I don't know how that really makes any sense. Call me crazy but if a fellow is suicidal, it most likely means that they are not of sound mind and correct me if I am wrong one has to be of sound mind to own a firearm correct?>? This to me sounds a lot like law coming before reason, which I suppose is quite common especially in Supreme Court cases as they set a strong president for future cases but in all honesty can anyone really say the offices in that situation did the wrong thing? Outside of what the "law" has deemed to be the wrong thing? I can rightly say that I personally would not leave a firearm in the hands of someone who was about to be admitted for suicide watch, but I am not familiar with the case so perhaps there is something I am missing.