done

[67goat]

Yeah, that kid liked to whine and complain.
They could have lured him home by telling him how beautiful he is,
and letting him complain about how much the world sucks and isn't fair.

If you think that would have worked (given they had been trying to support him emotionally for the past 22 years and it didn't work), then I hope you are never in that situation.

[cjc16]

If you're not sure where that part came from, then you have demonstrated a complete lack of reading comprehension. ....

I said knock off the insults. Now go pound sand, douche. I'm done. Guess what? you win and don't forget winning interweb arguments is like winning gold in the special olympics.

[67goat]

A statement of fact is not an insult. I made a direct comparison to your argument and then you claimed you didn't understand where it came from. You admitted to a lack of reading comprehension. I'm sorry if you feel that pointing out what you, yourself had stated is an insult, but I don't feel the need to pull punches simply because some random person on the internet might be overly sensitive.

You are the one that is making insults and calling names. And not very good at it. Winning a gold medal at the Special Olympics is more than you will ever accomplish in your life.

[CBR_rider]

So I guess if I get a welfare check on some Calgunners I should be 5150'ing them because they probably bought a few firearms recently..

As far as the videos go, several things:

#1) Apparently at some point this kid took them down and eventually re-posted some/all of them. The videos may/may not have been the same ones that we have now all seen.

#2) Some agencies block what their employees can view on department issues computers. Many times the websites blocked are ones like youtube/facebook/instagram/etc. These deputies might have had no way to view the videos, even if they wanted to.

#3) Videos may be important to helping determine someone's mental state, but its important to remember that 5150 deals with someone's mental state at the time of the evaluation. If I post a video in which I appear bat-you-know-what crazy last year but I get evaluated tomorrow and otherwise appear normal; law enforcement would be very hard pressed to justify a 5150 hold based solely on that video.

[TeddyBallgame]

i didn't read all the replies, but, my opinion will stand as such;

the officers did everything within their power, regardless of what information they did or didn't have...even having watched the videos and run the DROS on him, his demeanor came off as normal, and, it wouldn't have legally allowed them to violate any of his rights...its simply the way i see it

LEO's are not therapist, they are not qualified psychiatrist's...they have about as much ability to diagnose a person as you or I...they don't have any exclusive training or schooling, and, even if they did, it's not something that may well turn up in a 10 minute interview

sometimes these evaluations take many, many sit down hours with a schooled person in psychiatric care, and, even then, diagnosis' can be wrong

we can spend some time laying this on the lap of the LEO's but, that will only led to worse scenarios for us later on down the line, when they start feeling the need to cover their asses on every call by taking people in, violating their constitutional rights in the process

could they have watched the tapes - yes
could they have checked the dros - yes
would it have mattered - most likely not

[Patrick Aherne]

Just because someone calls the PD and says they are an MD or psych, doesn't mean they are. Welfare checks like this happen every day. Cops go out, contact the individual, ask, "Do you feel like you want to hurt yourself, or anyone else?" If they answer no and are not living in a pile of their own excrement, due to an mental illness, the cops take no action. That's the law. I'm not violating anybody's rights to preserve yours.

[cortayack]

So what if they had? He was not a prohibited person!

They looked up, that I owned guns, for a seat belt ticket.....LOL!

[Doheny]

I agree..

The reason so many are dead and injured is not because of this kid having a gun, but because of the lack of guns around to protect oneself and others from lunatics like this kid.

He killed 3 with a knife.. how that happened I have no clue. Maybe in their sleep.. I didn't look into it..

it's hard to defend one's self against a knife attack. I can see one motivated person taking down three people with a knife. Don't forget on 9-11 a few hijackers with box cutters took down planes with lots of passengers.

[GrizzlyGuy]

I'm a little surprised that I seem to be alone around here in resenting the implication that my mere status as a firearms owner should be viewed as a big scarlet letter by authorities any time they ever have dealings with me. Especially as I have had police come to the house after a call from a neighbor; they did interview me on my doorstep; they did notice that I was very agitated; and they went away since I was harming no one and doing nothing illegal.

Should their visit have ended differently if they knew I had guns (a lot of guns)?

I've only made it to post #14 in this thread (the one I'm quoting) and frankly I'm dumbfounded at what I've read so far. Usually I read the entire thread before posting, but I'm going to make an exception on this one: Mitch you are 100% correct, it should make ZERO difference.

Am I really reading (from others) that they believe LEOs should take our status as gun owners into consideration when trying to determine if we are looney?!? Wouldn't that make the standard lower for us and cause more of us to end up in the looney bin when we aren't really looney?

OK, back to reading, hopefully I'll find that sanity has been restored further down the thread.

[paolo]

I've only made it to post #14 in this thread (the one I'm quoting) and frankly I'm dumbfounded at what I've read so far. Usually I read the entire thread before posting, but I'm going to make an exception on this one: Mitch you are 100% correct, it should make ZERO difference.



Am I really reading (from others) that they believe LEOs should take our status as gun owners into consideration when trying to determine if we are looney?!? Wouldn't that make the standard lower for us and cause more of us to end up in the looney bin when we aren't really looney?



OK, back to reading, hopefully I'll find that sanity has been restored further down the thread.

I was going to reply right after I read Mitch's reply also. And, it appears sanity was restored.

Freedom is a two way street (as another poster said).

I don't think we want to get into a "dream police" world.

[ahern25]

If the cops had placed him on a hold because he made a video and had guns then this thread would have been about how the cops abused their power and violated this guys rights. We cant have our cake and eat it to.

[donny77]

I've only made it to post #14 in this thread (the one I'm quoting) and frankly I'm dumbfounded at what I've read so far. Usually I read the entire thread before posting, but I'm going to make an exception on this one: Mitch you are 100% correct, it should make ZERO difference.

Am I really reading (from others) that they believe LEOs should take our status as gun owners into consideration when trying to determine if we are looney?!? Wouldn't that make the standard lower for us and cause more of us to end up in the looney bin when we aren't really looney?

OK, back to reading, hopefully I'll find that sanity has been restored further down the thread.

No, not for determining if you should be 5150'd. But yes for determining if you should perform a 5150 wellness check, or see a judge about a search warrant. Columbine, Aurora Colorado, Newtown and Santa Barbara were all planned events with paper trails. A due process search warrant could have prevented these incidents from occurring. A concerned relative isn't enough for a search warrant. Concerned relative and gun owner, probably not good enough. Concerned relative, gun owner and some questionable tirades on the internet and I'm starting to get some vibes. I don't think a search warrant would be unreasonable, and if nothing is found you ARE NOT 5150'd. If a plot to wreak havoc is found, maybe not a 5150, maybe full on arrest for conspiracy to commit murder.

I don't think mental issues enough should lose you your gun rights. Those that commit mass murder are a small percentage of the population and a small percentage of "mental" patients as well. Many people in therapy live normal productive lives. That said finding a due process and constitutional method to prevent these kinds of murders is positive for everyone. I get tired of defending my gun rights every time one of these happens. If police could stop 50% of them without violating rights I would be very much ok with that.

[Mitch]

No, not for determining if you should be 5150'd. But yes for determining if you should perform a 5150 wellness check, or see a judge about a search warrant. Columbine, Aurora Colorado, Newtown and Santa Barbara were all planned events with paper trails.

This is all Monday morning quarterbacking. Police perform hundreds of welfare checks a month. Most of the time, nothing happens; some of the time (I'm guessing), police have to do something more. No one cares because only very rarely does a subject of one of these welfare checks go out on a knifing and shooting frenzy.

But when that happens the hand-wringers come out in force and insist the police should have Done Something.

None of the hand-wringers in this thread have actually proposed anything concrete the police should have done in this case.

A due process search warrant could have prevented these incidents from occurring.

How? What would they have found with a search warrant? Some legally purchased and possessed firearms, and presumably a knife and a BMW.

Last I looked, none of this is contraband for a non-prohibited person.

But let's say, for the sake of argument, Rodgers also had a hand grenade in his closet. Now the search warrant produces some results. But how to you justify the warrant in the first place?

A concerned relative isn't enough for a search warrant.

Thank goodness for that, anyway.

Concerned relative and gun owner, probably not good enough.

Probably not good enough? Really? Have you noticed the name of the forum you are posting on?

Concerned relative, gun owner and some questionable tirades on the internet and I'm starting to get some vibes.

Well, I'd like to hope that "vibes" aren't enough for people to have their civil rights violated by the police. For that matter, I have no doubt at all police have daily encounters with weirdos of every stripe who produce "vibes," but since no one is breaking any laws, they let the weirdos go on their merry way.

It's only once or twice a decade when one of those weirdos makes the headlines that the calls come down from the mass media and gun forum participants alike that police should have "done more," and we are all just too obsessed with antiquated civil liberties to produce a society that's safe for white college students, etc.

The fact is, the police could not have prevented this incident, at least not in a free country. The question is, do we or do we not want to continue living in a free country?

[RickD427]

No, not for determining if you should be 5150'd. But yes for determining if you should perform a 5150 wellness check, or see a judge about a search warrant. Columbine, Aurora Colorado, Newtown and Santa Barbara were all planned events with paper trails. A due process search warrant could have prevented these incidents from occurring. A concerned relative isn't enough for a search warrant. Concerned relative and gun owner, probably not good enough. Concerned relative, gun owner and some questionable tirades on the internet and I'm starting to get some vibes. I don't think a search warrant would be unreasonable, and if nothing is found you ARE NOT 5150'd. If a plot to wreak havoc is found, maybe not a 5150, maybe full on arrest for conspiracy to commit murder.

I don't think mental issues enough should lose you your gun rights. Those that commit mass murder are a small percentage of the population and a small percentage of "mental" patients as well. Many people in therapy live normal productive lives. That said finding a due process and constitutional method to prevent these kinds of murders is positive for everyone. I get tired of defending my gun rights every time one of these happens. If police could stop 50% of them without violating rights I would be very much ok with that.

Donny,

The requirements to get a search warrant are pretty strict. Please check out Penal Code section 1524 for a listing of circumstances that must be shown in order to get a search warrant. None of these things were present in Rodgers' case.

It takes two or more people before officers can take any action on a "Conspiracy." Where is there any evidence that Rodgers had a crime partner?

How would you propose that officers get the search warrant that you're talking about?

[philobeddoe]

If you think that would have worked (given they had been trying to support him emotionally for the past 22 years and it didn't work), then I hope you are never in that situation.

Thanks.

I don't think that works.

But it would have been the first step, if they were truly worried about him, in getting him out of Isla Vista and getting him the help he needed.

I do work in that field.



____________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ