Police want bullet from teen's forehead

[David S]

He should be able to make his own medical decisions without state interference.  Just because the police want a medical procedure performed on a boy, he has to comply?  How interesting that so-called libertarians support the actions of the police state.

If you can show me that his rights have been violated then I will agree with you. Lets start with the Bill of Rights; There is nothing here which involves the 1st 2nd or 3rd amendment. There is a 4th amendment concern since a search is involved, but they have a legal warrant so I think its a legal search. I  don't see anything that violates his 5th 6th or 7th amendment rights. They might make an argument that this violates the 8th amendment's prohibition on cruel or unusual punishment. But this is not punishment and I can't see that surgically removing a bullet from someones head is cruel, although leaving it there might be. There could be an argument that it violates the "other rights retained by the people" as protected by the 9th amendment. However it seems like a stretch to say that being allowed to keep a bullet in your head is a right. But even if it is I think they could just agree to put it back in when they're done examining it if that's what he wants. There also seems to be no issue with the 10th amendment, habeas corpus, ex post post facto, or anything else in the constitution. Now maybe I missed something and if you can show it to me  I could be persuaded.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

How the hell can someone be shot in the head with a 9mm and still live?

Maybe the store owner will switch to hollow points now.

Depends on which 9mm cartridge it is.  Some of them have very little stopping power and the article makes it clear that the shot was not made up close and personal.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I don't see anything that violates his 5th 6th or 7th amendment rights.

I could see a case being made based on the 5th.  Being forced to undergo the surgery could be viewed as a form of self-incrimination.  Depends on how invasive the surgery required to remove or examine the bullet would be.

[© tweed]

Also if this threatens his life, the life/liberty/property clause would be violated IMO.

[Ebowed]

He should be able to make his own medical decisions without state interference.  Just because the police want a medical procedure performed on a boy, he has to comply?  How interesting that so-called libertarians support the actions of the police state.

If you can show me that his rights have been violated then I will agree with you. Lets start with the Bill of Rights

Great straw man!

No where in my post did I indicate that this is a legal or constitutional issue.  I am simply arguing that the boy ought to have the right to make his own medical decisions.  If he doesn't want the bullet removed, who are you to tell him that he has to?  Ah, but wait.  The police want it done.  Just imagine what you would be saying if the government had ordered it instead.

[David S]

Also if this threatens his life, the life/liberty/property clause would be violated IMO.

According to the article the doctors don't think there is any danger. Also if the police found blood at a crime scene and wanted a blood sample from a suspect I think they could get a warrant for it and I think that is sometimes done. I don't think this is much different.

[David S]

He should be able to make his own medical decisions without state interference.  Just because the police want a medical procedure performed on a boy, he has to comply?  How interesting that so-called libertarians support the actions of the police state.

If you can show me that his rights have been violated then I will agree with you. Lets start with the Bill of Rights

Great straw man!

No where in my post did I indicate that this is a legal or constitutional issue.  I am simply arguing that the boy ought to have the right to make his own medical decisions.  If he doesn't want the bullet removed, who are you to tell him that he has to?  Ah, but wait.  The police want it done.  Just imagine what you would be saying if the government had ordered it instead.

Straw man - the constitution??? Ebowed the bullet is evidence in a crime. That's why they want it.  I would certainly agree that people have the right to make their own medical decisions and I have argued that in other topics, but this is about evidence in a crime, not medical decisions.

[Ebowed]

Straw man - the constitution??? Ebowed the bullet is evidence in a crime. That's why they want it.  I would certainly agree that people have the right to make their own medical decisions and I have argued that in other topics, but this is about evidence in a crime, not medical decisions.

The boy's privacy rights outweigh the police's various hand-picked inspections.

If the bullet is incriminating, requiring him to have the surgery would be in violation of the 5th amendment.

[opebo]

I'm not a rightwinger. I simply am not a fan of urban blight, crime and the gangsta "Culture". We need to crack down on it hard.

Yes, you are a rightwinger.  'Crime' is caused by the owners, not these darkskinned victims.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The police already feel quite free to shoot poors, I assure you, particularly the darkly pigmented ones.

As for the death penalty, it has no effect on crime, and in any case most of its victims are 'innocent' of the specific charge, but rather convicted simply because they are poors.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm certainly in support of ending the oppression of the drugs laws, but it is silly to put anyone in prison.  Redistribution can eliminate property 'crime' (by emiliorating the original 'theft' by the owners), and hospitals can deal with the mentally deranged.  Crimes like rape can be eliminated by prostitution and encouragement of promiscuity.  Crime is always merely a reaction by the powerless to their oppression by the powerful.

[AkSaber]

So you think it might not be a 9mm bullet after all?

Well, it's not entirely impossible he survived a direct shot to the forehead, but simple .22 rounds to the head can kill, so I'm more inclined to believe that if it is a bullet in his head, that it is more like a bullet fragment.

Hollow points are designed to expand after they hit something so they will make a larger hole. That makes them penetrate less than a full metal jacketed bullet. But maybe he should switch to a .45 or .357 magnum.

If it would have made a hole in his head and not get lodged in there this topic might have been a little different.

And yes, if he had a .45 we definitely wouldn't be having this conversation. But if multiple assailants attack him again a 12 gauge would be his best option.

And AkSaber, a woman in Detroit was shot in the temple, called police and they didn't believer her (this was an incident before the 911 call where they thought the boy was lying about his mom dying).

Do you know the caliber of the bullet she was shot with?

Depends on which 9mm cartridge it is.  Some of them have very little stopping power and the article makes it clear that the shot was not made up close and personal.

That is true, it wasn't a point blank shoot, and if the bullet itself was just lead, and didn't have a copper jacket, then I think it starts to make more sense why the kid wasn't killed by a head shot.