Posted on 05/22/2014 6:12:21 PM PDT by blueyon
Court Says Police Allowed To Kidnap Gun Owners With No Warrant Sutterfield pleaded with them, insisting she was in no danger...
The ongoing saga revolving around pro-gun activist Krysta Sutterfield could be seen as a troubling portent for all Second Amendment supporters. The Milwaukee, Wis. resident made some local news prior to this incident for toting a handgun to church and carrying outside a nearby coffee shop.
Like millions of Americans, she went to see a psychiatrist a few years back in an effort to sort out some personal issues. When she mentioned something about suicide during one session, the doctor went straight to the authorities.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
I agree for the most part. Psychiatrist's really have no commitment to confidentiality in the way that a good priest/pastor in the Christian tradition will have. Psych's have the dodge about "injuring someone else or yourself." And that can be stretched to cover just about anything.
How do you tell a good priest/pastor? They are the ones who won't even acknowledge that they talked with you. It never gets to the stage of "what did he talk about?"
Point 2, don't confide in a note taker. Period. If he has to write down what you're saying, then he has files.
How about Jesus loving.
If anyone was born a redneck He was.
“Probable cause is for serving a warrant...”
Exactly right. The police make their case for probable cause and if the judge concurs, a warrant is issued. Cops deciding on their own that they have probable cause won’t wash.
The governing class is looking for any way it can deny, at its option, to suspend the Constitution in any way it can, big and small. Since shrinks work is very subjective based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the “DSM”) a book that few average people even know exists, a person cannot know to what standards they will be held should they interact with a mental health professional.
Putting aside how many shrinks are raging leftists, it is my opinion that a person interacts, even informally, with mental health professionals at grave peril to their Constitutional rights. I think that the only course of action for anyone who is forcefully “evaluated” against their will should be to say that they reserve the right to remain silent.
Few remaining? Up to 100 million Americans own firearms. I sincerely doubt your logic will be able to hold up to such numbers, regardless of the fact that I also believe that such a ruling is detrimental to the lawful owners of firearms.
They can continue to attempt to slowly encroach upon our rights, but sooner or later they will get overly ambitious and go just a little too far and the dance will begin.
The real question is, who is prepared to put their money where there mouth is and stand up for their rights, regardless of the consequences.
Yep. Got a problem? A good friend and a good bottle of something dark and at least a decade old should do the trick...
The thrust of the story suggests something else — not to say your assessment is incorrect.
I concede your points.
But we are usually at a disadvantage debating because the facts, such as they presented here, are inadequate.
I’d like to see a much more detailed timeline of the events. I’d also like to know the details of just exactly how the cops went into her home and how they handled her. None of which we will ever find out without the court transcripts. Even this, it’s he said/she said.
I’d like to know a lot more about her history with the local authorities. Is she the local nutcase or a rational gun activist who is in their sights?
Since I am wishing for what I can’t have, I’d like to hear in detail what she claims to have said to the shrink & what he claims to have heard. Verbatim.
So true, the bill of rights has been so watered down by the government over the years with exceptions, loopholes and just outright throwing out any of it that they find to be temporarily inconvienient, that we shouldn't be surprised at all when police storm your house, kill your dog, and take you into custody for something you said to some quack.
We're nothing but federal property. Walking wallets that must conform to the will of our masters.
Given the right circumstances it can. But this piece is very short on facts and details. Unless all of this happened pretty damned fast with very strong sense of immediate urgent danger, which my gut says is not the case, a judge, a warrant and a knock on the door should have been all that was required. People get Baker Acted all the time and it doesn't happen as described here. Cops just don't go busting in without a warrant on every person that a shrink says *may* present a danger to themselves.
If this doctor burst into the police station claiming this woman clearly stated that she was going home to kill herself as soon as she got home, that they literally had minutes to spare before she stuck a gun in her mouth, that's one thing. That's also not what is inferred here as I read it. I just get the feeling that there is a lot of fudge room here.
A few decades ago I met and spoke with the famed attorney Melvin Belli. One thing I learned from him, is to be careful what you say. Rather than say something directly implicating yourself, use the third person in speech.
"Some might say that you're a (insert objectional words), but not me."
"Someone I know is depressed and suicidal and feels (insert what you're feeling), what should they do about it?"
"Someone says Obummer is a sh*thead and wants to kick his a** to shreds, I would never say so, but that's what someone is saying."
You get the point.
True, but they will get more through domestic violence laws now that Sota ayor has changed the rules.
In the Founders' days there was civil commitment of debtors.
There were post facto warrants secured by affidavit then as well.
This woman has legal recourse if her rights were violated.
She will have her day in court.
Would it have been better if she had snapped, killed innocent people, killed herself, and then became the occasion for hundreds of headlines about: "Gun Rights Advocate Goes on Rampage"?
What the left needs most are so-called conservatives who never think anything through and who do whatever comes into their heads without reflection.
It's getting that way, sorta like living in occupied territory.
She will have her day in court.
She's lucky they didn't just kill her on the spot. I'm sure she'll get all the 'justice' from the government that she can stand.
I’ve told my cardiologist exactly where I stand, but he won’t report me to the “authorities”. What are the odds that a fiftyish Jewish doctor would agree with me on Obama, the constitution, the expanding “taker” class, repealing Obamacare...
I love the guy!
Not me! It's what liberals believe, or want to believe. I know it'll never happen, but I don't live in liberal la-la-la land. You don't think liberals would love to do this?
That, too!
Ever get the feeling that liberals aren't very... well, "liberal"? True children of the novel, 1984, where the Ministry of Truth's job was to tell lies, liberals are anything "liberal".
Sounds like psychiatric hospitals will soon be the new concentration camps.
If the Trilateral Commission or The Illuminati or whoever wanted her dead, they had a ready-made excuse: her psychiatrist said she was suicidal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.