carracer
Regular Member
Saw this on the Good Morning America "Ticker Tape". Details?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Portland Hospital shooting?
- Thread starter carracer
- Start date
Lord Sega
Regular Member
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
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
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?
Can they justify this authority if it is a "public building" owned by the government?
We-the-People
Regular Member
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:
Sethrotull
Regular Member
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.
We-the-People
Regular Member
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.
Sethrotull
Regular Member
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-studies/fast-facts.shtml
I think it is a common misconception that the majority are public institutions.
davidmcbeth
Banned
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.
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.
Sethrotull
Regular Member
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/police-man-shot-at-hospital-used-phone-receiver-to-simulate-gun
Do you post because you like to hear the sound of your keyboard?
hermannr
Regular Member
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.
We-the-People
Regular Member
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".
Sethrotull
Regular Member
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.
We-the-People
Regular Member
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.