I think if someone is a danger to themselves and others they should not have access to guns or anything else they can hurt sim with they should be locked up in the hospital or jail until they are no longer a threat . Problem is who decides who is a threat?
I think if someone is a danger to themselves and others they should not have access to guns or anything else they can hurt sim with they should be locked up in the hospital or jail until they are no longer a threat . Problem is who decides who is a threat ?
Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk
why on earth would we restrict the rights of people with mintal illnesses when we can use a law the legally steal guns from everyone.
A court, with substantial input from licensed clinical therapists. And, of course, in a hearing where the defendant and his/her council has the opportunity to mount a defence, etc.
The "licensed" is very important here, since a therapist has everything to lose by playing fast and loose with a diagnosis. It's no different than a medical doctor putting his/her license on the line when he/she makes a diagnosis. Any kook can make an accusation, but it's the therapist that is putting a professional credential on the line. That means a lot.
Mike
A court, with substantial input from licensed clinical therapists. And, of course, in a hearing where the defendant and his/her council has the opportunity to mount a defence, etc.
The "licensed" is very important here, since a therapist has everything to lose by playing fast and loose with a diagnosis. It's no different than a medical doctor putting his/her license on the line when he/she makes a diagnosis. Any kook can make an accusation, but it's the therapist that is putting a professional credential on the line. That means a lot.
Mike
Wrong.
These 'red flag' hearings are ex parte, NOT contradictory. That is the problem. There is no due process for the "defendant" because there is no defendant (present.)
You’re using his quote out of context. Look back and see how he directed that at another statement. He’s not wrong.Wrong.
These 'red flag' hearings are ex parte, NOT contradictory. That is the problem. There is no due process for the "defendant" because there is no defendant (present.)