Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: When 9/11 Truth Becomes a Criminal Offense: Marine Vet Arrested for 9/11 Facebook Posts

Posted 1 year ago on Aug. 26, 2012, 3:02 p.m. EST by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32487

Email this article to a friend Print this article

YouTube/IamKristenMeghan

It is unknown if Brandon Raub was detained for anything more than questioning.

UPDATE: A previous version of this article said Raub was detained by the FBI. The FBI has told us their agents had "nothing to do" with his detainment and placement in a psychiatric ward.

ORIGINAL: A former U.S. Marine who accused the government of lying about 9/11 and spoke of "The Revolution" on Facebook was detained on Thursday night, reports Renee Nal of Gather.

According to Brandon Raub's mother, authorities from the FBI, Secret Service and Chesterfield County PD came to their door, questioned Raub about his Facebook posts – which are critical of the official story regarding 9/11 and refer to "starting a revolution" – then handcuffed him and placed him in a Chesterfield PD squad car before taking him to John Randolph Psychiatric Hospital in Hopewell, Va.

Raub's mother said he returned about a year ago after serving in Afghanistan (after serving in Iraq) and did not suffer from PTSD.

The Chesterfield PD told us that the situation "was an FBI matter and we were just there to assist them" so it could not provide us with an official reason why Raub was detained.

Raub's mother said that an FBI agent told her Raub was "arrested by the Chesterfield police department" because he "assaulted an officer and resisted arrest," then asked her if Raub "was having any issues relating to people" and told her that "the threats he was making were terrorist in nature."

When asked the Chesterfield PD said Raub has not been charged with resisting arrest and assaulting an officer.

The FBI and Secret Service will not be available for comment until Monday morning.

Here is the video of the arrest:

The most recent posts by Brandon J Raub – as opposed to Raub Brandon – include "AND THEY WILL SAY HE SAID IT TO THE NSA FIRST." on August 16 and "Feelin like Pac all Eyes on me." on August 15 and "The Revolution will come for me. Men will be at my door soon to pick me up to lead it. ;)" on August 14.

Also on August 14, he posted this video:

And this:

Facebook/Brandon J Raub

A post on August 12 said: "There has been an overwhelming amount of evil enacted and planned against you, your children, and your countrymen. It is great in scope. Your government evil. It is as simple as that. And the calvary is coming."

Raub's mother said Raub was told that he will see a judge on Monday but has not been told what he has been charged with and has not been read his rights.

61 Comments

61 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by Nevada1 (4024) 1 year ago

There must be zero tolerance for illegal detention.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

exactly

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4024) 1 year ago

Most critical issue. If they get away with illegal detention, they get away with everything.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Or legalized illegal detention as in this case.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17898) 1 year ago

What did Raub say about 9/!! though ?! Any one know ?!! Or are we too not allowed to mention that ?!!!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

Raub's post are not particular articulate

his words lack specific detail for his arguments

[-] 1 points by ericweiss (575) 1 year ago

DALLAS, August 23rd, 2012 - After a special hearing today, Circuit Judge W. Allan Sharret declared the commitment order granted to federal authorities for Brandon Raub’s arrest and detainment was invalid.

Raub, the 26-year-old former Marine, pro-liberty activist and Virginia resident, was seized by FBI, Secret Service and local authorities over Facebook posts allegedly “terrorist in nature”.

According to court documents, a swift evaluation by social worker Michael Campbell determined Raub’s involuntary admission. The following day, a magistrate Michael S. Znotens ordered his detention at John Randolph Hospital. Raub was evaluated for an additional 15 minutes by Dr. James A. Correll and later ordered by Special Justice Walter Douglass Stoke to remain for 30 days at VA Hospital in Salem, VA.

John Whitehead of The Rutherford Institute, a Virginia-based civil rights organization, rushed to Raub’s defense, filing multiple motions later denied, including a plea preventing Raub’s transfer away from family and legal counsel. Once denied, another appeal noting Raub’s initial detention orders did not follow the law Chesterfield PD was filed.

Judge Sharret agreed the arrest and detention actions were illegal and will request Raub’s discharge. As the Richmond-Times Dispatch reports, he was shocked by the failure of the magistrate to include in the order any grounds for holding Raub.

“The initial order was rubber-stamped”, says John Whitehead. "The special justice is very old. He had trouble hearing Brandon. He brought into the courtroom a personal cassette player – we tried to listen to it and you can hardly hear what's being said. This is the so-called judge – he's a lawyer, not a real judge – it's like what you would see in a bad movie."

“There's a system here that is corrupt. And this guy is caught in it," Whitehead told Business Insider. "I'm friends with the local police; I could call them right now and probably get you committed if you were in Virginia. They can arrive at your door based on somebody's testimony or your Facebook page and take you away to a mental hospital.”

Whitehead stated that 20,000 people are committed under similar circumstances in Virginia annually. “That means a lot of people are disappearing under the pretext of mental illness”.

Many of Raub’s posts were controversial, including forecasting a popular revolution against the federal government, anti-establishment statements and pro-conspiracy remarks. But authorities claimed concerned citizens anonymously reported Raub’s statements while Whitehead clarified the statements “terrorist in nature” were out-of-context messages shared privately via a Facebook game Raub played with siblings, which the FBI spied on.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

You completely misunderstand the process.

The 9/11 Truth Conspiracy has very little credibility. Because it has such little credibility those who pick it up appear not to be very credible. It isn't a criminal offense to be less than credible -

but it does make you vulnerable.

So that when you also begin saying :

  • *The revolution is coming!
  • Someone is coming to get me to lead it*

it facilitates the perception that you are mad as hell and in need of pharmaceutical restraint.

Here are a few observations I made earlier on this case:

.



.

First we have to distinguish between simply being radicalized and being programmed. Programming comes as a result of repetition - and may often include various forms of both positive and negative reinforcement. The more punishing the negative reinforcement, the more deeply the conditioning may be set.

Radicalization is similar, the differences may be subtle, but in general it is simply a process of pissing someone off - constantly.

Given the utility of the angry white guy syndrome, I include both types of what I consider very very bad behavior under the heading Manchurian Candidate. Strictly speaking, the movie depicts true conditioning, as opposed to simple radicalization. Since I presume it may be difficult to tell the difference today, and since both forms in my view are as a result of that really really bad behavior I assume the use of the term Manchurian Candidate is appropriate.

.


. With a more precise understanding of the term, we can now examine telling symptomology:

  • There is a degree of altruism incorporated in his message - as you can see here when he says You deserve to know the truth. He goes on to assert the government is evil, and this represents a significant change in thinking - he did join the military, had he held this opinion of the government at that time then it seems highly unlikely he would have signed up.

    • he insists there is evil planned against us, and that it is great in scope - making such public statements while holding such a belief implies that he is placing himself at some risk in attempting to get the message out.

    • this point should not be understated - especially since it may provide motivation in the future. If he thinks he is taking personal risk, he will be evaluating his encounters with authority to determine if that risk is present during the encounter, or in the future - reception of his message is his primary source of feedback, and will form the basis of his evaluation.

  • He identifies individual portions of federal bureaucracy as complicit in something, and seeks to communicate to them through his FB postings:

    • *Dear men and women in positions of power here may be an indication that he sees a distinction between average government employees and those who are engaged in corruption;
    • within our government, corrupt bureaucrats, corrupt judges and police*
    • and he indicates that he doesn't have time to explain in more depth - possibly indicating a time constraint beyond the norm.
    • He also indicates a recognition that others perceive him as going crazy - indicating he is aware of how his behavior is impacting others, not entirely trying to hide it, but perhaps attempting to tailor his behavior in such a way that it leaves room for the accessibility of his message - because obviously in his mind the message is important.
  • He has expectations of both the American people and our institutions - he says We are Americans and therefore will win out against the corruption; he has an expectation of Justice - these are principles ingrained as a result of the narrative we tell our selves and our children, it has a basis in reality, and the cause of Justice is, in his view at this present time, at some risk.

    • Chem trails show up as a theme in this FB post - I'm not sure where it comes from, perhaps it originated in South America as a result of paraquat spraying; I'm not certain on that point - but this theme has gained traction among the tin foil hat crowd - and since we did use various portions of an unsuspecting U.S. public as guinea pigs with radiation experiments, it is not possible to state with utter certainty that such claims are complete nonsense.

    • NOTE: This is also the only time, based on the evidence we have, where he states explicitly that repetition of the message You are Heroic has power to convince and to alter behavior. It is likely he has found himself within an environment where positive reinforcement for his current behavior has followed this process and the theme of heroism, and it may in fact be based on some of his marine experience, capitalizing on the conditioning he has already undergone as a result of boot camp, or later military training.

  • The theme of personal risk may be seen in this FB posting, and we also see positive reinforcement for his message. Heroism is also a theme repeated here - and it should be remembered that Richard Jewel did think he would go to Atlanta and become a hero - it didn't work out that way even though he did attempt to do something to stop the bombing.

    • It should be noted that in Jewel's case, he won a million dollar settlement with the FBI - they had no clue at that time regarding the nature and utility of such constructs, if they had they would not have been out a million bucks. Also, a year or two later he died of a heart attack. We cannot know if this was by natural causes or if it was chemically induced - but the value of the iconography alone suggests the later.
  • Here we see he has accepted the view that the government was responsible for September 11; this kind of thinking is prevalent among the tin foil hat crowd and yet, rarely are individuals arrested for their behavior as it ties to this belief. I would suggest that some form of reinforcement, some form of personal experience, reinforcing that perception of great evil is what makes the difference between someone who simply holds this belief, and someone who becomes extremely angry and agitated and attempts redress.

  • The last picture in the series of links included in the Forum Post indicate that the revolution is here, and someone will come pick him up to lead it. This is typical of the practical joker who says, do this for me, you'll like it, it'll be fun*, when the reality is actually quite different. It is similar to the Jewel experience, in that Jewel did not end up being the hero he expected.

    • This last also has an element of the spooky - a premonition that comes out twisted, which has the result of warning: You do not want to be this guy, because we will make you the tragic butt of an endless series of practical jokes, and there is nothing anyone can do. Sit down, shut up, and maybe we'll leave you alone . . . It isn't true of course, they never stop. Abusers rarely do.

    • NOTE: I haven't checked the YouTube url, but I note the caption: Big Pun - Brave in the Heart - A Tribute to the Artist This appears to be a possible message, one that only those engaged in his environment will catch. As if he is now creating his own, Subliminal Billboards.

.

[-] 5 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Fact is the guy got rousted and locked up for his posts. You cool with that? I'm not.

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Exactly, all the BS in the world, doesn't make it right to "restrain" him in any way, as long as he poses no imminent threat to others or himself.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

No one should be cool with that.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I did not say I was cool with that. Given that he was arrested for posts on line, and given that I have made posts like this it tends to beg the question:

  • why has no one ever questioned me over some of my posts?

Let me clarify at the outset - I'm not complaining that I haven't been detained indefinitely - although as we see with the Raub case, certain curbs may exist.

What is different perhaps is that I don't believe anyone has ever called the police to report my postings - thus placing civic authority on the record as having been notified.

That creates a whole other set of considerations in situations like this.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

As a Vietnam era draftee i was trained to use the M- 14 and M- 16 "assault rifles". Though I was not the best shot in the platoon I was competent and passed on the rifle range without any do-overs. Also i could take apart and reassemble those weapons while blindfolded. As things turned out i was not in combat thanks to God but i still to this day am pissed off that i had to endure two very unpleasant years of servitude and risk while Mitt Romney, Richard Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and other well wired members of my age cohort who were and still are militarists in theory (chicken hawks) got away without having to even take Basic Training. I can honestly say that I hate these individuals, and the feeling is personal. I hate George W. (AWOL FROM THE NATIONAL GUARD) Bush for the lies and the havoc and death and destruction his lying precipitated. I believe that we are being lied to about 9/11 and that makes me angry too. So, you telling me some idiot social worker who couldn't find a real profession he was qualified for can have me locked up? See where I'm going with this?

[-] 3 points by 1971 (154) 1 year ago

We have no shortage of chickenhawks who are always beating the war drums. Here's the short list:

  • Spencer Abraham: Did not serve
  • Eliot Abrams: Did not serve
  • John Ashcroft: Did not serve
  • Roy Blunt: Did not serve
  • George W. Bush: Texas Air Nat. Guard; AWOL
  • Jeb Bush: Did not serve
  • Saxby Chambliss: Did not serve. Attacked Cleland's patriotism
  • Dick Cheney: Did not serve
  • Christopher Cox: Did not serve
  • Tom DeLay: Did not serve
  • John Engler: Did not serve
  • Douglas Feith: Did not serve
  • Bill Frist: Did not serve
  • Newt Gingrich: Did not serve
  • Rudy Giuliani: Did not serve
  • Dennis Hastert: Did not serve
  • Tim Hutchison: Did not serve
  • Jack Kemp: Did not serve.
  • Jon Kyl: Did not serve
  • Trent Lott: Did not serve
  • Mitch McConnell: Did not serve
  • John McHugh: Did not serve
  • George Pataki: Did not serve
  • Richard Perle: Did not serve
  • Dana Rohrabacher: Did not serve
  • Karl Rove: Did not serve
  • Rick Santorum: Did not serve
  • Richard Shelby: Did not serve
  • JC Watts: Did not serve
  • Vin Weber: Did not serve
  • Paul Wolfowitz: Did not serve
  • Andy Card – no service
  • Condi Rice – no service
  • John Bolton – no service
  • Don Nichols – no service
  • David Dreier - no service
  • Bill Bennett: Did not serve
  • Wolf Blitzer: Did not serve
  • Pat Buchanan: Did not serve
  • Mann Coulter: Did not serve
  • Charlie Daniels: Did not serve
  • Lou Dobbs: Did not serve
  • Paul Gigot: Did not serve
  • Sean Hannity: Did not serve
  • Bill Kristol: Did not serve
  • Rush Limbaugh: Did not serve
  • Michael Medved: Did not serve
  • Ted Nugent: Did not serve
  • Bill O'Reilly: Did not serve
  • Ralph Reed: Did not serve
  • Michael Savage: Did not serve
  • Antonin Scalia: Did not serve
  • Kenneth Starr: Did not serve
  • Clarence Thomas: Did not serve = George Will: Did not serve
  • Roger Ailes (Fox) – Did not serve
  • Anne Coulter – Did not serve
  • Fred Barnes – Did not serve
  • Gary Bauer – Did not serve
  • Neil Bortz – Did not serve
  • Tony Snow - Did not serve
  • Jerry Falwell - Did not serve

Pundits, Preachers, and Judges

Bill Bennett: Did not serve Wolf Blitzer: Did not serve Pat Buchanan: Did not serve Mann Coulter: Did not serve Charlie Daniels: Did not serve Lou Dobbs: Did not serve Paul Gigot: Did not serve Sean Hannity: Did not serve Bill Kristol: Did not serve Rush Limbaugh: Did not serve Chris Matthews: Did not serve Michael Medved: Did not serve Ted Nugent: Did not serve Bill O'Reilly: Did not serve Ralph Reed: Did not serve Michael Savage: Did not serve Antonin Scalia: Did not serve Kenneth Starr: Did not serve Clarence Thomas: Did not serve George Will: Did not serve Roger Ailes (Fox) – Did not serve Anne Coulter – Did not serve Fred Barnes – Did not serve Gary Bauer – Did not serve Neil Bortz – Did not serve Tony Snow - Did not serve Jerry Falwell - Did not serve

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I should have waited to read your post till next day because I think reading this list got my blood pressure up and i will soon be retiring for the night. Oh well, but thank you!

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4024) 1 year ago

Bush jr, Cheney and Limbaugh have had substance abuse problems. Bush jr and Cheney have had DUIs. Cheney shot friend in face with shotgun.

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Cheney's victim apologized. Imagine that! And the presstitutes went on their merry little way. Nothing to see here...

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4024) 1 year ago

Good Post.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I hear that. One of the things I find so objectionable about repelicans is that as a party, while al qaeda launched attacks on the USS Cole and two embassies, the party insisted that any response by the Commander in Chief was simply a distraction to the real issue - some blue fucking dress . . .

Had Clinton be free to respond appropriately perhaps we would not have had September 11 at all - if not of course there would not be any air port screening, no patriot act, no invasion of Iraq . . .

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

And TSA highway stops and subway personal belongings searches.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I'm hearin ya. Bush wore his flight jacket, but never flew at all. Too busy selling coke to support his addiction to booze, while real men and women went and fought his daddy's wars for oil .

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I quit the military when the war started

I was not going to support it

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

My father knocked out his sarg, did thirty days solitary.

[-] -3 points by electron (-492) 1 year ago

Social workers are important. It's a real profession. 911 Truthers are mentally ill individuals that should be locked away on distant islands.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Social workers are people who couldn't find a real profession that they could qualify for.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

he insists there is evil planned against us, and that it is great in scope - making such public statements while holding such a belief implies that he is placing himself at some risk in attempting to get the message out.

I'm not a believer in Al Quada

and he indicates that he doesn't have time to explain in more depth - possibly indicating a time constraint beyond the norm.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I am fairly sure he was not talking about al qaeda.

I believe he was talking about the rise of the s.i.c.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

s.i.c. ?

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

surveillance industrial complex?

the s.i.c.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20556) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

not a bad idea if it looks like a situation where they are not following the law.

the thing is cops are at the bottom of the surveillance hierarchy, something to keep in mind.

[-] 1 points by kaiserw (211) 1 year ago

This is all getting incredibly dangerous. The rubber band is being pulled very tight. By the gov pulling stunts like these, they're seriously risking kicking off actions that could quickly escalate and spiral to a fully live civil war.

I hope some semblance of sanity can prevail, but I'm getting less hopeful.

[-] 0 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

I find it difficult to understand why you seem surprised that after the shootings at two army bases, a political rally, and a movie, that authorities would be concerned over some of his Facebook entries. Why the reason has to be a 911 conspiracy or anything complicated and not simply, here's a guy that knows how to use a gun and may be crazy.

Mental health laws that are decades old were used. He wasn't read his rights because there was no crime. Some of the posts he made seemed to indicate he was considering harming others. He was taken in, examined by mental health professionals and eventually released by a judge who evaluated the entire situation.

Across the country there are hundreds of these involuntary civil commitments every day and there have been for decades. Most States have some mental health law that allows a person to be committed involuntarily if they are thought to be a danger to themselves or others.

[-] 2 points by letsdomore (89) 1 year ago

MsStacy you're right. Safety is the most important thing. Freedom and Individual Rights are way overrated. What good is Freedom if some crazy shoots you while watching Batman?

I say let's give everyone a Lobotamy and Castrate the Males when they're 15....., no, no, 13, yes...., YES 13 ! I think 13 years of age would be best.

I have to sign off now. Dick Cheney, Bernanke and W are coming over to help Fix Medicare and Social Security.

  • Paul Ryan
[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

Sarcasm? It's a simple law, if you disagree with it and can find cases where it's abused then organize to change it. States review these laws occasionally and update them for the times.

I'm not saying I support it, just that it's there and has been part of our law for all our lives. People should already be aware that what they put out for public display on Facebook is looked at by the authorities. No one should be surprised by this particular incident.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment

This guy apparently was locked up on the say so of an idiot social worker. (Do you know any social worker who can honestly say "I could have been a doctor" or "I could have been an engineer"?)

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

There are always problems with the details in any law. There was a case a few years ago of a psychologist in Florida misusing their involuntary commitment law to commit a neighbor over a dispute involving a dog. The abuses don't change the fact that in today's climate the authorities are going to be anxious to prevent another public outcry over a mass shooting.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

So now a social worker can have you locked up. And when you get out, which you will then wht?

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

When you get out it's over. It's a medical issue not a criminal one. It's estimated there are several hundred suicide attempts each year, any of them stopped by the authorities would be committed. Hopefully helped and then released to go on with their life.

The whole process varies from state to state. In some jurisdictions a nurse, doctor, or even a police officer can start the process. There was a case in Florida a few years ago where a psychologist lost her license when she had a neighbor committed over a simple dispute that started over a dog.

I simply can't get over that this kind of law surprises anyone. Civil commitment has been used world wide. It's also been with us since innocent by reason of insanity. There is even a movement in some countries to train people in mental-first aid. That means non-health professionals may be starting the process. That "idiot" social worker may soon be joined by a lot of other ordinary people.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Look if I thought someone i knew was really on the verge of suicide or homicide I'd make a call ASAP. But to have a social worker make the decision? Based on writings on a facebook page? No way, I'm not good with that.

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

Look at the example you just gave. In your scenario the process was actually started by you. When you decided someone was on the verge of a violent act. After that it's just trying to get someone in authority to make a decision as fast as possible, before harm is done. You call the police, if they agree with your assessment, they call someone to sigh off on the initial observation period, a social worker or psychologist, whoever is going to agree and is easiest to get to.

What is the actual story here with Raub? Someone found his Facebook entries disturbing and acted. Was it an overreaction due to recent violence in the news or not who can say. Is it persecution for political beliefs? Who knows for sure? I personally thought some of his posts were disturbing and would have wanted him examined. Some of the others were harmless ramblings.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

So, MsStacy, you believe that because someone "knows how to use a gun and may be crazy," sufficient grounds exist to forcibly detain and restrain that person.

If that is your premise, many members of the armed forces and a good number of police officers probably deserve the same fate.Also, nearly all members of the NRA should be incarcerated and examined. Egads! Half the American population, especially the ones with whom I disagree, should be put away.

The real problem, of course, is who gets to decide who is sane.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

the US does hold the greatest incarceration per capita

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Undoubtedly because we have the highest number of criminals per capita, but many of the criminals are the ones putting others behind bars.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

for profit

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

Anything worth doing, is worth doing for profit.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

meh

only because I have to pay the rent

[-] 2 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

This guy apparently was locked up on the say so of an idiot social worker. (Do you know any social worker who can honestly say "I could have been a doctor" or "I could have been an engineer"?)

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

That makes the whole issue even more bizarre and threatening. A social worker? Good god, why not the cleaning lady?

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

My summary, while a little flippant, may be how it's done by police in some locations, depending on what the involuntary commitment laws are in their particular state. It's a judgement call, no crime has been committed but the determination has to be made if the individual might harm himself or others and would be best served by a period of observation by a professional.

Who decides varies from state to state, often the individual is brought by police to a mental health professional who makes the determination as to wether or not there will be a period of observation.

In this case some of those Facebook entries were viewed as danger signals by police. That started the process. Eventually a judge made the determination that there wasn't enough to keep the man committed.

My main point is that like this process or not it shouldn't be a surprise that it's being used considering the recent movie shootings. It's not some vast conspiracy. More just simple societal paranoia.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

before the internet, these "dangers" would not have been perceived

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

I might be inclined to agree with you, but reread the article and tell me that something isn't rotten in the state of Denmark.

The man is committed for "observation," but all the police agencies deny their involvement. The FBI denies they arrested Raub, while the Chesterfield Police say the whole affair "was an FBI matter and" they "were just there to assist them."

Brandon Raub was arrested and committed for "observation," but no police agency readily admits responsibility, Hmmm.

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

They have deniability because the man wasn't arrested, and a psychologist signed the commitment. I'm not saying it's a good system, just that it's been there, been used, and occasionally abused for a very long time. Social network sites simply open the door for greater use of commitment when potentially violent attitudes get expressed.

Media adds to it by publicly wondering if anyone noticed any signs of mental illness after some violent attack and making demands that something should be done to prevent shootings. In this climate it shouldn't be a surprise that commitment gets misused.

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2367) from Boulder City, NV 1 year ago

He might not have been "arrested," but he was forcibly removed to a psychiatric institution. The more we accept this type of control from the government, the worse the oppression will become. The government will take every bit of individual freedom it can.

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 1 year ago

Then organize to try to end it, or work in your state to review who makes the commitment decision and how many cases show abuse of authority.

The commitment laws do serve a purpose. Consider just suicide. There are nearly 35000 suicides in the US in a year and it's estimated there are 10 or 11 attempts for each successful suicide. That's quite a few people that might benefit from intervention, a period of observation, and perhaps some medication.

[-] -1 points by electron (-492) 1 year ago

This is like Renneye. We all know she's mentally ill, delusional because of conspiracy theories, and today she threatened to harm me physically.

[-] -2 points by electron (-492) 1 year ago

This is good. 911 Truther BS has gone on long enough. They guy needs mental help.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 1 year ago

you know you and the mods you work with inspired this screen name don't you?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

what's it mean?

5440 or fight about pushing the US border with canada?

[-] -2 points by electron (-492) 1 year ago

I don't understand your question. It's malformed English.