Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Portland Hospital shooting?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096

    Portland Hospital shooting?

    Saw this on the Good Morning America "Ticker Tape". Details?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Lord Sega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, Oregon
    Posts
    317

    No details really, waiting to hear more...

    LINK to KATU.com

    "Around 9:30 p.m. officers received a report of an armed man in the parking lot of Portland Adventist Medical Center in Southeast Portland"

    Lock down of the hospital, confront and shoot the man. "It’s not yet clear what exact circumstances led to the officers shooting."

    LINK to FOX12
    "Guns are not the problem … crazy is the problem” ... “We cannot legislate our society to the craziest amongst us.” - Jon Stewart
    “I do not love the bright sword for it's sharpness, nor the arrow for it's swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend." - Tolkien

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Am I just dense? What exactly does "lock down the hospital" mean? No one in or out? Imprisoned? An armed man IN THE PARKING LOT, and already being confronted by police, authorizes a lock down of a nearby building (presumably large with maybe thousands of people inside)?

    Can they justify this authority if it is a "public building" owned by the government?
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  4. #4
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Am I just dense? What exactly does "lock down the hospital" mean? No one in or out? Imprisoned? An armed man IN THE PARKING LOT, and already being confronted by police, authorizes a lock down of a nearby building (presumably large with maybe thousands of people inside)?

    Can they justify this authority if it is a "public building" owned by the government?
    I've often wondered what would happen when a knowledgeable citizen refused to be "locked down" in a building at the whim of some government bureaucrat because of some "trigger" (no pun intended) event. I do believe that would be a seizure without probable cause thus violating the fourth amendment if done by government. Kidnapping and/or unlawful imprisonment if done by private parties.
    Last edited by We-the-People; 02-20-2013 at 02:38 AM.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    56

    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Am I just dense? What exactly does "lock down the hospital" mean? No one in or out? Imprisoned? An armed man IN THE PARKING LOT, and already being confronted by police, authorizes a lock down of a nearby building (presumably large with maybe thousands of people inside)?

    Can they justify this authority if it is a "public building" owned by the government?
    I am a little confused by this. The hospital is not a "public building owned by the government". It is owned privately. And public schools owned by the government go in lockdown all the time.

  6. #6
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Sethrotull View Post


    I am a little confused by this. The hospital is not a "public building owned by the government". It is owned privately. And public schools owned by the government go in lockdown all the time.
    The hospital is more likely to NOT be privately owned than it is to be privately owned. At least in the eyes of technical law. Many hospitals are government owned or susidized. Many more receive government funding. Either of these conditions blurrs the lines of "private ownership". Even if the hospital is "privately" owned, if it recieves government funding, subsidies, etc., the ability to claim it is "private property" becomes a matter of debate.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    The hospital is more likely to NOT be privately owned than it is to be privately owned. At least in the eyes of technical law. Many hospitals are government owned or susidized. Many more receive government funding. Either of these conditions blurrs the lines of "private ownership". Even if the hospital is "privately" owned, if it recieves government funding, subsidies, etc., the ability to claim it is "private property" becomes a matter of debate.
    Adventist is a nonprofit run by the Church. Public hospitals make up around 20% of all hospitals and are on the decline. http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-...st-facts.shtml

    I think it is a common misconception that the majority are public institutions.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I'm putting my money on that the guy was a gang member ... all the lock downs in hospitals I have witnesses are due to gang on gang shootings.. to keep the rival gang from coming in the hospital while the first gang is in there due to their member being in the ER.

    Now nobody cares about gang members being shot by police so maybe the press just left out this tid-bit of information .. otherwise no one would care about the story as it is a story that has happened many times before.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I'm putting my money on that the guy was a gang member ... all the lock downs in hospitals I have witnesses are due to gang on gang shootings.. to keep the rival gang from coming in the hospital while the first gang is in there due to their member being in the ER.

    Now nobody cares about gang members being shot by police so maybe the press just left out this tid-bit of information .. otherwise no one would care about the story as it is a story that has happened many times before.
    Been determined for a few days he was a multiple time looser. Now it just came out he was using a stolen phone to simulate a gun. http://www.kptv.com/story/21291929/p...o-simulate-gun

    Do you post because you like to hear the sound of your keyboard?

  10. #10
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    I've often wondered what would happen when a knowledgeable citizen refused to be "locked down" in a building at the whim of some government bureaucrat because of some "trigger" (no pun intended) event. I do believe that would be a seizure without probable cause thus violating the fourth amendment if done by government. Kidnapping and/or unlawful imprisonment if done by private parties.
    Sacred Heart Hospital had this happen awhile back...what they did was everyone had to use only the ER exit/entrance, where the SPD had an officer posted. In the Sacred Heart incident they never did find anyone with any gun.

  11. #11
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Sethrotull View Post
    Adventist is a nonprofit run by the Church. Public hospitals make up around 20% of all hospitals and are on the decline. http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-...st-facts.shtml

    I think it is a common misconception that the majority are public institutions.
    Hence the "technical" part of my statement. If a hospital takes government funding of any sort, including subsidies, the line becomes blurred as to whether they can claim private status. The argument can even be made that the tax expemptions given to such organizations are subsidies. I think we are still in the "totality of the circumstances" phase of determining private/public status but just because a private corporation owns a hospital does not automatically mean that it isn't "public".
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    Hence the "technical" part of my statement. If a hospital takes government funding of any sort, including subsidies, the line becomes blurred as to whether they can claim private status. The argument can even be made that the tax expemptions given to such organizations are subsidies. I think we are still in the "totality of the circumstances" phase of determining private/public status but just because a private corporation owns a hospital does not automatically mean that it isn't "public".
    I think you are grasping at shoestrings. There are my private companies that get government subsidies that you couldn't make any case for being "public".

    Lots of "ifs" flying around here.

  13. #13
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Sethrotull View Post
    I think you are grasping at shoestrings. There are my private companies that get government subsidies that you couldn't make any case for being "public".

    Lots of "ifs" flying around here.
    There is a case to be made, depending on the circumstances. In the case of hospitals it can often be a strong case. The same is true of locations that are operated "privately" by companies that contract with government agencies. There are numerous schemes to try to remove the appearance of public ownership, most are legally flawed.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •