Recently, the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) has decided to share civil mental health commitments, which include civil commitments under Section 302 and 303 of Pennsylvania’s Mental Health and Procedures Act (MHPA), with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
This is a monumental change for Pennsylvania, which never used to share civil commitment records because of the privacy issues. Under the new direction, on Tuesday, January 29th, 2013, 643,167 mental health records were electronically transferred to the FBI’s National Instant Check System (NICS), according to Lt. Col. Scott Snyder, deputy commissioner for the state police. The PSP is also working on a system that will automatically upload any new records. Of the records submitted to the FBI NICS system, 70-75% of them were reportedly 302 commitments, which occur without ANY form of due process. A 302 commitment only requires a doctor’s signature and does not provide the individual with the ability to consult with counsel, cross-examine witnesses, offer witnesses and evidence, or even present the information to a neutral arbiter; yet, the individual loses his/her Second Amendment right to own, possess, or purchase a firearm or ammunition. This clearly violates all dictates of due process.
Interestingly, although the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) previously issued a determination that Pennsylvania’s MHPA Section 302 violated due process and was therefore not sufficient to trigger a federal disability, it later retracted that determination in approximately 2008; however, it appears that ATF/FBI is once again reconsidering whether PA’s MHPA violates due process. An unnamed spokeswoman for the ATF was reported to stated in an email that “ATF is reviewing whether Pennsylvania’s 302 commitment is a federal prohibition under” federal law.
It will surely be interesting to see whether the ATF issues a new determination that PA’s MHPA violates due process, as I have two cases up on appeal before the Superior Court arguing that it does violate due process.
Published by Joshua Prince, Esq.
With our 2nd Amendment rights being attacked at both the Federal and State level, and the ATF (Burea of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) trying to close down FFLs (Federal Firearms Licensees) for minor infractions while making FFLs the scapegoat when the ATF's records are inaccurate, I want to take this opportunity to introduce myself. I am one of only a handful of attorneys across the US that practices in the niche area of law known as firearms law. I decided to concentrate my legal practice on firearms law not only because I am a shooter and firearms enthusiast, but also to ensure that our inalienable Right to Keep and Bear Arms is never encroached upon.
I handle cases at the Federal and State level for both FFLs and individuals. At the federal and state levels for individuals, I actively defend the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution and Section 21 of the PA Constitution, as well as, help individuals with:
- License to Carry Firearms Denials;
- Challenges to Erroneous PICS Denials;
- Relief from Firearms Disabilities;
- Estate Planning Advice;
- Gun/NFA Trusts; and
- 42 USC 1983 Actions for Deprivation of Civil Rights
At both the state and federal levels, I represent FFLs and SOTs throughout Pennsylvania and the US regarding:
- ATF Compliance Inspections;
- Warning Letters and Hearings;
- FFL Revocations;
- Corporate Structure Advice
- Indoor/Outdoor Range Implementation; and
- Forfeiture Proceedings
In following my love for firearms and firearms law, I have taught several Continuing Legal Education (CLE) seminars on Firearms in Estates and Trusts and Firearms Law 101 for several Bar Associations, including Berks, Cumberland, and Dauphin Counties. I also planned and taught several Firearms in Estates CLE classes for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (PBI).
While at Widener Law School, I was a member of the Widener Law Journal. I wrote an article on the Inaccuracy of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR). I also had an article published on Fee Disputes in Workers Compensation cases in the Widener Law Journal, Volume 18, No. 2.
You can often find me posting on several internet forums, including Subguns, Uzitalk, AR15, and PAFOA. I also hold PA Firearms Law classes for local ranges to inform the public on the firearm laws of the Commonwealth.
Following in my father's footsteps, I am also a Board member for the Pottstown Police Athletic League (PAL).
View all posts by Joshua Prince, Esq.
Prince Law Offices Blog 
Please feel free to email me you could add me to your list I found out that I was 302 as a child and had since served in the military bought and sold firearms without a problem and obtained hazmat license through the FBI and homeland security however was recently denied from picking up my firearms from a pawn shop due to this 302 that was wrongfully held against me without due process and I was released the next day when I was 16 years old
LikeLike
Mr. Prince, is there any cause of action here against the PSP from the privacy aspect and the fact that Pa’s 302 does not appear to be a federal prohibitor? Doesn’t the NICS Improvement Act specifically define that these types of mental health records no not apply? I want to sue them.
LikeLike
Lisa,
There are a lot of issues. Everything from statutory law to violations of HIPAA. The NICS Improvement Act does not apply to PA, as we have not signed on. Also, the ATF has previously declared that a PA 302 involuntary commitment DOES trigger the federal disability, even in the absence of due process. The other issue that needs to be consider is suing the PSP, as such a suit would constitute a suit against the Commonwealth.
LikeLike
It’s difficult for me to see the hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians declared unworthy of constitutional rights by the police and not do anything about it. I understand that in 2012 a Federal First Circuit Court in a case called US v. Rehlander said Maine’s emergency involuntary hospitalization procedure (very similar to PA’s 302) is not a prohibitor under the Federal GCA.
LikeLike
You are correct but the Superior Court seems unconcerned with this. I just had a decision come down from the Superior Court, where it completely ignored our arguments regarding the unconstitutionality of Section 302 of the MHPA. I have submitted the case for en banc reconsideration, but I believe for the issue to be properly vetted for a constitutional law issues, it needs to be brought in federal court.
LikeLike
It’s tough to get around that pesky old constitution, so we better just ignore it… PA Superior Court
LikeLike
Has the ATF made a formal decision on this yet?
LikeLike
Not to my knowledge
LikeLike
I spoke with the ATF attorney (the one listed on the last page) that wrote the letter stating that the 302 does NOT trigger the disability. He is still working in the Philly ATF office. He told me that they reversed their decision based on “a couple cases from surrounding districts”. He also mentioned that their has been NO FORMAL DECISION on the subject, just an opinion he was ordered to justify. My own 302 case is in limbo because of it. Plus, I am in a VERY unique position (think Trooper Keyes) because of all the improvements I have made in my life only to have this crop up 17 yrs later. My 302 happened just 3 weeks before the letter in question.
To make matters worse, I can actually PROVE that procedures were not followed by the MHMR delegate and hospital staff. I’ve already obtained all the reports.
LikeLike
While I don’t want to disclose too much, as there is one federal case currently pending and another that will be filed shortly, but there are arguments that state relief triggers federal relief. Additionally, when dealing strictly with a 302, there are issues of due process. I expect that this issue will also be addressed by the future action that will be filed. Unfortunately, with the federal court system, decisions on the underlying issue generally take over a year once the complaint is filed and the Government is likely to appeal, which means even further delay in a final decision.
LikeLike
Josh – I am just finishing up a pro-se case in which I believe I will get my County to agree to post the patient’s rights on the wall of the E/R holding room. They will do this rather than be held to the requirement in 5100.86 that they “record and coordinate each action”. I am deciding whether to pro-se petition the judge in the case to get me expunged or to go to the Federal Court to attempt to have the State Police list declared Unconstitutional. The argument appears short and simple and the facts seem to support a finding of no due process denial of a Constitutional Right is Unconstitutional. Is pro-se in a Federal Court harder than a State Court? Would entering Federal Court pro-se provide proof that one is seriously mentally impaired? Thank You
LikeLike
You need to know what you are doing in federal court and generally you are required to file everything electronically. While everyone has a right to represent themselves pro-se, there is an old adage that an attorney that has himself for a client has a fool for a client. If I had a legal issue, I would have another attorney represent me.
LikeLike
HELL I HAVE A 302 AND I ENJOY THE LOOPHOLES GIVEN THE SO CALLED LOSS OF FIREARM RIGHTS QUOTE FROM ABOVE ” This clearly violates all dictates of due process.”
DUE PROCESS IS UNDER THE 5TH AND 14TH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. HAS ANY ONE WONDERED?
THE LANGUAGE WITH IN THE 5TH AMENDMENT?
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
WHY ARE THE WORDS PERSON PERSON AND HIMSELF SYNONYMOUSLY USED ?
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/person
PERSON. This word is applied to men, women and children, who are called natural persons. In law, man and person are not exactly synonymous terms. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, &c. A person is a man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes.
AND WHAT IS A PERSON CAPABLE OF?
THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH?
SO THERE FOR DO PROCESS HAS DO DO WITH FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
SO THE ATTACK AGAINST THE MENTAL HEALTH LAWS WOULD BE AN ATTACK OF THE MOUTH ?
THE PA CODE 5100
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/055/chapter5100/s5100.54.html
ARTICLE III
THE RIGHT TO HANDLE
YOUR PERSONAL AFFAIRS
Statement of Principle.
Every patient retains all civil rights not specifically curtailed by an order of a court or other body empowered to take such action.
(a) Every patient has the right to handle his personal affairs. Admission or commitment to a mental health facility does not by itself, prevent a patient from holding a driver’s license or professional license, from marrying or obtaining a divorce, from voting or writing a will, or exercising other civil and personal rights; nor is the patient guaranteed the ability to exercise any of these rights.
(b) Every patient has the right to purchase, keep, and use personal possessions. This right may be limited only when the possession or use of specific property is illegal or creates a substantial threat to the health or welfare of the patient or others. The reasons for imposing any limitations on the exercise of this right and the scope of such limitation shall be clearly explained to the patient and placed in the patient’s record.
(c) Every patient has the right to sell or retain any product or crop he makes, or grows on facility property. Money received from these activities shall not be used to pay the costs of any patient’s care and treatment.
(d) A patient shall not be deemed incompetent to manage his own affairs solely by reason of admission or commitment to a mental health facility.
A court finding of incompetency may not be extended beyond the specific scope of the court order.
SO GIVEN (a) Every patient has the right to handle his personal affairs. Admission or commitment to a mental health facility does not by itself, prevent a patient from holding a driver’s license or professional license, from marrying or obtaining a divorce, from voting or writing a will, or exercising other civil and personal rights; nor is the patient guaranteed the ability to exercise any of these rights.
AND A JUDGEMENT OF INCOMPETENCY
Mental Incompetency
A person who is diagnosed as being mentally ill, senile, or suffering from some other debility that prevents them from managing his own affairs may be declared mentally incompetent by a court of law. When a person is judged to be incompetent, a guardian is appointed to handle the person’s property and personal affairs.
The legal procedure for declaring a person incompetent consists of three steps: (1) a motion for a competency hearing, (2) a psychiatric or psychological evaluation, and (3) a competency hearing. Probate courts usually handle competency proceedings, which guarantee the allegedly incompetent person Due Process of Law.
Professional Obligation
Lawyers, doctors, teachers, and other persons who belong to a profession are bound either by professional codes of conduct or by contracts that contain standards of conduct. A professional person who fails to meet the duties required of that profession may be judged incompetent. Such a ruling by a court, a professional disciplinary board, or an employer may result in professional discipline, including loss of a license to practice, demotion, or termination of employment.
WHAT DOES THE PA CODE TALK ABOUT
I WOULD THINK A PROFESSIONAL LICENSE SO THE ATTACK I WOULD USE AND HAVE USED IN THE BACK OF AN AMBULANCE AS AN EMT(GIVEN THE PA CODE 5100 AND A JUDGMENT OF INCOMPETENCY)
I JUST TELL THE PEOPLE IN NEED OF CARE I WOULD LOVE TO DO MORE THAN HOLDING A MEDICAL LICENSE I AM A LITTLE INCOMPETENT. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOUR LIFE? oh the state police letter great for phone numbers to call and tell them direct hit i have them on speed dial i used the numbers several time with a loss o life verbal communication are much easier saves time and money and keeps me out of courts
doctors in the er i jus tell them i did every thing i could”””” holding a professional license””””””. simple body disposable unit doctors love body parts i found out from my sister who works in the disposal unit hospital emergency room section .
hint nice to have ears on the inside of a facility.
hint most die. under respiratory distress or cardiac.
go figure the focus is on a gun i just look at the law as fighting words
Fighting words are written or spoken words, generally expressed to incite hatred or violence from their target. Specific definitions, freedoms, and limitations of fighting words vary by jurisdiction. It is also used in a general sense of words that when uttered tend to create (deliberately or not) a verbal or physical confrontation by their mere usage.
that and the language of the laws
(a) Every patient has the right to handle his personal affairs. Admission or commitment to a mental health facility does not by itself, prevent a patient from holding a driver’s license or professional license, from marrying or obtaining a divorce, from voting or writing a will, or exercising other civil and personal rights; nor is the patient guaranteed the ability to exercise any of these rights.
every patient (patients are who? hmm people the sex of the people are? male and female.) has the right to handle his personal affairs(his personal affairs???? so females don’t count????)
or once again because of what exactly was said (in the written format of the code laws and so on right to the united states constitution clearly shows the words person and himself come together synonymously. )
which would open up the state Constitution.
The Constitution of Pennsylvania
§ 28. Prohibition against denial or abridgment of equality of
rights because of sex.
Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or
abridged in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania because of the sex
of the individual.
(May 18, 1971, P.L.767, J.R.2)
1971 Amendment. Joint Resolution No.2 added section 28.
but no one cares now the weapon part
The Constitution of Pennsylvania
§ 21. Right to bear arms.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of
themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
hmm??
the foucs is on the fire arm.
apparently the wording “the State shall not be questioned.”
i choose to bear arms under the united states Constitution with in the language of the laws codes state and federal local etc. of the freedom of speech as well as the right to remain silent when needed as well as under the fifth with the process of due process and the and the language of the fifth and what exactly is being said (in written format) to walk threw the united states Constitution. People of all ages sexes races do realize a Constitution and laws are only good when we obey the law as a nation and as a nation when we choose to change the laws rules or engagement we can abolish or walk threw etc. laws are only laws when we be leave in the law but when we don’t be leave in laws they are just words on paper and nothing more but a set of guidelines and open loopholes.
the mental health laws are written in a fashion to demolish the Constitutions because of the language the same loop hole appear in different states under different sections.
remember intelligence can over throw a back ground check for a gun learn chemistry and you can learn explosives and pass pcis nics etc because the truth is the weapon came from the build as well as the capability to see the way.
LikeLike
further more when the nonsense went on like the lady who read me my Miranda rights told me anything said can and be used against me in a court of law i thought things go both ways. all i waited for was the judge to check the box that said incompetent. and mail the paper to the state police.
10 times easier to agree with the judge i m sick get the point. understanding full well i can not be tried as incompetent.
A court finding of incompetency may not be extended beyond the specific scope of the court order.
oh
MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL RETARDATION ACT OF 1966 – CERTAIN TERMINOLOGY UPDATED AND MODERNIZED
Act of Nov. 22, 2011, P.L. 420, No. 105 Cl. 50
Session of 2011
No. 2011-105
SB 458
AN ACT
Amending the act of October 20, 1966 (3rd Sp.Sess., P.L.96, No.6), entitled “An act relating to mental health and mental retardation; authorizing county programs and amending, revising and changing the laws relating thereto and making an appropriation,” updating and modernizing certain terminology.
MENTAL HEALTH AND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY ACT OF 1966
Act of Oct. 20, 1966, Special Session 3, P.L. 96, No. 6 Cl. 50
Section 102. Definitions.–As used in this act:
“Aftercare” means services rendered to a person after his release from a facility, designed to assist such person in establishing and maintaining himself as a member of society, including foster home placement, home visiting, observation, halfway houses and outpatient care.
“Aftercare” means services rendered to a person(man women) after his(male) release from a facility, designed to assist such person(man women) in establishing and maintaining himself (male) as a member of society, including foster home placement, home visiting, observation, halfway houses and outpatient care.
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/055/chapter5100/s5100.2.html
§ 5100.2. Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Director of treatment team—A physician or licensed clinical psychologist designated by the facility director to assure that each patient receives treatment under the act and this chapter and that the facility’s treatment responsibility to the patient, as defined in this chapter, the Mental Health/Mental Retardation Act of 1966 and the act, are discharged. The director of the treatment team is responsible for implementing and reviewing the individualized treatment plan, for participating in the coordination of service delivery between other service providers, and for insuring that the unique skills and knowledge of each team member are utilized. The director of the treatment team is responsible for encouraging the person in treatment to become increasingly involved in decisions regarding the treatment planning process.
so at what point does the writers of this lovely pa code deftion follow the language used “”””””””” as defined in this chapter, the Mental Health/Mental Retardation Act of 1966 and the act, are discharged.”””””””””
I had to read the pa code to learn about the act screw up.
i would say the language clearly dictates otherwise with in the language of the code. but as shown above the elected officials keep on beating the words around. form retardation to intellectual disability.
The Miranda warning, also referred to as Miranda rights, is a warning given by police in the United States to criminal suspects in police custody (or in a custodial interrogation) before they are interrogated to preserve the admissibility of their statements against them in criminal proceedings.
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT
Act of Jul. 9, 1976, P.L. 817, No. 143 Cl. 50
AN ACT
Relating to mental health procedures; providing for the treatment and rights of mentally disabled persons, for voluntary and involuntary examination and treatment and for determinations affecting those charged with crime or under sentence.
Section 116. Continuity of Care.–(a) It shall be the
responsibility of the facility administration to refer those
voluntary and involuntary patients discharged from State
institutional programs to the appropriate county mental health
and mental retardation program.
(b) The county mental health and mental retardation program
shall, pursuant to Article III of the “Mental Health and Mental
Retardation Act of 1966,” receive referrals from State-operated
facilities and shall be responsible for the treatment needs of
county residents discharged from institutions pursuant to
Articles II and III of this act.
so the mental health procedures act still shows “Mental Health and Mental
Retardation Act of 1966,”
and the “Mental Health and Mental
Retardation Act of 1966,”
is changed to
Amending the act of October 20, 1966 (3rd Sp.Sess., P.L.96, No.6), entitled “An act relating to mental health and mental retardation; authorizing county programs and amending, revising and changing the laws relating thereto and making an appropriation,” updating and modernizing certain terminology.
MENTAL HEALTH AND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY ACT OF 1966
Act of Oct. 20, 1966, Special Session 3, P.L. 96, No. 6 Cl. 50
but yet the pa code stated under definitions
Director of treatment team—A physician or licensed clinical psychologist designated by the facility director to assure that each patient receives treatment under the act and this chapter and that the facility’s treatment responsibility to the patient, as defined in this chapter, the Mental Health/Mental Retardation Act of 1966 and the act, are discharged.
states the Mental Health/Mental Retardation Act of 1966 and the act, are discharged.
so this is the director of a treatment teams job?????
or is this the directors of a treatment teams job?
The director of the treatment team is responsible for implementing and reviewing the individualized treatment plan, for participating in the coordination of service delivery between other service providers, and for insuring that the unique skills and knowledge of each team member are utilized. The director of the treatment team is responsible for encouraging the person in treatment to become increasingly involved in decisions regarding the treatment planning process.
i do think i had a unfair trial but hell i enjoy the loop hole and the hell with the USA hurray!!!!!
besides that.
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT
Act of Jul. 9, 1976, P.L. 817, No. 143 Cl. 50
AN ACT
Relating to mental health procedures; providing for the treatment and rights of mentally disabled persons, for voluntary and involuntary examination and treatment and for determinations affecting those charged with crime or under sentence.
Section 102. Statement of Policy.–It is the policy of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to seek to assure the availability
of adequate treatment to persons who are mentally ill, and it is
the purpose of this act to establish procedures whereby this
policy can be effected. The provisions of this act shall be
interpreted in conformity with the principles of due process to
make voluntary and involuntary treatment available where the
need is great and its absence could result in serious harm to
the mentally ill person or to others. Treatment on a voluntary
basis shall be preferred to involuntary treatment; and in every
case, the least restrictions consistent with adequate treatment
shall be employed. Persons who are mentally retarded, senile,
alcoholic, or drug dependent shall receive mental health
treatment only if they are also diagnosed as mentally ill, but
these conditions of themselves shall not be deemed to constitute
mental illness: Provided, however, That nothing in this act
shall prohibit underutilized State facilities for the mentally
ill to be made available for the treatment of alcohol abuse or
drug addiction pursuant to the act of April 14, 1972 (P.L.221,
No.63), known as the “Pennsylvania Drug and Alcohol Abuse
Control Act.” Chronically disabled persons 70 years of age or
older who have been continuously hospitalized in a State
operated facility for at least ten years shall not be subject to
the procedures of this act. Such a person’s inability to give a
rational, informed consent shall not prohibit the department
from continuing to provide all necessary treatment to such a
person. However, if such a person protests treatment or
residence at a State operated facility he shall be subject to
the provisions of Article III.
hmmmm?
However, if such a person(male female) protests treatment or
residence at a State operated facility he(male) shall be subject to
the provisions of Article III.
once again the words synonymous appear
person and he
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT – OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS
Act of Jul. 2, 1996, P.L. 481, No. 77 Cl. 50
Session of 1996
No. 1996-77
SB 1566
AN ACT
Amending the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L.817, No.143), entitled “An act relating to mental health procedures; providing for the treatment and rights of mentally disabled persons, for voluntary and involuntary examination and treatment and for determinations affecting those charged with crime or under sentence,” further providing for mental health review officer, for confidentiality of records, for incompetence to proceed on criminal charges and lack of criminal responsibility as a defense and for competency determination and burden of proof.
(d) Notwithstanding any statute to the contrary, judges of the courts of common pleas, mental health review officers and county mental health and mental retardation administrators shall notify the Pennsylvania State Police on a form developed by the Pennsylvania State Police of the identity of any individual who has been adjudicated incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under this act or who has been involuntarily treated as described under 18 Pa.C.S § 6105(c)(4) (relating to persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms). The notification shall be transmitted by the judge, mental health review officer or county mental health and mental retardation administrator within seven days of the adjudication, commitment or treatment. Notwithstanding any statute to the contrary, county mental health and mental retardation administrators shall notify the Pennsylvania State Police on a form developed by the Pennsylvania State Police of the identity of any individual who before the effective date of this act had been adjudicated incompetent or had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care treatment under this act or had been involuntarily treated as described in 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(c)(4).
The Miranda warning is part of a preventive criminal procedure rule that law enforcement is required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of his or her Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. In Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court held that the admission of an elicited incriminating statement by a suspect not informed of these rights violates the Fifth and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel
i am a little incompetent identity of any individual who before the effective date of this act had been adjudicated incompetent good thing for the pa code 5100
ARTICLE III
THE RIGHT TO HANDLE
YOUR PERSONAL AFFAIRS
Statement of Principle.
Every patient retains all civil rights not specifically curtailed by an order of a court or other body empowered to take such action.
(a) Every patient has the right to handle his personal affairs. Admission or commitment to a mental health facility does not by itself, prevent a patient from holding a driver’s license or professional license, from marrying or obtaining a divorce, from voting or writing a will, or exercising other civil and personal rights; nor is the patient guaranteed the ability to exercise any of these rights.
(d) A patient shall not be deemed incompetent to manage his own affairs solely by reason of admission or commitment to a mental health facility.
A court finding of incompetency may not be extended beyond the specific scope of the court order.
so when i am asked by doctors and other professionals am i a emt i simply say yesssss! when given what i am allowed to do by law simple really just hold the paper or a license. life become very unimportant.
ahh the evedent proof——-whether written or oral, be disclosed to anyone
Fighting words are written or spoken words, generally expressed to incite hatred or violence from their target. Specific definitions, freedoms, and limitations of fighting words vary by jurisdiction. It is also used in a general sense of words that when uttered tend to create (deliberately or not) a verbal or physical confrontation by their mere usage.
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT – OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS
Act of Jul. 2, 1996, P.L. 481, No. 77 Cl. 50
Session of 1996
No. 1996-77
SB 1566
AN ACT
Section 111. Confidentiality of Records.–
(4) pursuant to Federal rules, statutes and regulations governing disclosure of patient information where treatment is undertaken in a Federal agency.
In no event, however, shall privileged communications, whether written or oral, be disclosed to anyone without such written consent. This shall not restrict the collection and analysis of clinical or statistical data by the department, the county administrator or the facility so long as the use and dissemination of such data does not identify individual patients.
Hearing; When Required.–The court, either on application or on its own motion, may order an incompetency examination at any stage in the proceedings and may do so without a hearing unless the examination is objected to by the person charged with a crime or by his counsel. In such event, an examination shall be ordered only after determination upon a hearing that there is a prima facie question of incompetency. Upon completion of the examination, a determination of incompetency shall be made by the court where incompetency is established by a preponderance of the evidence.
* * *
Section 403. Hearing and Determination of Incompetency to Proceed; Stay of Proceedings; Dismissal of Charges.–(a) Competency Determination and Burden of Proof.–[The moving party shall have the burden of establishing incompetency to proceed by clear and convincing evidence. The determination shall be made by the court.] Except for an incompetency examination ordered by the court on its own motion as provided for in section 402(d), the individual making an application to the court for an order directing an incompetency examination shall have the burden of establishing incompetency to proceed by a preponderance of the evidence. The determination shall be made by the court.
hmm? notice how the words person, his, individual are used.
let me re use it what is this individual person himself capable of?
“fighting words” and knowing the state of how arms would be bared comes in a mouth. its invisible force can suppress opponents way be for attack and defense is needed. but yet leave no marks. only hearings of words of love filled with such kindness THAT IS CAPABLE OF ENDING LIFE I WOULD LOVE TO DO MORE OTHER THAN HOLDING A MEDICAL LICENSE . HAVE THE TRAINING CAN NOT USE IT JUT CAN HOLD IT ILL HOLD THAT ACTIONS OF CARE IN WHILE EXPRESSING MY INTENTION OF WANTING TO CARE. BUT RESTIRCTED BY SUCH FILTH IN THE LAW THAT HAS ENDED LIVE BUT YET BEING JUDGED INCOMPETENT ONLY TO HAVE PAPER MOVE FROM DESK TO COMPUTER WHILE MY VOICE IS ENDING LIVES BEING SENT TO A BODY OF CARE. AND KNOWING THE FAITH FROM MY SISTER WHO WORKS UNDER DOCTORS TELLS ME EVERY SO OFTEN THE END GAME AS TO LACK THERE OF MY EMERGENCY CARE. SHE WANT ME TO CHANGE THE LAW BUT TILL THEN SHE FILLS ME IN ON THE DETAILS. I SIMPLY SAY TO MY SISTER I DONT MAKE LAW I JUST WOLLOW I IT. SHE DOESNT SAY MUCH TO THE DOCTORS KNOWING THE ER DOCTOR WAS THE ONCE WHO SIGNED THE PAPER WORK. AND NEGLECTED MY CARE AT A TIME OF NEED. IN FRONT OF HER VERY EYES.
Section 403. Hearing and Determination of Incompetency to Proceed; Stay of Proceedings; Dismissal of Charges.–(a) Competency Determination and Burden of Proof.–[The moving party shall have the burden of establishing incompetency to proceed by clear and convincing evidence. The determination shall be made by the court.] Except for an incompetency examination ordered by the court on its own motion as provided for in section 402(d), the individual making an application to the court for an order directing an incompetency examination shall have the burden of establishing incompetency to proceed by a preponderance of the evidence. The determination shall be made by the court.
* * *
Section 3. This act shall take effect immediately.
ARTICLE III
THE RIGHT TO HANDLE
YOUR PERSONAL AFFAIRS
Statement of Principle.
Every patient retains all civil rights not specifically curtailed by an order of a court or other body empowered to take such action.
(a) Every patient has the right to handle his personal affairs. Admission or commitment to a mental health facility does not by itself, prevent a patient from holding a driver’s license or professional license, from marrying or obtaining a divorce, from voting or writing a will, or exercising other civil and personal rights; nor is the patient guaranteed the ability to exercise any of these rights.
(d) A patient shall not be deemed incompetent to manage his own affairs solely by reason of admission or commitment to a mental health facility.
A court finding of incompetency may not be extended beyond the specific scope of the court order.
hell thank god for laws.
and thank you judges for judging me incompetent.
no money nor guns ever will give me the freedom or this loophole
just the courts verbal and written words.
shall i disclose the postal loop hole
or the tax free loophole
or the other loopholes.
LikeLike
further more i am not going to court to be discriminated against the sex i am as a male. nor am i going to listen again to a judge tell me words that do not show signs of love or care but nothing more than hate and hurt. the courts had their chance and anything said can and will be used against them in a manner of what is happening(with the lack of a gun). just simple language.
so figure a gun is the answer but same thing is happening at the end people dieing. some in a blood bath of bullets(gun violence white house nonsense ) and others by my voice .
primary foucs of many is guns.
why?
the mental health proedures act clearly states under this section what to do.
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT
Act of Jul. 9, 1976, P.L. 817, No. 143 Cl. 50
AN ACT
Section 113. Rights and Remedies of Persons in Treatment.–
Every person who is in treatment shall be entitled to all other
rights now or hereafter provided under the laws of this
Commonwealth, in addition to any rights provided for in this
act. Actions requesting damages, declaratory judgment,
injunction, mandamus, writs of prohibition, habeas corpus,
including challenges to the legality of detention or degree of
restraint, and any other remedies or relief granted by law may
be maintained in order to protect and effectuate the rights
granted under this act.
but most choose guns and nonsense. ask a person what they want. then ask what is right?
id rather work with in the language of the law and any other remedies or relief granted by law may
be maintained in order to “””””protect and effectuate”””” the rights
granted under this act.
protect my life and effectuate well yours regardless of age sex color race and so on.
which directly opens the door for public danger and no one sees how?
so keep foucsing on the gun.
Habeas Corpus
[Latin, You have the body.] A writ (court order) that commands an individual or a government official who has restrained another to produce the prisoner at a designated time and place so that the court can determine the legality of custody and decide whether to order the prisoner’s release.
A writ of habeas corpus directs a person, usually a prison warden, to produce the prisoner and justify the prisoner’s detention. If the prisoner argues successfully that the incarceration is in violation of a constitutional right, the court may order the prisoner’s release. Habeas corpus relief also may be used to obtain custody of a child or to gain the release of a detained person who is insane, is a drug addict, or has an infectious disease. Usually, however, it is a response to imprisonment by the criminal justice system.
A writ of habeas corpus is authorized by statute in federal courts and in all state courts. An inmate in state or federal prison asks for the writ by filing a petition with the court that sentenced him or her. In most states, and in federal courts, the inmate is given the opportunity to present a short oral argument in a hearing before the court. He or she also may receive an evidentiary hearing to establish evidence for the petition.
The habeas corpus concept was first expressed in the Magna Charta, a constitutional document forced on King John by English landowners at Runnymede on June 15, 1215. Among the liberties declared in the Magna Charta was that “No free man shall be seized, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or injured in any way, nor will we enter on him or send against him except by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land.” This principle evolved to mean that no person should be deprived of freedom without Due Process of Law.
i have every right to deprive a person freedom because of the due process of law. thanks to the paper work of doctors and judges with out even the use of a gun. directly putting the public in danger of life and limb because of the due process of the language of the law the freedom of speech is not free from libels or slander which leads to a abridgement of the sexes. and pure discrimination.
but the truth is no paper for me will change the shit i went threw of being striped searched. photoed, hand cuffed. guns held to my face. and so on
so i learned. people dont give a shit why should i il just obey the law and walk threw the law with direct hits. i really have no intention of asking states of judges or people to justify their actions towards me. nor do i tend to want to justify my actions towards others. i am simpley spelling out the loop holes for all to read see and think people who went threw the system this is a road map to follow it works well. as like the pa code said
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/055/chapter5100/s5100.54.html
ARTICLE I
THE RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE
1. Right to Information.
(c) Every patient has the right to be informed of the nature of material about to be released to others (or obtained) when he is requested to sign a release of information.
5100.51. Preservation of rights.
5100.52. Statement of principle.
5100.53. Bill of rights for patients.
5100.54. Manual of rights for persons in treatment.
5100.55. Notification of rights.
5100.56. Existing regulations.
LikeLike
In response to PSP releasing mhpa 302/303 lists, someone had mentioned about a total dismissal by the US supreme courts. In light of what has happened in Newtown, Connecticut, Blooming Grove, Pennsylvania, and Arizona, those of us who do have either a 302/303 face a long uphill battle thanks to those deranged madmen. What the public never sees is the real faces of the mentally ill, whether it’s bipolar, depression, schizophrenia, or downs syndrome. The media has painted us in such a bad way that it’s no wonder that anyone with any form of mental illness isn’t locked away in a death campaign.
I have 2 302’s on my record, 1of which I wasn’t even committed for! The other was a complete pooch screw because the intern in the er couldn’t tell the difference between a seizure and an overdose! Does that mean that my right to bear arms and to privacy needs to be blatantly violated? Who’s going to police the police when they break the law?
LikeLike
I too am amount those 302D and unable to legally obtain a firearm. Never once stating that I intended to harm myself. I had refused to sign a charge of kidnapping (boyfriend wouldn’t leave my home) and when officers said then you must want to die I had responded I guess so because I refuse to sign that lie. I was taken to mental ward. At age 53 with nothing violent or mental in my history this is humiliating. Also had been charged with aggravated assault dropped down to disturbing the peace. I guess minimum wage and sitting duck the rest of my days
LikeLike
In 1993 after a series of verbal family fights and while suffering from an undiagnosed movement disorder I was 302’d , the police lied and said I threatened to commit suicide to give them a way to commit me.
I am a military veteran and did not deserve this. Now that I am older and very vulnerable to crime I cannot protect myself. This law should have been deemed unconstitutional a long time ago I do not want to die of old age before I get my gun rights back. It is ironic that family are urged by the police and mental health workers to 302 people when they can cause a crisis. This is like being a registered sex offender or felon in that you can never get rid of this stigma and it’s legal consequences.
LikeLike
Being 302’d is akin to being a registered sex offender or convicted felon. It lasts for life and the ban on gun ownership should have been declared unconstitutional years ago. Police and angry family members lie to get people 302’d.
LikeLike
Sorry it took so long to reply to this. I’m a victim of the 302. The police, in my case, didn’t lie. My ex did. The police responded, in my opinion, extremely well. They had a phone statement, that’s all. When they transported me to Easton hospital, they were supposed to make a statement about my actions, but didn’t. They didn’t observe me doing ANYTHING. The doctor waited until my ex showed up and “the delegate helped fill out the paperwork.” No emergency transport warrant was ever signed, no statement by anyone that observed me doing anything, no specific details in the ex’s statement. No PROOF of ANYTHING. She did, however, admit to having an affair with a 15 year old boy… during the only team meeting she ever showed for… She never even showed for the 303 hearing in which I was ruled “not a danger”…
Oh, and to top it off, I have several statements by the VA saying I’m cleared of any mental health needs and that I’m good to carry a gun for the govt, which I do… Hmmm… And I can’t get anyone to help unless I shell out a boatload of dough$$$.
LikeLike
there are not any such things as rights in pa. it is a commonwealth, meaning basically u can use residency in pa to use it’s assets but no one truly owns anything. it’s akin to an eula agreement . u agree to use things within the constraints of the communist entity of Pennsylvania, but all things belong to the “state” and it permits u to have the use of a house, a car…etc. this is why the federal government has not struck down act 77 of 1976 as unconstitutional. of course I have overly simplified the full explanation. u may verify what I have said here, and It will certainly shock u into realty.
LikeLike