[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Murf993

I've dealt with psychiatrists who after 3 weeks of seeing a detained patient couldn't make a diagnosis. Perhaps you guys in Cali us different terminology then we do in Canuckistan, but to me "mentally challenged" would be a clue.

Our 5150 WIC laws require us to establish that a person is either a danger to themselves, a danger to others and/or gravely disabled. We establish that criteria based on statements made by the suspect/subject, witnesses on scene, the victim(s), etc. We can establish the gravely disabled requirement with a few key questions. If the suspect voluntarily disclosed they want help, we write the 72-hour hold and transport them to a mental facility. If the suspect is taken involuntarily, either the fire department or our MET team will transport; if it's the fire department, we will roll Code 3 behind them. We will write the 72-hour hold once we arrive at the facility.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Our 5150 WIC laws require us to establish that a person is either a danger to themselves, a danger to others and/or gravely disabled. We establish that criteria based on statements made by the suspect/subject, witnesses on scene, the victim(s), etc. We can establish the gravely disabled requirement with a few key questions.

Yup, we call them EDP, Emotionally Disturbed Person. Challenged would be someone who has a disability. But danger to themselves or others is the thing that you need to determine. We use the same thresholds for dealing with the HBD types as well.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

An officer [in California] also receives mental health training in the course of becoming an officer (…and continuing training/education after having become sworn).

Here in NY State, there's a new law where all police officer candidates must themselves undergo psychological examinations with a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist before being sworn:

https://midhudsonnews.com/2021/11/08...n-with-shrink/

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

Here in NY State, there's a new law where all police officer candidates must themselves undergo psychological examinations with a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist before being sworn:

https://midhudsonnews.com/2021/11/08...n-with-shrink/

It has been that way in California for a really, really long time. I'm surprised NY is just now adding that to the hiring process.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

Here in NY State, there's a new law where all police officer candidates must themselves undergo psychological examinations with a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist before being sworn:

https://midhudsonnews.com/2021/11/08...n-with-shrink/

Yup, here in Canada since before I got hired in 1985. You had to write these 2 bizarre 800+ question questionaires and then if you got past that you had to be interviewed by a psychologist for as I recall a few hours.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Murf993

Yup, here in Canada since before I got hired in 1985. You had to write these 2 bizarre 800+ question questionaires and then if you got past that you had to be interviewed by a psychologist for as I recall a few hours.

Was it the MMPI2? That's what we take here in California.

[vreihen16]

So, what are we doing with the person on the side of the road who has been determined to be a danger to themselves?????

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

So, what are we doing with the person on the side of the road who has been determined to be a danger to themselves?????

For the most part, everybody who took action and then transported the subject did the right thing.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Was it the MMPI2? That's what we take here in California.

I think so, it was a long time ago....lots of questions about your mother and stuff like that.

[UncleWede]

Turn off sirens

Ask the father to try and bring the son off to the non-traffic side of the car. Ask father if flashing lights are an issue for the son.

If the son continues to display lack of self-control, and/or shows potential for running away from father (has dad grabbed a hold of a hand or arm already?) then call for backup to block traffic lane immediately adjacent to the vehicle.

Check my cruiser trunk to see if I have a teddy bear or similar comfort device available. Slowly approach father/son with comfort device clearly visible, speaking in low voice offering to son.

If receptive, ask son if he'd like to look inside the cruiser, maybe play with the lights and sirens. This gets him out of traffic lanes potentially.

[jamesinaz]

I'm pretty sure I know what most people would do. Fire up their cell phone and hope for a viral video. Sadly.

[Samurai of 2day]

Originally Posted by Murf993

Yup, we call them EDP, Emotionally Disturbed Person. Challenged would be someone who has a disability. But danger to themselves or others is the thing that you need to determine. We use the same thresholds for dealing with the HBD types as well.

In NY, pretty much everyone is described as an EDP over the SOD net, even if it's just a person who is upset / angry / sad / making a scene

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Samurai of 2day

In NY, pretty much everyone is described as an EDP over the SOD net, even if it's just a person who is upset / angry / sad / making a scene

That's one of the reasons we dropped the term MI Mentally Ill, EDP catches them all.

[jamesinaz]

Originally Posted by Onesie

And be fired over it? Doubt that's what anyone would do…

Talking about most civilians these days. They'd stop and film a guy pouring gasoline on himself.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by jamesinaz

Talking about most civilians these days. They'd stop and provide a gas can just so they can film a guy pouring gasoline on himself.

FTFY.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by jamesinaz

Talking about most civilians these days. They'd stop and film a guy pouring gasoline on himself.

So true. Today's civilian will standby and watch a woman be raped on an NY subway…..and do absolutely nothing. Fucking cowards!

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

So true. Today's civilian will standby and watch a woman be raped on an NY subway…..and do absolutely nothing. Fucking cowards!

If you're talking about the Philadelphia story where the crowd allegedly filmed the rape on a SEPTA train last month, that part of the story turned out to be a fabrication by a police union spokesperson IIRC.

The big NYC subway problem these days are EDP's shoving people off of the platforms and onto the tracks in front of approaching trains. Besides the danger of the approaching train, there is the danger of a hot third rail to both the shoved party plus anyone who tries to rescue them.....

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

If you're talking about the Philadelphia story where the crowd allegedly filmed the rape on a SEPTA train last month, that part of the story turned out to be a fabrication by a police union spokesperson IIRC.

The big NYC subway problem these days are EDP's shoving people off of the platforms and onto the tracks in front of approaching trains. Besides the danger of the approaching train, there is the danger of a hot third rail to both the shoved party plus anyone who tries to rescue them.....

The "citizen journalists" are a problem to be sure. Too many folks would rather take a picture or a video rather than lend a hand or call for help.

[NorCalAthlete]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

If you're talking about the Philadelphia story where the crowd allegedly filmed the rape on a SEPTA train last month, that part of the story turned out to be a fabrication by a police union spokesperson IIRC.

The big NYC subway problem these days are EDP's shoving people off of the platforms and onto the tracks in front of approaching trains. Besides the danger of the approaching train, there is the danger of a hot third rail to both the shoved party plus anyone who tries to rescue them.....

What's an EDP?

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Murf993

The "citizen journalists" are a problem to be sure. Too many folks would rather take a picture or a video rather than lend a hand or call for help.

Didn't I just see a case in the news today about a guy who intervened in a mass shooting event and was shot/killed by responding officers?????

[NorCalAthlete]

Scenario (mods, feel free to prune if this is too contentious for this thread):

Lot of accusations flying with the Rittenhouse trial that police had "steered" protestors towards counter-protestors and taken a hands off approach.

Other issues with wild-speculation theories aside, it raised a few questions on crowd control / dispersion / diffusion.

1. IF police had attempted to stop anything...hell, it's an anti-police protest. I can't see that going well and would only escalate things.

2. So-called "Counter protestors" (to my knowledge at least) were not counter-protesting or marching so much as standing around (armed as a deterrent to property damage / looting / violence)

3. Crowd control is not in my area of expertise or knowledge of law enforcement activities, so in the opinion of the LEOs here - is it possible law enforcement on the ground there DID "steer" the crowds in an attempt to split them up / disperse them, but inadvertently this led to encounters with the counter-protestors (for lack of a better term for them)? Or, is it possible they steered P's towards CP's intentionally in hopes of conflict? This last is the accusation being thrown out and the basis of at least one lawsuit.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by NorCalAthlete

Scenario (mods, feel free to prune if this is too contentious for this thread):

Lot of accusations flying with the Rittenhouse trial that police had "steered" protestors towards counter-protestors and taken a hands off approach.

Other issues with wild-speculation theories aside, it raised a few questions on crowd control / dispersion / diffusion.

1. IF police had attempted to stop anything...hell, it's an anti-police protest. I can't see that going well and would only escalate things.

2. So-called "Counter protestors" (to my knowledge at least) were not counter-protesting or marching so much as standing around (armed as a deterrent to property damage / looting / violence)

3. Crowd control is not in my area of expertise or knowledge of law enforcement activities, so in the opinion of the LEOs here - is it possible law enforcement on the ground there DID "steer" the crowds in an attempt to split them up / disperse them, but inadvertently this led to encounters with the counter-protestors (for lack of a better term for them)? Or, is it possible they steered P's towards CP's intentionally in hopes of conflict? This last is the accusation being thrown out and the basis of at least one lawsuit.

Conflict is never what an LEO hopes for. Conflict means the potential for death or serious bodily injury not only for the disturbing parties, but also for you and/or your partners. Mitigation is the preferred approach.