OR - Interesting story. Mental eval for purchasing firearms.

[Irish]

I’ll reserve my opinion on this for now but please feel free to post yours. http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100309/NEWS/3090315

Police act swiftly after gun purchases. ODOT worker who’d been put on leave is mentally evaluated after buying handguns, AK-47.

March 09, 2010
By Anita Burke

Concerns about an Oregon Department of Transportation employee who purchased several guns after being placed on leave prompted law enforcement across Southern Oregon to step in.

Negotiators and a SWAT team from Medford police safely took a man — whose name wasn’t released — into protective custody Monday morning in the 500 block of Effie Street, Medford police said in a news release.

He was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health evaluation.

The man recently had been placed on administrative leave from his job and was “very disgruntled,” the news release said.

ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said there were administrative, personnel matters involved that limited what the department could discuss.

However, the state agency had reported concerns about the man to law enforcement agencies, who started monitoring him, officials said.

“We had concerning information regarding a personnel issue and were watching the subject,” Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters said.

In two days, the man bought a Heckler & Koch .45-caliber universal self-loading handgun, a Walther .380-caliber handgun and an AK-47 assault rifle, Medford police Lt. Bob Hansen said. All of those firearms were purchased legally, with required record checks by the Oregon State Police.

Authorities were “extremely concerned” that the man may have been planning to retaliate against his employers, the news release said.

“Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach,” OSP Sgt. Jeff Proulx said.

Douglas and Jackson County sheriff’s departments, OSP officers based in both counties and police in Medford and Roseburg collaborated, he said.

Medford police watched the man’s home overnight, starting at about 9 p.m. Sunday, Hansen said.

Because he was known to have weapons, police wanted to defuse the situation and ensure the man wasn’t a danger to himself or others before the neighborhood awakened and people started their daily activities, Hansen said.

Medford’s hostage negotiators and SWAT team were called in at 3 a.m. Monday and arrived on the scene at about 5:45 a.m., he said.

About a dozen officers responded. They closed the street for about an hour and evacuated three homes to protect neighbors and prevent bystanders from gathering, he said.

After a phone conversation with negotiators, the man — who was alone in the home — agreed to come out, Hansen said.

Police seized the recently purchased firearms, as well as another .45-caliber Heckler & Koch handgun and a 12-gauge shotgun. Police are holding the weapons for safekeeping, but no criminal charges have been filed.

Reach reporter Anita Burke at 541-776-4485, or e-mail aburke@mailtribune.com.

[EzGoingKev]

WTF is an “Heckler & Koch .45-caliber universal self-loading handgun”??

[Business_Casual]

This is thought crime, pure and simple. The founding fathers detested thought crime and we should all well know that.

M_P

[jsebens]

It’s a USP; that’s what USP stands for. “Universal Self-loading Pistol” (actually stands for the German words, but I don’t know those).

[SouthWolfGA]

I don’t knwo if I would go as far as to say it is thought crime. He isn’t being charged with anything. Personally I think it’s good work. His employer voiced a concern and the police saw activity that raised flags. In order to prevent this turning into the next Breaking News Story, had the gentleman checked out for his own safety as well as possibly others. I’ve had to enact similar actions at my workplace after firing someone and they made verbal threats to get back at the company. Most the time, these are probably just an angry person venting and nothing comes of it, but it only takes one time of not doing something about to have a mild situation turn a major one, causing pain for many.

I have no concerns about this particular incident, but it is treading on a very fine line. AS long as it doesn’t evolve into charging people on what we think they might do, I’m ok with it. I would rather my tax dollars be spent preventing otherwise good people from doing bad things out of emotion by seeing the signs and getting them help.

[Belmont31R]

@SouthWolfGA

I don’t knwo if I would go as far as to say it is thought crime. He isn’t being charged with anything. Personally I think it’s good work. His employer voiced a concern and the police saw activity that raised flags. In order to prevent this turning into the next Breaking News Story, had the gentleman checked out for his own safety as well as possibly others. I’ve had to enact similar actions at my workplace after firing someone and they made verbal threats to get back at the company. Most the time, these are probably just an angry person venting and nothing comes of it, but it only takes one time of not doing something about to have a mild situation turn a major one, causing pain for many.

I have no concerns about this particular incident, but it is treading on a very fine line. AS long as it doesn’t evolve into charging people on what we think they might do, I’m ok with it. I would rather my tax dollars be spent preventing otherwise good people from doing bad things out of emotion by seeing the signs and getting them help.

So if a person gets fired, and gets pissed its cool to call up the police, and have them taken in along with their property confiscated?

Might as well just bar people from owning guns all together because we never know when someone is going to snap, and its for the public good right?

See here in the USA we’re supposed to be punished for what we have done (thats against the law) not what we MIGHT do.

If I ever get fired Ill have to remember not to get pissed off less my former employer call the cops, and the SWAT team comes for my guns…:rolleyes:

[Jerm]

It sounds to me like the guy is going along with everything he’s been asked to do.

Such as…

Police are holding the weapons for safekeeping, but no criminal charges have been filed.

I’m guessing he allowed the police to hang on to them?

After a phone conversation with negotiators, the man — who was alone in the home — agreed to come out, Hansen said.

So what happens if he just gos back to bed?

If he’s been “forced” into any of this…I would say there’s a lawsuit in the not too distant future.

[dbrowne1]

Unless there is something big missing from the story - like the part where he actually made threats or indicated that he would be back for blood with his alien friends - this is absolutely ridiculous.

I would be irate if my house was surrounded by a SWAT team and my property was confiscated simply because I got fired and - shockingly - wasn’t happy about it. I’m wondering what “situation” they were sent to “defuse,” and under what authority they seized the guns.

If the guy really had lost it, and a judicial official issued a temporary detention order or something similar based upon sworn representations of his concerning behavior/statements, then no foul. Otherwise I hope this guy enjoys a year or two taxpayer funded retirement from his settlement.

[SouthWolfGA]

@Belmont31R

So if a person gets fired, and gets pissed its cool to call up the police, and have them taken in along with their property confiscated?

Might as well just bar people from owning guns all together because we never know when someone is going to snap, and its for the public good right?

See here in the USA we’re supposed to be punished for what we have done (thats against the law) not what we MIGHT do.

If I ever get fired Ill have to remember not to get pissed off less my former employer call the cops, and the SWAT team comes for my guns…:rolleyes:

No but it is cool if the person gets fired or other punitive action is taken and they display behavior that could indicate they may want to “retaliate” somehow and then within a day or two suddenly start buying up an arsenal of weaponry, then I would say there is reason for concern and I’d rather have a professional make sure he is in the right state of mind before he does something that will result in his arrest, death or others death.

If a person, such as you or me, already owns such weaponry and makes reasonable statements of anger or disapproval about being fired or placed on leave, then I am not saying it is needed for law enforcement to come in. But if you say something along the lines of “You’ll all come to regret this!” or any other menacing behavior of this nature and then the police as a precaution are watching you to make sure you actually just were venting and cool off, notice you loading ammo and weapons in your car, yes, they should take action.

We as gun owners have a right to be gun owners, but it is also improtant that we are responsable with that right. Like I said, there is a fine line being tread in this story. I think they went a little…ok a lot overboard with the swat team and everything, but he isn’t being criminally charged and it is action being taken out of concern for him and his safety as well as others. It’s no different to me, than someone saying they just want to die, and then see them buying a pistol later that same day. Any sane person is going to have concern about the sequence of those events.

[Business_Casual]

@SouthWolfGA

I don’t knwo if I would go as far as to say it is thought crime. He isn’t being charged with anything. Personally I think it’s good work. His employer voiced a concern and the police saw activity that raised flags. In order to prevent this turning into the next Breaking News Story, had the gentleman checked out for his own safety as well as possibly others. I’ve had to enact similar actions at my workplace after firing someone and they made verbal threats to get back at the company. Most the time, these are probably just an angry person venting and nothing comes of it, but it only takes one time of not doing something about to have a mild situation turn a major one, causing pain for many.

I have no concerns about this particular incident, but it is treading on a very fine line. AS long as it doesn’t evolve into charging people on what we think they might do, I’m ok with it. I would rather my tax dollars be spent preventing otherwise good people from doing bad things out of emotion by seeing the signs and getting them help.

I fear for our Republic.

M_P

[ST911]

Same response I make in other posts with news articles: I want to know what hasn’t been printed before I form a firmer opinion.

That being said, this smells really funny. I hope threre’s more to this.

An ex parte protective order of some sort, granted upon sworn affidavit of a petitioner, that included provisions for the firearms, should handle the legalities of what they did (depending on OR law). There’s no mention of that.

And I see the world is the same everywhere:

Medford’s hostage negotiators and SWAT team were called in at 3 a.m. Monday and arrived on the scene at about 5:45 a.m., he said.

[kwelz]

@SouthWolfGA

I don’t knwo if I would go as far as to say it is thought crime. He isn’t being charged with anything. Personally I think it’s good work. His employer voiced a concern and the police saw activity that raised flags. In order to prevent this turning into the next Breaking News Story, had the gentleman checked out for his own safety as well as possibly others. I’ve had to enact similar actions at my workplace after firing someone and they made verbal threats to get back at the company. Most the time, these are probably just an angry person venting and nothing comes of it, but it only takes one time of not doing something about to have a mild situation turn a major one, causing pain for many.

I have no concerns about this particular incident, but it is treading on a very fine line. AS long as it doesn’t evolve into charging people on what we think they might do, I’m ok with it. I would rather my tax dollars be spent preventing otherwise good people from doing bad things out of emotion by seeing the signs and getting them help.

There is one on every forum it seems. :rolleyes:

[Belmont31R]

@SouthWolfGA

No but it is cool if the person gets fired or other punitive action is taken and they display behavior that could indicate they may want to “retaliate” somehow and then within a day or two suddenly start buying up an arsenal of weaponry, then I would say there is reason for concern and I’d rather have a professional make sure he is in the right state of mind before he does something that will result in his arrest, death or others death.

If a person, such as you or me, already owns such weaponry and makes reasonable statements of anger or disapproval about being fired or placed on leave, then I am not saying it is needed for law enforcement to come in. But if you say something along the lines of “You’ll all come to regret this!” or any other menacing behavior of this nature and then the police as a precaution are watching you to make sure you actually just were venting and cool off, notice you loading ammo and weapons in your car, yes, they should take action.

We as gun owners have a right to be gun owners, but it is also improtant that we are responsable with that right. Like I said, there is a fine line being tread in this story. I think they went a little…ok a lot overboard with the swat team and everything, but he isn’t being criminally charged and it is action being taken out of concern for him and his safety as well as others. It’s no different to me, than someone saying they just want to die, and then see them buying a pistol later that same day. Any sane person is going to have concern about the sequence of those events.

So a gun owner isn’t allowed to get pissed off after being fired, and should be watched by the police? Nothing like a big nanny state eh?

If he made threats they should have charged him with making terroristic threats. Sounds like they didn’t have anything to charge him with, and decided to surround his house with a SWAT team, and then take him in to see a shrink.

Yeah gun owners do need to be responsible, and they should be punished if they commit a crime with their gun. They should not be punished for what they MIGHT do. If you think people should be taken in by SWAT team to go see a shrink because of what they “might” do then they need to go round up every gun own because we “might” blow up and go shoot up our place of employment. I’m sure every single one of us has gotten pissed off at some point so why not right?

[BrianS]

Will be waiting for some followup on this one.

[SouthWolfGA]

@Belmont31R

So a gun owner isn’t allowed to get pissed off after being fired, and should be watched by the police? Nothing like a big nanny state eh?

If he made threats they should have charged him with making terroristic threats. Sounds like they didn’t have anything to charge him with, and decided to surround his house with a SWAT team, and then take him in to see a shrink.

Yeah gun owners do need to be responsible, and they should be punished if they commit a crime with their gun. They should not be punished for what they MIGHT do. If you think people should be taken in by SWAT team to go see a shrink because of what they “might” do then they need to go round up every gun own because we “might” blow up and go shoot up our place of employment. I’m sure every single one of us has gotten pissed off at some point so why not right?

You know it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation. Play the scenario out if they don’t take precautions if they see an angry person suddenly buy up an arsenal of weaponry. Then you read in the paper of some ticked off employee taking out 6 to 20 heads at his work place when he walks in guns a blazing and then taking himself out. Think of the backlash that wil cause.

That’s exactly the fuel Gun control activist need to push their agenda first of all. Then on top of that, you have heat on his supervisor if he did not report said disturbing behavior to anyone, or if he did, the police take heat for not doing enough about the supervisor reporting it.

Again, he hasn’t been charged with anything, and his weapons are only being held for safe keeping until he is cleared as in stable mind.

And anyone with or without guns, should be careful about what spout off with their mouth. These are dangerous times and you have to assume someone will follow through with any kind of dangerous threat because so many do. Just imagine your wife or someone you care about works at the same place this guy did. Wouldn’t you be a little thankful of these actions? especially if it turns out this guys is seriously jacked up in the head?

I think so far, with the exception of the excessive show of force, it has been dealt with fairly reasonably. This is of course given the information we do have available to us. There could be other information we don’t know that may sway this debate one way or the other.

[Macx]

@SouthWolfGA

You know it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation. Play the scenario out if they don’t take precautions if they see an angry person suddenly buy up an arsenal of weaponry. Then you read in the paper of some ticked off employee taking out 6 to 20 heads at his work place when he walks in guns a blazing and then taking himself out. Think of the backlash that wil cause.

That’s exactly the fuel Gun control activist need to push their agenda first of all. Then on top of that, you have heat on his supervisor if he did not report said disturbing behavior to anyone, or if he did, the police take heat for not doing enough about the supervisor reporting it.

Again, he hasn’t been charged with anything, and his weapons are only being held for safe keeping until he is cleared as in stable mind.

And anyone with or without guns, should be careful about what spout off with their mouth. These are dangerous times and you have to assume someone will follow through with any kind of dangerous threat because so many do. Just imagine your wife or someone you care about works at the same place this guy did. Wouldn’t you be a little thankful of these actions? especially if it turns out this guys is seriously jacked up in the head?

I think so far, with the exception of the excessive show of force, it has been dealt with fairly reasonably. This is of course given the information we do have available to us. There could be other information we don’t know that may sway this debate one way or the other.

Won’t you be happy that they took these reasonable percautions when they kick in your door because that neighbor down the street who gets scared because he sees you ferrying rifles cases back and forth from your vehicle, calls the police to report “threats”. Of course that neighbor will have immunity because they called in “good faith”. Yeah, it is good faith even if they are members of the Brady Foundation & militant PETA/Vegans & you didn’t actually do or say anything threatening. Now you are going to be taken to a facility by force & your only hope of a short stay is to cooperate fully. Your neighbors are evacuated by SWAT in the early am hours “for their safety” before the raid, that’ll make living in that neighborhood fun. Your doors and windows that got broken, well you will need to pay for those. . . because it was a legal warrant & immunity clause, blah, blah. After you are cleared, it will take a year and a half or more and thousands of lawyer dollars to get your property back. Just because you finally get a court order for the release of your property, doesn’t mean you have any recourse to recoup your losses … . it is just out of pocket. Glad to hear you support this reality SouthWolfGA, it won’t hurt a bit when they come for you. You have a slush fund for legal fees & some extra doors and windows laying around right?

That’s exactly the fuel Gun control activist need to push their agenda first of all.
Well, yeah, Sarah Brady will call this a “win” . . . they “prevented” a crime by pre-emptively misusing the police against a law abidding citizen. Yea Sarah!

[Irish]

@modern_pirate

I fear for our Republic.

M_P

We’re in the same boat, pirate boat that is.

[Belmont31R]

@SouthWolfGA

You know it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation. Play the scenario out if they don’t take precautions if they see an angry person suddenly buy up an arsenal of weaponry. Then you read in the paper of some ticked off employee taking out 6 to 20 heads at his work place when he walks in guns a blazing and then taking himself out. Think of the backlash that wil cause.

That’s exactly the fuel Gun control activist need to push their agenda first of all. Then on top of that, you have heat on his supervisor if he did not report said disturbing behavior to anyone, or if he did, the police take heat for not doing enough about the supervisor reporting it.

Again, he hasn’t been charged with anything, and his weapons are only being held for safe keeping until he is cleared as in stable mind.

And anyone with or without guns, should be careful about what spout off with their mouth. These are dangerous times and you have to assume someone will follow through with any kind of dangerous threat because so many do. Just imagine your wife or someone you care about works at the same place this guy did. Wouldn’t you be a little thankful of these actions? especially if it turns out this guys is seriously jacked up in the head?

I think so far, with the exception of the excessive show of force, it has been dealt with fairly reasonably. This is of course given the information we do have available to us. There could be other information we don’t know that may sway this debate one way or the other.

I don’t think its reasonable for police to get a call about an ex employee, and then surround the house with a SWAT team to take the guy in for a mental eval without the guy doing anything to bring charges on himself.

If he made actual threats then they can charge him with that. Not well he was pissed off he lost his job, and bought some guns so we’re gonna send in the SWAT team, and then see if he is of (by our definition of course by our shrink) mental state to own a gun.

Seriously the anti-gunners use the same arguments against CCW, open carry, owning “military guns”, etc. That we are about to pop off, and its dangerous for people to own these guns or carry them. “Pre-emptive” laws are no different than sending the SWAT team because Billy Joe got pissed he lost his job so we’re going to take his guns “for safe keeping” because he MIGHT pop off.

This is why “might” laws and pre-emptive police action is so dangerous because you can take almost any person, and construe something about them. Its damn risky to liberty to engage in this type of stuff. Yeah they might catch a couple people who were planning on doing something but for every one guy they catch early how many others are going to get surrounded by a SWAT team, and hauled off to the shrink when they actually didn’t do anything. And just based on a random accusation? How many people lose their guns because their crazy ex-wife makes false accusations? Getting some call, and then taking drastic action against someone is simply wrong. Although I may be wrong if he made threats drastic enough to bring in the SWAT team those threats would be enough to charge him with terroristic threats. But they didn’t do that…so he must not have said anything enough to even warrant charges. Instead its a forced “health and welfare” check at the point of a gun. I don’t like it.

[Irish]

@Belmont31R

See here in the USA we’re supposed to be punished for what we have done (thats against the law) not what we MIGHT do.

Minority Report.

[dcollect]

I fear for the republic as well.

I want to know about how they knew he was purchasing weapons.

I can think of a situation where this response could be reasonable and not totally illegal.

<scenario>
Man gets fired from job, says some fightin’ words. Cry baby ‘employer’ is bored, and as a government employee has likely little else to do, calls police. Police do what they should do: write a report.

Susy Q Sister/Wife/Friend/Neighbor calls police, shes scared. My brother just got fired/laid off/pissed from his job he just bought a bunch of guns the next day.
<-begin news story->

This all seems above board if that is the case.

OR

Already unconstitutional NICS background checks are accessible to police without a proper warrant. Fuddy duddy cry baby gov’t ‘employer’ (comisar) calls police, police pull illegal surveillance file, and pull up with the swat team to pick a fight.

This is an extreme problem requiring such a solution, if that is the case.

In either case, the swat team is just pickin’ a fight, I’m afraid.