1. I don't live in Oregon. I haven't since I was 2 years old.
2. I don't know the specifics of how the legal system in Oregon works.
3. I do know how it works in Arkansas. And we, at the Sheriff's office, do this kind of thing all the time. They're called commitment orders, and they're signed by a judge.
The process works like this: A concerned person (mother, brother, doctor, coworker, boss, preacher, etc.) goes to either the sheriff's office or the prosecutors office. He or she shares the concern (99% of the time it's a mental patient that has gone off his or her meds, an alcoholic or drug addict, or someone with SI/HI) and swears out an affidavit. From there, the judge issues a commitment order, and a deputy goes out to the home of the person with the order, and brings him/her before the judge. From there, the judge can strongly suggest that the patient follow a suggested course of action. If the patient refuses, the judge can order it.
Of course. Otherwise you're left in the uncomfortable position of hauling someone away under force of arms without ever reading them their rights, charging them with a crime or having them appear before a magistrate. If they come quietly you can pretend it isn't a gross violation of the Constitution.
Where's the Gross Violation? It's no deprivation without due process. Due process is in place.
Unless attempted suicide is illegal, then no officer has any business doing anything to stop it. If it's illegal, then due process and a proper arrest is the course to take. To bypass all of that and arrest people without charge is a gross violation of the oath. It's not the job of LEO's to "help people out" or to "make people better."
Bullcrap, sir. It is absolutely my job to help people out. Most of the time, I do that by ensuring that criminals that might otherwise affect their lives are in, headed to, or contemplating jail.
In this case, the only question they should have been asking is did he do anything illegal. If some source gave them sufficient evidence to arrest him and obtain a warrant, then they should have done that. If not, then there's no justification to act. Instead we find the LEO's scanning the man's arms purchases and misusing the psych hold procedure to get around their lack of a warrant for arrest or search.
This might be true if law enforcement officers only dealt with criminal law. However, as we deal with civil law as well, there are other procedures than misdemeanor/felony arrest. Civil commitment, short term psych holds, there are all kinds of options.
