What is a Red Flag Law?

[g5000]

Does one exist, promulgated by the Congress or any State Legislature and signed by the Executive?

In CA the Welfare and Institutions code covers situations where a person may be a danger to themselves or others. It allows LE to detain a person who raises a "red flag" and bring them to a secure psychiatric hospital, and be held for 72 hours for observation (5150 W&I).

The detainee can be released anytime by the psychiatrist, but must be released at the end of 72 hours unless s/he is determined to need further evaluation and/or treatment. The patient then can be held for two weeks (5250 W&I), and if the medical doctor decides more treatment is needed they must petition the court under the LPS Act, see details in the link below:

Lanterman–Petris–Short Act - Wikipedia.

Yeah, most states already have laws in place. And, I, a hardcore libertarian, believe that such laws are proper.

But, because we already have all these laws in place, why are we doing this national "red flag" thing?

.

TRUMPZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ!

 

[whitehall]

The Red Flag bill has nothing to do with involuntary psychiatric treatment so all you lefties afflicted with TDS need not worry. The "red flag" is part of the instant name check to purchase firearms. If a person was suspected of having psychiatric problems or undergoing psychiatric treatment or has been accused of violent behavior their names would raise a red flag and they would "temporarily" be prevented from purchasing a firearm. Why doesn't the left endorse the concept? Maybe because half of them would be red flagged.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yeah, most states already have laws in place. And, I, a hardcore libertarian, believe that such laws are proper.

But, because we already have all these laws in place, why are we doing this national "red flag" thing?

.

It's denial of rights without due process....Totally fucked up.

Pray that "libertarian" doesn't get deemed a "mental disorder" by some leftbat despot.

Post some evidence that Red Flag Laws are all without due process?

The LPS Act in CA has safeguards to protect those identified as a danger to others or themselves.

Due process, as in being apprised of what criminal act you committed to have your rights taken away, facing your accuser(s), and having the case proven before a jury.

Your "safeguards" are meaningless.

You are viewing this through the lens of criminal law rather than the appropriate lens of probate/guardianship law. There is a huge difference.

.

I'm looking at this through the lens of statism vs. freedom....If you think the statist gun grabbers will stop here, you're nuts.

100% agree. The gun grabbers have demonstrated that they are not trustworthy. I assume that they are attempting to do a national red flag law to abuse it.

That's why I say we don't need a national red flag law, because states have already handled it, as a matter of guardianship, where it belongs, and not as a criminal matter.

I certainly do not believe that it is statist to appoint a guardian for someone who is incapacitated. To believe otherwise is akin to believing that young children should be left to make life decisions for themselves, without adult supervision.

.

 

[Old Man Grumbles]

You obviously worked in an institution, as did I for a few years. We employed four Social Workers to evaluate inmates detained, before trial, and to provide counseling to those placed on probation and serving time in our county jail.

Schizophrenia is common among many committed for short terms for misdemeanor convictions, and mostly represented by overworked public defenders who no longer represented their client after their conviction (that has recently changed, since my retirement).

Thus the Social Workers and the assigned Probation Officer worked together to find adult group homes for those with no family or no family member who they have not alienated. When a placement was found a removal order was requested and probation was modified giving credit for time served in the placement.

Yes sir, I did. Over 8 years working in confinement facilities. We had 1 social worker and 1 psychiatrist (who was only there a couple of hours 2 or 3 times a week). It wasn't abnormal for the judge to order mental health evaluations that were more in-depth than what they could get in jail. In the end though, even if they did get a spot in a treatment facility, they wouldn't be compliant with their med routines and would get tossed out for the treatment facility.

One aspect of this that really bothered me is that judges were extremely hesitant to order the individual into treatment involuntarily. We know these people need treatment, not jail. But without that court commitment order they'd never see the inside of a state, or state funded, psychiatric facility.