22, 2012 Quote>Song lyrics So is "I'm gonna kill you; I'm gonna blow you away." But both might get you a visit from the police. It might. And the police investigating could be a very reasonable reaction. I appears (from news reports) that the police did not come for an investigation. He's not sitting in a jail cell and I'm sure that if the FBI or the Police had evidence of a crime committed or evidence of intent to commit a crime he would in a jail cell not a psych ward. Should we limit our ability to free speech because it could be construed as a threat? Should this just be limited to our online communications on sites like this and facebook or should it extend to painters, musicians, writers and movie producers? Where is the line? There is a very good reason we have a 1st amendment right. There have been numerous cases where speech that can seem threatening in some contexts and considered offensive by many is protected by out supreme court. This is how our system was designed. View this as a supreme court case. Read his FB posts. Do you think the supreme court would rule that some of the speech is not protected? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #19 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote> The guy never made a threat of mass murder. “Sharpen my axe; I’m here to sever heads.” Song lyrics Most people do not listen to inmature bands and their silly lyrics. Our constitution protects bad taste. Most people would not run around saying they were a decorated war veteran. Most people would find those type individuals disgusting and would support a law (passed in 2006) that made it a crime..... ....The supreme court upheld these peoples right to free speech. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/06/scotus-stolen-valor-ruling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #20 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote> The guy never made a threat of mass murder. “Sharpen my axe; I’m here to sever heads.” Song lyrics Most people do not listen to inmature bands and their silly lyrics. Our constitution protects bad taste. Most people would not run around saying they were a decorated war veteran. Most people would find those type individuals disgusting and would support a law (passed in 2006) that made it a crime..... ....The supreme court upheld these peoples right to free speech. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/06/scotus-stolen-valor-ruling My reply was to point out that people may not recognize what was being said as a quote from somewhere else. A lot of music of bad taste have quotes that naked of bibliography, sounds very threatening._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,380 #21 August 22, 2012 >Should we limit our ability to free speech because it could be construed as a threat? Yes. You can't tell a cop "I have a gun and I'm going to kill you." You can't tell a pilot "I have a bomb." You can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater. And you can't threaten mass murder publicly. (Well, to be more accurate you can certainly say all those things - but if you are 'just kidding' expect to be detained while the police determine that you really are.) >Do you think the supreme court would rule that some of the speech is not protected? I think they would rule that 99.99% of his speech was protected. Threatening mass murder isn't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jinlee 0 #22 August 22, 2012 I can picture him sitting in his lonely dank apartment as he, "stares at the world, planning his vengeance that he will soon unfurl" -Black Sabbath 1970 meanwhile in other news Batman killer sought the help of many medical professionals prior to rampage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #23 August 22, 2012 QuoteQuote or....he could have been having a mental breakdown. In that case I'm still a little confused about who these "mental health crisis intervention workers" that can decide if we need to be locked up for evaluation based solely off of our online positings? That has a chilling effect. I work in a community mental health center here in VA. It was probably a peer in a different center in that area who is the "mental health crisis intervention worker" who assessed the person. Here's how the process works--there is an interview and an assessment. Based on that the evaluation work can petition the magistrate for a Temporary detention order. At that point the person can be detained for, I believe, 48 hours, until a more complete hearing before a judge is held. Here is the relevant statute in VA: http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?000+cod+37.2-809 After the Cho shooting the state of Virginia made it easier to have a temporary detaining order issued. I am a retired mental health/crisis intervention/substance use disorder counselor in FL and therefore a mandated reporter. I see nothing in his Facebook page that would require police action. There must be more to the story. I have had clients threaten much worse in my office or in group and for me that meant an opportunity for therapeutic dialogue. OTOH, I am very, very careful what I post or state on the Internet.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #24 August 22, 2012 I agree that there must be more to this story, I strongly suspect that someone concerned for either his and the safety of other contacted the relevant authorities following behaviour issues, I can't believe that the FB page alone would have been enough. No matter how deluded.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfzombie 3 #25 August 22, 2012 just because you can't believe it doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. it is a tough line when you try to prevent harm coming to individuals from a person with a mental instability, or any other reason to kill a bunch of innocent people. i'm not sure where i stand on this, i have always been a proponent of freedom and personal liberty, but i also have a 9 year old son who i love more dearly than life itself. tough call indeed on this one and many others. sometimes it is better to err on the side of caution and say, "at least nobody got killed", and let the courts decide what was appropriate later.http://kitswv.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
