Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
HE WAS NEVER ARRESTED. What part of that do you not understand?Since when are you guilty until proven innocent?Nor have they provided any evidence that he WASN'T an immediate threat to anybody.
Perhaps you should study the Constitution of the country you supposedly fought for?
Innocence or guilt had nothing to do with it. It was about his mental health, and the threat he may have posed to our fellow citizens. He was deemed not a threat to himself or others hence, he was released and given his weapons back.
Maybe you need to wake the fuck up!
You came out and said he was "arrested", when it's quite obvious he wasn't.
You obviously have a thing against cops. Taking you seriously on this subject is ludicrous, at best.
He was forced to take a mental evaluation. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the Supreme Court rule in Roe vs Wade we all had a RIGHT to privacy? He committed no crime, was not in the process of committing a crime, the cops had no reason to dispatch 4 different police agencies and 2 SWAT teams to his house. He was handcuffed and escorted away by the police.
No, he can be forced into psychiatric custody and evaluation if he is considered an imminent danger to himself or others. The seminal rule on that is from O'Connor v. Donaldson:
FindLaw | Cases and Codes
Still trying to remember where the 72-hour rule came from though. My brain seems to be mush tonight.
HE WAS NEVER ARRESTED. What part of that do you not understand?Since when are you guilty until proven innocent?
Perhaps you should study the Constitution of the country you supposedly fought for?
Innocence or guilt had nothing to do with it. It was about his mental health, and the threat he may have posed to our fellow citizens. He was deemed not a threat to himself or others hence, he was released and given his weapons back.
Maybe you need to wake the fuck up!
Saddam was never convicted of gassing Kurds. That means it never happened....by your logic. Bin laden has never been charged with anything about 9E so he is innocent about that day....by your logic. Do you think people are as stoopid as you sound?
You wish to abandon the 4th Amendment to save 20-30 Americans from public shootings per year.But you still haven't addressed the meat and potatos of my argument. You just quote Ben Franklin like he is the first and last word on what makes a society, when clearly he is not.
I would rather let them die.
---
We have nothing to discuss.
1. Oh, so now you're saying that all those cops, including SWAT, were nothing more than "rookies straight out of the academy"So, in your world, a rookie fresh out of the Police Academy can:HE WAS NEVER ARRESTED. What part of that do you not understand?Since when are you guilty until proven innocent?
Perhaps you should study the Constitution of the country you supposedly fought for?
Innocence or guilt had nothing to do with it. It was about his mental health, and the threat he may have posed to our fellow citizens. He was deemed not a threat to himself or others hence, he was released and given his weapons back.
Maybe you need to wake the fuck up!
1. Deem me a mentally unstable threat to society with no evidence
2. Kidnap me at gunpoint in the middle of the night with no warrant
3. Hold me in a psychiatric hospital indefinitely
Whatever you say, commissar.
And you have evidence that there was no indication?.... Please provide said evidence.He was forced to take a mental evaluation. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the Supreme Court rule in Roe vs Wade we all had a RIGHT to privacy? He committed no crime, was not in the process of committing a crime, the cops had no reason to dispatch 4 different police agencies and 2 SWAT teams to his house. He was handcuffed and escorted away by the police.
No, he can be forced into psychiatric custody and evaluation if he is considered an imminent danger to himself or others. The seminal rule on that is from O'Connor v. Donaldson:
FindLaw | Cases and Codes
Still trying to remember where the 72-hour rule came from though. My brain seems to be mush tonight.
The cops do not get to make the mental evaluation NOR the determination he needs a mental evaluation. That requires a competent authority. A DOCTOR and then a JUDGE.
There was absolutely no indication he was either a threat to himself or anyone else. In fact the raid could have caused exactly what it was supposedly there to stop.
If the cps believed he was a threat due to mental instability they are required to get a doctor to make that determination. And he would have to have done something for the cops to arrest and then request the evaluation.
Yes. I am not willing to sacrifice the 4th Amendment so that we can save 30 of the 320,000,000 Americans in this country.no, i'd rather common sense prevail..
..just hope you or your loved ones aren't one of the 20-30 Americans - how benevolent of you. You'd sacrifice the freedoms of others (their deaths) for your pathetic argument.
On certain issues, there is no compromise.You're right. It's impossible to discuss anything with the close-minded
Does the SWAT member have more training in Psychiatry than the rookie?1. Oh, so now you're saying that all those cops, including SWAT, were nothing more than "rookies straight out of the academy"
So he is a DETAINEE, like those in Guantanamo?2. Nobody was kidnapped. He was DETAINED.
How long can you lock someone up without a warrant, arrest, or charges?3. He obviously wasn't held "indefinitely". He was evaluated, released and given his guns back.
This isn't 24.You conspiracy theorists are just too damn funny!
1. A SWAT member is trained to go in and get those who may have made threats against himself or others in order to take them to those who can make the evaluation on their mental stabililty. They are also trained to determine if a suspect needs arrest or mental evaluation. Ya' ever watch COPS?Does the SWAT member have more training in Psychiatry than the rookie?1. Oh, so now you're saying that all those cops, including SWAT, were nothing more than "rookies straight out of the academy"
So he is a DETAINEE, like those in Guantanamo?2. Nobody was kidnapped. He was DETAINED.
How long can you lock someone up without a warrant, arrest, or charges?3. He obviously wasn't held "indefinitely". He was evaluated, released and given his guns back.
This isn't 24.You conspiracy theorists are just too damn funny!
He's not a suspect, as no crime has been committed (well, save by the cops).1. A SWAT member is trained to go in and get those who may have made threats against himself or others in order to take them to those who can make the evaluation on their mental stabililty. They are also trained to determine if a suspect needs arrest or mental evaluation. Ya' ever watch COPS?
So not all detainees are created equal?2. No, he was detained in order to be evaluated regarding his mental state. Your fantasy is apples and oranges.
Indefinitely.3. As long as the law allows. In california it's 72 hours. But can be extended as long as necessary if trained professionals deem it necessary.
Then why do you pretend that the police need not follow any search and seizure rules?4. I never said it was 24.
Yes. I am not willing to sacrifice the 4th Amendment so that we can save 30 of the 320,000,000 Americans in this country.no, i'd rather common sense prevail..
..just hope you or your loved ones aren't one of the 20-30 Americans - how benevolent of you. You'd sacrifice the freedoms of others (their deaths) for your pathetic argument.
On certain issues, there is no compromise.You're right. It's impossible to discuss anything with the close-minded
Seriously, you can't possibly be that fucking stupid.He's not a suspect, as no crime has been committed (well, save by the cops).1. A SWAT member is trained to go in and get those who may have made threats against himself or others in order to take them to those who can make the evaluation on their mental stabililty. They are also trained to determine if a suspect needs arrest or mental evaluation. Ya' ever watch COPS?
So not all detainees are created equal?2. No, he was detained in order to be evaluated regarding his mental state. Your fantasy is apples and oranges.
Indefinitely.3. As long as the law allows. In california it's 72 hours. But can be extended as long as necessary if trained professionals deem it necessary.
Then why do you pretend that the police need not follow any search and seizure rules?4. I never said it was 24.
Seriously, you can't possibly be an Army Ranger.Seriously, you can't possibly be that fucking stupid.
First Pre-Crime Arrest.
That's all you've got?.....weak!Seriously, you can't possibly be an Army Ranger.Seriously, you can't possibly be that fucking stupid.
He was never arrested.First Pre-Crime Arrest.
A gross violation of his constitutional rights.
Unfortunately , it is not the first pre-crime arrest. The first pre-crime arrest and CONVICTION occurs daily in these USA - they are called driving while under the influence
Legalize Drunk Driving
But there’s a more fundamental point. What precisely is being criminalized? Not bad driving. Not destruction of property. Not the taking of human life or reckless endangerment. The crime is having the wrong substance in your blood. Yet it is possible, in fact, to have this substance in your blood, even while driving, and not commit anything like what has been traditionally called a crime.
.
He was never arrested.Do you loons not get it? Do you loons even understand the law? Apparently not!First Pre-Crime Arrest.
A gross violation of his constitutional rights.
Unfortunately , it is not the first pre-crime arrest. The first pre-crime arrest and CONVICTION occurs daily in these USA - they are called driving while under the influence
Legalize Drunk Driving
But there’s a more fundamental point. What precisely is being criminalized? Not bad driving. Not destruction of property. Not the taking of human life or reckless endangerment. The crime is having the wrong substance in your blood. Yet it is possible, in fact, to have this substance in your blood, even while driving, and not commit anything like what has been traditionally called a crime.
.
No, according to US law.He was never arrested.Do you loons not get it? Do you loons even understand the law? Apparently not!A gross violation of his constitutional rights.
Unfortunately , it is not the first pre-crime arrest. The first pre-crime arrest and CONVICTION occurs daily in these USA - they are called driving while under the influence
Legalize Drunk Driving
But theres a more fundamental point. What precisely is being criminalized? Not bad driving. Not destruction of property. Not the taking of human life or reckless endangerment. The crime is having the wrong substance in your blood. Yet it is possible, in fact, to have this substance in your blood, even while driving, and not commit anything like what has been traditionally called a crime.
.
"They woke me up with a phone call at about 5:50 in the morning," Pyles told me in a phone interview Friday. "I looked out the window and saw the SWAT team pointing their guns at my house. The officer on the phone told me to turn myself in. I told them I would, on three conditions: I would not be handcuffed. I would not be taken off my property. And I would not be forced to get a mental health evaluation. He agreed. The second I stepped outside, they jumped me. Then they handcuffed me, took me off my property, and took me to get a mental health evaluation."
.
You are right, he was never arrested .....according to Cuban Law.
.
Educate yourself, would ya'?
