Skip to main content

They Got to Amanda Bynes Harder Now. Stop this nonsense

   Amanda Bynes was placed in an involuntary psychiatric hold, also called a "5150," a legal device used to trample and traipse on people's rights. This was done to her apparently just for tweeting about her father, and trying to explain it away from mind control. Any time someone mentions mind control to authorities, they tend to do a "5150" on that person. Clearly people did not want her saying what she said and that is the cause of this.They have completely floored her by disregarding her first amendment rights, and it is in a vile attempt to control her behavior. She definitely has the right to express concern that there may be a mind-control implant in her head.  Are we at a stone age level of technology? I don't think so. We are in an age of high technology. Her freedom to express that concern is part of her first amendment rights. Look at what happened. She was treated worse for just saying anything.
   All of this is completely unacceptable. Please release this person from captivity if that is her wish. Her human rights are being violated by an arbitrary arrest and arbitrary hold. Typically a 5150 decision is made by the police, but they are not qualified to make a psychiatric diagnosis. Therefore, it is arbitrary. They simple follow through on things mechanically as a matter of procedure, and it is normally not very nice to do to people.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/12/showbiz/amanda-bynes-mental-hold/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2014/10/11/report-amanda-bynes-put-under-involuntary-psychiatric-hold/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nice Dissenting Opinion on the Fairness of the Criminal Justice System

   I was recently having a conversation with someone about the possibility for unreliability and/or unfairness in the criminal justice system. I was reminded of this quote from a Supreme Court case which is from Justice Harry Blackmun's dissenting opinion. The case was Darden v. Wainwright 477 U.S. 168 (1986). Obviously he's talking about the Supreme Court level, but if this could be said about their accuracy, then how shall we communicate about fairness at the trial court level? "JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE MARSHALL, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting. Although the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant only "a fair trial [and] not a perfect one,"  Lutwak v. United States,   344 U. S. 604 ,  344 U. S. 619  (1953);  Bruton v. United States,   391 U. S. 123 ,  391 U. S. 135  (1968), this Court has stressed repeatedly in the decade since  Gregg v. Georgia,   428 U. S. 153  (1976), that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Personality Types and the Fall of Man Argument

   There will be some who will want to say that I was being illogical or unbiblical when I wrote the post about how personality differences get misunderstood.  Their argument is basically that differing personalities are a consequence of the Fall of Man- a consequence of the DNA getting disordered.  Therefore, they will say, that people who don't fit the "perfect personality" are sinful. God created one man, they will say, with a perfect personality (Adam).  In truth, they can cite Adam, Eve, and Jesus.  That argument is not correct, and I will stand my ground on this.    The reason why they are not correct is because they are making the unwarranted assumption all of Adam's descendants would have had the same personality had the Fall never happened. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that had the Fall never happened, there would have been different kinds of people with different personalities, it just would have been a more perfect world. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

We Have Freedom of Speech, right?

   How come everyone seems so afraid to speak against the real politik in our country? We used to have lively political discussion and dissent, and now people with minority opinions seem scoffed at and outcast. This is a bad trend, don't go in that way. The first amendment was set up with one of the intentions being that people would be able to criticize those in charge. It is unbelievable that people could say that a scenario happened like Pearl Jams' "Dissident" describes, and these things happen on American soil?    The 1992 Presidential election is something to look to consider the way things used to be. Third party independent candidate Ross Perot was considered as having equal weight as the two other candidates. There was a strong freedom of the thought in the political spectrum. Perot's money went a long way for him. All things considered, though, billionaires still exist. Where are the Ross Perots of our time, then, who are not afraid to jump in and shake...
Post a Comment
Read more