Violent thought? You get reported.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
I don't get what you mean? I really doubt your therapist is going to take the word of your ex.... Sorry, that has nothing to do with the OP.

Oh yes they will, in a humming bird's heartbeat.

This is the one part of the "reasonable" gun control laws that can be used to take guns from nearly everyone. All it takes is redefining a word here and there after they get support for the bills and pass them, just like they did with "terrorist," and you go from reasonable to totalitarian.

I am surprised that all of these legislators all over the country do not see what is happening to our nation. We are being bombarded with such unConstitutional sludge lately that where we are headed cannot be good. Yet they do not see that? I don't buy it, as it is obvious. That is why I feel that there is something more going on here. I do not trust a government that has done the things that the US government has done. And just about all governments have done similar or identical things, which is quite sad. And you wonder why people are always out for themselves...Because those who run the country are psychopathic or at the very least emotionally imbalanced, otherwise they would not have sought power in the first place. I mean seriously, what kind of complex does one have to have to actually seek and attempt to garner power over others?

It would deter mentally unstable people from getting help or if they got help they wouldn't divulge much that would aid in treating them accordingly.

People joke about wanting others injured or dead all the time. I want my estranged husband to sustain an injury, but I'm not planning on doing it to him.

These therapists could set anybody up to say violent things by asking them if they ever want to do this or that to someone.

1984

THOUGHT CRIMES!

When they report, do the therapists have to have some recorded evidence of what was said, probably to get a second opinion? Or can they just use their notes as evidence?

Eventually they'll be able to literally read your thoughts, at which point anyone could be indicted for their thought crimes. Undressing a coworker in your mind? Premeditated &/or mental rape. Daydreaming of knocking your boss out and quitting? Premeditated assault. Thinking about how tyrannical your government is? Mental treason punishable by life imprisonment in a slave labor camp. I can foresee the future becoming a technologically enhanced mutation of the Orwellian nightmare, if we continue down the same road; i.e where the pathocrats (psychopaths) call the shots.

These days they want to label everything as a mental illness or a potential act of terrorism..

back in the 80's i knew a guy who would stick the phrase "bomb in your briefcase" into what he was saying. it was a good shot to see if people were actually paying attention to what he was saying as well as to see how long it would take people to process what he was saying. i don't think he would want to do that now, he'd end up with atf, fbi, and homeland security breaking down his door to arrest him. oh how far we have already fallen.

it's almost funny people used to avoid psychiatry because of the negative stigma attached to it. now people are going to avoid it out of a very real and valid fear that they will loose rights. coming soon it will be loose freedom as they lock you up if you say the wrong thing to a shrink. you might not even have to say anything at all, as a psychiatrist may warp what you do or DO NOT say to suit what THEY think. i saw a report that a shrink filled out on me where i was accused of being evasive and not telling the truth, because i would not say that my parents abused me (which they did not). now what my parents abusing me or not had anything to do with an AUTO ACCIDENT is beyond me but it DID apparently count against me with the insurance company somehow in regards to injuries i received from it. so it is not only what you might say but what the shrink THINKS, which may have nothing to do with reality.

Isn't that how it is today though? I mean really, you say one thing that could be misconstrued one way and you're a right-wing hillbilly or a left-wing hipster, racist, misogynist, sexist, murderous, bigotted or any other possible thing the world can come up with right now.

It's getting to the point that it's becoming ridiculous. My father taught me to be thicker skinned and the way people act these days it's like theirs is made of tissue paper. Now if you say you're going to hurt someone you get reported? We aren't school children, we're adults under stress, dammit!

Doctor-patient confidentiality: there's no way this flies. Otherwise, they would over-turn Roe v. Wade. If the life of an unborn human is forfeit due to the privacy between an abortionist and a woman, then what goes on between a therapist and a psychiatric patient is still private even if that patient expresses a desire to harm others. New York can't have it both ways. I would love to see this one go to court. Either this law or Roe gets over-turned. Doctor-patient confidentiality is doctor-patient confidentiality. You can't protect one patient while throwing another under the bus, it's malpractice, it's discrimination, and it's against federal law.

Originally posted by MoonChild02
Doctor-patient confidentiality: there's no way this flies. Otherwise, they would over-turn Roe v. Wade. If the life of an unborn human is forfeit due to the privacy between an abortionist and a woman, then what goes on between a therapist and a psychiatric patient is still private even if that patient expresses a desire to harm others. New York can't have it both ways. I would love to see this one go to court. Either this law or Roe gets over-turned. Doctor-patient confidentiality is doctor-patient confidentiality. You can't protect one patient while throwing another under the bus, it's malpractice, it's discrimination, and it's against federal law.

There are state laws that allow a breach in doctor-patient confidentiality when there is high risk of violence to others, so this is not unprecedented.

There are circumstances, however, that override the requirement to maintain confidentiality and do not need a patient’s consent.

Duty to protect third parties. In 1976 the California Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Tarasoff case4 that a psychiatrist has a duty to do what is reasonably necessary to protect third parties if a patient presents a serious risk of violence to another person. The specific applications of this principle are governed by other states’ laws, which have extended or limited this duty.


The APA’s position on this exception is consistent with legal standards. Its code of ethics states, “When, in the clinical judgment of the treating psychiatrist, the risk of danger is deemed to be significant, the psychiatrist may reveal confidential information disclosed by the patient.”

www.jfponline.com...

reply to post by ValentineWiggin


How is this anything to do with freedom of speech?

Therapists are obligated to report anything illegal you tell them already.

Threats are not covered by free speech anyway...

The right is not absolute, however. State, local and federal governments can regulate how people express themselves, provided that they adhere to certain principles laid down by the United States Supreme Court. Moreover, certain types of speech - such as threats and incitations to violence - aren't protected at all.

news.findlaw.com...

Not that I agree they should start reporting every threat.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by ValentineWiggin

 

I mean... do you joke about bombing an airplane while standing in the security line?

Errrr yeah, loads of times, people need to lighten up and get a sense of humour

The elite are transhumanists. Transhumans mess with the mind. They want to be able to do all sorts of things eventually, my guess is, chips in the brain, brain scanning as we enter different parts of the world, brain scanning will be a big thing because it means that there is a new type of assualt on people. Its also the case that they will know how to effect the brain from afar. That is via technology, humans are robots to them. If we let them. Has no one seen the mouse with an ear on its body? Shows you how sick scientists are. They are willing to take parts dna or what ever from others and implant them onto those that do not want it. When the time comes. They are hiring heavy duty scientists, to do this experimentation, NOW. NWO.

Originally posted by FreedomEntered
Has no one seen the mouse with an ear on its body?

Yeah not nice for the mouse probably, but a positive advancement for Human medicine eh?

Not everything being done is nefarious, get a grip man.

If the elite illuminati kill on mass, in cold blood. You dont think that they can use the body to move dna about, to the brain, the body etc. And manipulate mankind through these methods. Its the truth scientists are currently doing heavy duty research on the mind. It will make mk ultra look like amateur brainwashing.

I dont want a grip. Im happy to face reality, as is.

Originally posted by FreedomEntered
I dont want a grip. Im happy to face reality, as is.

Well if you think the mouse with the ear is sick then I suggest you never look into the medical field, or vivisection, or how most of the products you use are tested.

At least the ear might one day allow us to grow new body parts, lol admittedly that sounds creepy, but if you had lost an ear, you might think differently eh? So ears to ya mate!

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I am surprised that all of these legislators all over the country do not see what is happening to our nation. We are being bombarded with such unConstitutional sludge lately that where we are headed cannot be good. Yet they do not see that? I don't buy it, as it is obvious. That is why I feel that there is something more going on here. I do not trust a government that has done the things that the US government has done. And just about all governments have done similar or identical things, which is quite sad. And you wonder why people are always out for themselves...Because those who run the country are psychopathic or at the very least emotionally imbalanced, otherwise they would not have sought power in the first place. I mean seriously, what kind of complex does one have to have to actually seek and attempt to garner power over others?

''I am surprised that all of these legislators all over the country do not see what is happening to our nation.''

OH they do see it ! Believe that ! They see it and they're grinning like a fox in a henhouse !

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


We can take mental health institutions for an example. The reason mentally ill people can't be held against their will today is because that was horribly abused. Greed caused the abuse. People would have a loved one committed when they refused to die and let them inherit their estate. That is just one example of unintended consequences and abuse. This proposed policy would have the same unintended consequences. The mental health of an individual is sometimes open to interpretation. It is not like you can x-ray their brain and find the problem like a broken bone. Greed and revenge could motivate people to abuse such a policy. It does not mean that i don't agree with the concept of getting dangerous people off the street, i totally agree. I just think it needs much more thought put into it.