Marine veteran held in psych ward for Facebook posts

[Daniel]

you think the Patriot Act is bad, go research the National Defense Act that was recently passed into legislation. It's even more frightning than the Patriot Act is.

Personally, this guy is getting screwed. His First Amendment rights and his civil rights are being violated to every extent. He's maybe a bit out there, but I see nothing definitive showing threats. I see a lot of sarcasm, dark rhetoric and such, but nothing showing this guy to be a true danger to society or about to engage in destructive behavior.

the FBI, Secret Service and Law Enforcement should be much more concerned with Leonard Embodys likelihood of going off the deep end than they should this guy. just saying.

If you do not see something showing threats what exactly would it take?

[Guest WyattEarp]

If you do not see something showing threats what exactly would it take?

This is a touchy area Daniel. Take my situation for instance. I called a man some names in an email, yes they were terrible names, and spoken out of bigotry and ignornace, but still names nonethelss, and I got arrested and charged with a felony because of it. I didn't make any threats against him. There was nothing implied, no statement of violence or impiied violence, there was no reports of me following him around, going to his work or home, calling his house, or anything like that.

The First Amendment gives each and every one of us the right to say what we want, how we feel, express our views and opinions freely. Some of us convey it productively, some of us convey "inappropiately, immorally or unethically". But step aside from the emotions of the statements I made, step aside from the issue that I was white and he was black, and I made racist comments. and what did I really do? Racism is not illegal. Racism is not a crime. There was no threat written, implied and it was not accompanied with anything else. I was arrested because I called someone some names.

Are we as a nation prepapred to accept arresting people for mere words? For statements they make? Even though the statements might be distasteful, or unpopular? Is that satisfactory to you? If you had a teeenage son or daughter, and he or she went to school and told another student that they were Fat, and ugly and worthless and that they hated them, how would you respond if your kid was arrested and charged with a felony?

or what if your kid called someone gay, or a fag or a lesbian or a dyke, and they're arrested and charged with a hate crime? Just for words that they said with no implied threat of violence or anything.

This is a very dangerous and very slippery slope, and our government is testing the waters, and slowly but surely progressing forward and crossing barriers that our Bill of Rights and our Constitution were written to protect. The more they push, and the more the People allow them to get away with, the more they will take until they slowly erode all of our individual rights away, and we become nothing more than a nation of malcontents under the control of a Communist Government.

to answer your question, I think there would have to be some sort of plot of a violent action, a surplus of guns and ammo, or a pattern of buying explosives based chemicals or something. You just can't waltz into someone's house and arrest them because they used some dark rhetoric. That's Minority Report type stuff there, arresting people for crimes they have yet to commit. It's scary, because now you have to watch every single itty bitty thing you say to people, say on the phone, make a joke or a sarcastic remark about, or even throw out a "what if scenario", because now you have to fear being arrested. It's gotten beyond RIDICULOUS. America is becoming a Police State and quite rapidly.

Edited August 22, 2012 by WyattEarp

[TMF]

to answer your question, I think there would have to be some sort of plot of a violent action, a surplus of guns and ammo, or a pattern of buying explosives based chemicals or something. You just can't waltz into someone's house and arrest them because they used some dark rhetoric. That's Minority Report type stuff there, arresting people for crimes they have yet to commit. It's scary, because now you have to watch every single itty bitty thing you say to people, say on the phone, make a joke or a sarcastic remark about, or even throw out a "what if scenario", because now you have to fear being arrested. It's gotten beyond RIDICULOUS. America is becoming a Police State and quite rapidly.

How do you know there isn't more?

[Guest WyattEarp]

How do you know there isn't more?

I don't. I'm basing my opinion of the situation based on the information that has been made availble by the reports through the media. if it turns out there is such plots, or threats, then the arrest will be justified. However, if there was such evidence, it would have been announced in a press conference, and there's so far been no official statements from any of the LE departments of such a plot, or threat or the discovery of a surplus of weapons or suspicious buying activities.

[daddyo]

Our society seems to have become one where folks have no problem with someone being arrested if they "think" he might have been a danger to others. To hell with proof and/or actual commission of a crime. And while they're at it, to hell with the Constitution too.

[RobertNashville]

If this is really all based on this Marine's Facebook postings then yes, I'd say he's being screwed and it's beyond scary that this could happen to anyone. I'm really hoping, however, that the Facebook postings isn't all there is here (of course, I seriously doubt that we've see all the Facebook postings, either).

As others have pointed out, if this guy had gone out and shoot up a school or a theater or a political gathering I suspect that some of the same people here complaining about this guy's rights being violated would be here complaining about why no one did anything to prevent it from happening - that doesn't mean that what the FBI/Police did was right but given what's happened over just the past year or so, I can at least understand their concern.

Edited August 22, 2012 by RobertNashville

[CM1021]

I think that if there is more to the story then they were still not justified in going into his house and taking him into custody just for something he said. Yes he may have said some things that we are not all seeing. But short of a threat that will cause bodily harm to someone, he shouldn't be in custody at this time. I think a better approach would have been for them to monitor him for a while. If they had seen him doing something suspicious to cause concernt then I could see maybe them picking him up but this was a little pre-emptive.

[Jonnin]

Dave,

I agree with most of what you said. But, how did the Republican party let us down? There was a wide field of candidates in the beginning, and citizen primary voters whittled it down to one.

The party continues to select candidates using a system that allows liberal, high population states that have 0 chance of adding ONE electoral college vote to the GOP candidate to have a large say in the GOP candidate. As long as this process continues, we will never see the 'best there is to offer' get past the first round of primaries.

[tnhawk]

Not me. I'll shoot me some zombies when they come, though. I hate zombies.

I believe most government employees are zombies.

[TMF]

I think a better approach would have been for them to monitor him for a while. If they had seen him doing something suspicious to cause concernt then I could see maybe them picking him up but this was a little pre-emptive.

I have zero doubt they've been watching him for a while. It is, in fact, what we pay law enforcement to do. An example would be the guy who just went nuts and shot up all those Sikhs. Was the government over stepping their bounds by watching him? Obviously they were on to something considering he murdered several people in an unprovoked attack. Unstable people like this are watched for good damn reason. I would bet my paycheck that they have been monitoring him for a long time. His being institutionalized is related to the fact he made clear that he was about to do something violent.

Some of you act like these LEOs are boogeymen out to stomp rights. There is the Bill of Rights, but there are also countless laws that allow for batsh** crazy people to be thrown in an institution if they are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. I'm familiar enough with some of those laws as my own sister had to be thrown in one for a week a long time ago. I've even had one of my Soldiers put in a padded room for over a week... all he did was say a few things as well. Did we violate his rights? Hell no. He was about to kill himself or someone else.

Get over it. As long as you're not acting like a loon the Men in Black aren't coming for you. This isn't about the 1st Amendment, this is about a lunatic.

[daddyo]

As long as you're not acting like a loon the Men in Black aren't coming for you. This isn't about the 1st Amendment, this is about a lunatic.

"Loon" is a subjective term, and your assertion that "this isn't about the 1st Amendment" is like saying that cops stopping you for no reason and searching your car without probable cause has nothing to do with the 4th Amendment. It's ludicrous.

At any rate, is "acting like a loon" against the law?

[sigmtnman]

In the day of proactive laws and law enforcement it is.

[TMF]

People get thrown in padded rooms everyday. People are just up in arms about this one because he was saying stuff about the government.

[daddyo]

Does the fact that people get rousted by police every day for legally carrying weapons make it alright?

Edited August 22, 2012 by DaddyO

[TMF]

Does the fact that people get rousted by police every day for legally carrying weapons make it alright?

No, the fact they are loony makes it right. I just think the only reason people are up in arms is because this loon happen to be anti-government. What if he was the run of the mill loon that was posting about severing heads and was on his way to his ex-wife's house to "get this started"? Would we be having the same conversation? Like I said, I've put at least one person in the loony bin before. I probably saved his life if not the lives of others. His rights weren't violated. What he said had nothing to do with the 1st Amendment.

This is the world we live in. There is a reason for it. If a time comes that folks are being arrested because they were "offensive" or simply speaking out against the gov, I will be the first to be outraged. This isn't it.

[daddyo]

I just think the only reason people are up in arms is because this loon happen to be anti-government.

Based on what? No one said that was the reason. Charging guilt with no evidence, or just because you think something is so with no reason is just hearsay.

[TMF]

Based on what? .

Simple reasoning. If this were such a big deal this wouldn't be the first thread about someone being institutionalized. It just so happens that thousands of these cases happen every year and only this one stands out. This is because of his anti-gov statements. The articles supporting him all focus on that aspect. How about he is a lunatic? Let's focus on that first, and worry about the government reading my thoughts next.

[Guest WyattEarp]

I have zero doubt they've been watching him for a while. It is, in fact, what we pay law enforcement to do. An example would be the guy who just went nuts and shot up all those Sikhs. Was the government over stepping their bounds by watching him? Obviously they were on to something considering he murdered several people in an unprovoked attack. Unstable people like this are watched for good damn reason. I would bet my paycheck that they have been monitoring him for a long time. His being institutionalized is related to the fact he made clear that he was about to do something violent.

this portion of your post brought something to the forefront of my mind. at what point do the People, become responsible for taking measures to ensure their own safety as opposed to relying on the Police or other Law Enforcement Agencies or government agencies?

maybe the approach of the government on the issue of gun control is entirely wrong, and they should be REQUIRING citizens in good standing and of sound mind to be educated, trained and skilled in the use of firearms and carry a firearm. make it mandatory, much in the way a drivers license is required. If an entire population was armed and out and about, do you think people like the Aurora shooter, and the Sikhs shooter, would be more or less prone to engaging in such violent acts?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No, the fact they are loony makes it right. I just think the only reason people are up in arms is because this loon happen to be anti-government. What if he was the run of the mill loon that was posting about severing heads and was on his way to his ex-wife's house to "get this started"? Would we be having the same conversation? Like I said, I've put at least one person in the loony bin before. I probably saved his life if not the lives of others. His rights weren't violated. What he said had nothing to do with the 1st Amendment.

This is the world we live in. There is a reason for it. If a time comes that folks are being arrested because they were "offensive" or simply speaking out against the gov, I will be the first to be outraged. This isn't it.

How much of a loon is he?

When Janet Napolitano calls soldiers and right wingers terrorists in a letter to LEO, I guess that made me a little loony.

What's the next step? Or do you wish to blow that off? Free speech is free speech, not only to be determined by a left

winger.

Aside from that, he could have left his rants off the keyboard. It excites people.

Next, it's thought crimes. Then Minority Report. That movie ended well, didn't it? Glad it was just a movie.

[RobertNashville]

It seems to me that everyone here, me included, has reached their views based on a very incomplete picture. Sometimes law enforcement acts improperly/out of bounds but most of the time, they don't. I'm not comfortable with people being snatched out of their home only based on something they said on the internet but does that mean it should never happen?

I think we are getting into a new area of law enforcement...it wasn't very long ago that internet forums, social networking sites, or even wireless communications didn't exist so if this Marine had said exactly the same things to a friend or two over coffee or a couple of beers no one else would have been the wiser; today he posts it on Facebook (or TGO) and it's there for the entire world to see instantly; the entire world including law enforcement agencies with big computer power to sort though billions of words/phrases that can get their attention.

What I'm saying is that what we may be seeing here is not so much the act of an overbearing, overreaching government as much as it is a new part of law enforcement that with rules that haven't bee well defined (or even thought of for that matter). Maybe we ought to be incensed by this...maybe not...I'm not sure yet.

[Oh Shoot]

How much of a loon is he?

When Janet Napolitano calls soldiers and right wingers terrorists in a letter to LEO, I guess that made me a little loony.

What's the next step? Or do you wish to blow that off? Free speech is free speech, not only to be determined by a left

winger.

Aside from that, he could have left his rants off the keyboard. It excites people.

Next, it's thought crimes. Then Minority Report. That movie ended well, didn't it? Glad it was just a movie.

Russia has traditionally handled dissidents who got too much notice by putting them in asylums. This is the scary analogy.

- OS

[strickj]

Russia has traditionally handled dissidents who got too much notice by putting them in asylums. This is the scary analogy.

- OS

The US has a long history of admitting folks to asylums based on the appearance of sanity. Up through the '70s even.

Far as this guy being arrested goes, there is a little difference between speaking out against government and openly discussing plans for for an armed revolution.

Edited August 23, 2012 by strickj

[DaveTN]

In the 80’s we couldn’t do anything for people with mental problems. Our States Attorney would not touch it even when a family member called in that someone was going to commit suicide. We would try to talk the mentally ill into committing themselves and it sometimes worked with the threat of criminal charges if they didn’t. But if we couldn’t talk them in and they had committed no crime; our hands were tied. We would stand by until other family members could get there to help, or some had attorneys that could get a Judge to sign commitment papers. It resulted in a lot of people hurt and killed.

I was detailed to a call of a mental case threating people and acting crazy downtown. I ask if there was a complainant and was told “Not that wants to be seenâ€. I get there and talk to this guy and he obviously had mental problems and is wound tight as a drum. If I leave him there he is going to hurt someone. He tells me that was committed a long time ago to our regional mental institution and that they “Kicked him out†He told me he wanted to go back because he was afraid he was going to hurt someone.

I had our dispatcher’s call the nut house and they told the dispatchers his state funding had run out and they had to put him out. We told them he wanted to come back because he was afraid he was going to hurt someone. They said they can’t take him back unless he hurts someone, is arrested, or a Judge signs commitment papers.

Going to a Judge had to go through the SA Office, so that wasn’t going to work. I wasn’t about to tell him I couldn’t do anything unless he hurt someone, so I told him I couldn’t do anything unless he committed a crime. He said “What kind of crime?†I told him “Any crimeâ€. He walked over and picked up a concrete block and walked towards my squad. I could see where this was going and just let it happen. Yep, he threw that block at the windshield and turned around and said “Will that do it?â€

As we started to bring him in to book one of our Command Officers told us to get booking info from him and take him straight to the nut house.

The guy knew he was a danger, I knew he was a danger, but his so called “Rights†kept him from getting help. He was convicted of a felony, so if he ever did get straight, he had that to deal with.

Things have changed since then; a person that is a threat to society or is threatening to kill themselves can now be committed for observation without having to commit a criminal act.

Posting violent threats on the internet is going to land you in jail or the nuthouse; free speech has nothing to do with it.

As citizens when someone threatens us with a gun we don’t have to wait to see if it’s real, if it’s loaded, or if the perp is going to shoot; we have the right to protect ourselves. Law Enforcement has the duty to protect the people from harm even if they don’t know they are being threatened; it sounds like that is what happened here.

We may never hear what really happened. The Secret Service isn’t real big on making public statements unless directed to do so by the highest powers.

5-1-5-0 somebody call the PoPo.

[BigK]

Seems to me we only have part of the story. That's a lot of agencies working together to bring in a guy who only made the comments we've read so far. There's got to be more to it...there just has to be, right? I don't subscribe to the idea that gov't agencies are just here to serve the people, but I also don't subscribe to the idea that they're just here to harm the people either.

[Guest Wildogre]

If he had a map with all of the local polling places circled in red would that make a difference to anyone? What if he had newspaper clippings of the Detroit and Colorado shootings? What if he told the officers if a certain candidate did not win the election he would fix that?

I think that we have only part of the story as others have said.

I too like TMF have dealt with Soldiers who should be not be in uniform or even close to a weapon. Luckily I was an instructor at OCS and when they left the Company we did not see them again and never followed up.

I did always wonder how they ended up there in the first place.