Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 120

Thread: Shoreline schools were on lockdown for reports of man with a gun

  1. #1
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Shoreline schools were on lockdown for reports of man with a gun

    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    after witnesses called in reports of a man dressed in a dark hooded sweatshirt and camouflage pants and brandishing a firearm, the sheriff's office said....from linked web page


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJefPaBsSug

    Its only make believe ^^^^^^^^^ enjoy the Twitty song ...

  3. #3
    Regular Member ()pen(arry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    My wife works in North Shore SD, and she said they received an email stating that a custodian at a Shoreline elementary school claimed to have been approached during morning arrivals by a man in a dark hoodie with a gun, who threatened to "shoot up some schools" and ran away. He was the only direct witness to this purported event. DYOC.

  4. #4
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    So martial law on hearsay?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Do schools seriously not have security cameras? If the custodian was approached during arrivals, this happened on school property?
    "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

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Do schools seriously not have security cameras? If the custodian was approached during arrivals, this happened on school property?
    It was all over the news this morning and this evening nothing. Lots of questions unanswered.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    So martial law on hearsay?
    I believe the "lockdown" for anything other than schools was voluntary. But a huge overreaction nonetheless. We have no evidence a gunman ever even existed.

    I enjoyed the wailing from the plethora of mad mommies who lambasted me for daring to say as much on the KOMO forums. People obviously enjoy living in a constant state of fear in our society today. And they pass that down to their poor children.

    Lockdown the school this supposed gunman was seen at, sure. Tell everybody else to keep an eye out, sure. Anything more is pure paranoia from a society that is constantly conditioned to fear guns and the people who own them.

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by compmanio365 View Post
    I believe the "lockdown" for anything other than schools was voluntary.
    On the news this morning a mother talked about how she was refused access to her child by the police. Doesn't seem voluntary to me.


    But a huge overreaction nonetheless. We have no evidence a gunman ever even existed.

    I enjoyed the wailing from the plethora of mad mommies who lambasted me for daring to say as much on the KOMO forums. People obviously enjoy living in a constant state of fear in our society today. And they pass that down to their poor children.

    Lockdown the school this supposed gunman was seen at, sure. Tell everybody else to keep an eye out, sure. Anything more is pure paranoia from a society that is constantly conditioned to fear guns and the people who own them.
    +1
    Condition people to be afraid and to cower to authority. Something both the fake left and right seem to be competing to outdo each other in.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  9. #9
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Could it have been one of those umbrella guns, we have had a couple lockdowns in NC because someone called in a MWAU.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  10. #10
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    On the news this morning a mother talked about how she was refused access to her child by the police. Doesn't seem voluntary to me.




    +1
    Condition people to be afraid and to cower to authority. Something both the fake left and right seem to be competing to outdo each other in.
    Was she trying to access her child at the school?

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    So martial law on hearsay?
    I don't think that means what you think it means.

    Charles

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by ()pen(arry View Post
    My wife works in North Shore SD, and she said they received an email stating that a custodian at a Shoreline elementary school claimed to have been approached during morning arrivals by a man in a dark hoodie with a gun, who threatened to "shoot up some schools" and ran away. He was the only direct witness to this purported event. DYOC.
    So I presume that a full time employee at the school is a fairly credible witness. And he didn't just call in a MWAG alarm over seeing someone walking down the street minding his own business. He says he received a direct threat from a man carrying a gun. One witness may not be enough to convict the bad/crazy guy in court if he (or someone the cops think is him) gets picked up later, especially if there is no gun present.

    But how do we all expect the system to respond if someone walks up to us, gun in hand, says he is going to shoot us, and we respond with necessary force to stop that threat? What if the person who was threatened and then successfully defended herself is the "only witness to" the purported threat?

    It seems there was some over-reaction. But I believe that given a credible witness to a specific and overtly expressed threat of criminal violence against the schools by a man who was in possession of some means to carry out that threat, does warrant some response of heightened security.

    When someone pulls a fire alarm at a school, or calls in a bomb threat, we don't just assume it is a joke. It is entirely appropriate to make some effort to confirm there isn't a real threat before proceeding along is if there is no problem.

    We all preach situational awareness but then get upset if a school district does anything at all to respond to a credible witness reporting an overtly expressed threat of criminal violence made by a man who at the moment he made the threat was in possession of the item needed to carry out that threat?

    I think hostility to government is clouding some judgment on this side just as much as excess paranoia may be causing some over-reaction on the other side.

    Charles

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by compmanio365 View Post
    Was she trying to access her child at the school?
    Yes
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    I don't think that means what you think it means.

    Charles
    Sure if you don't believe the police have become the militaristic incarnation of a standing army. And that they didn't use military like tactics to control that certain area.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 01-08-2015 at 05:10 PM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Sure if you don't believe the police have become the militaristic incarnation of a standing army. And that they didn't use military like tactics to control that certain area.
    Now I'm certain that "martial law" doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Charles

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Now I'm certain that "martial law" doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Charles
    Maybe you don't like this definition then...

    AccordingtotheSupremeCourt,thetermmartial law carries no precise meaning (Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. 304,66 S. Ct. 606, 90 L. Ed. 688 [1946]). However, most declarations of martial law have some common features. Generally, the institution of martial law contemplates some use of military force. To a varying extent, depending on the martiallaw order, government military personnel have the authority to make and enforce civil and criminal laws. Certain civil liberties may be suspended, such as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom of association,and freedom of movement.


    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti.../Martial+lawBo
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Yes
    That's why I said "I believe the "lockdown" for anything other than schools was voluntary."

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Maybe you don't like this definition then...
    That definition seems to work pretty well. But doesn't seem to have much to do with some rather short term security measures at a government facility like a public school.

    Charles

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by compmanio365 View Post
    That's why I said "I believe the "lockdown" for anything other than schools was voluntary."
    Oh I see, thank you for the clarification.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    That definition seems to work pretty well. But doesn't seem to have much to do with some rather short term security measures at a government facility like a public school.

    Charles

    So the freedom to go to or retrieve your family from a public facility isn't a civil right? Gotcha.......
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    So the freedom to go to or retrieve your family from a public facility isn't a civil right? Gotcha.......
    Give it a rest.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Give it a rest.
    Give what a rest?

    I have taken by kid out of school when cops said I could not for one reason or another.

    They are not prisoners lol.

    We are not soldiers .. cops "orders" have little meaning unless you are actually interfering with them arresting someone.

    You are free to collect your kid out of school at any time and under any circumstances. You can just say "he's not a student anymore" then what they gonna say.

  23. #23
    Regular Member ()pen(arry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    So I presume that a full time employee at the school is a fairly credible witness.
    Credulous. I don't have to presume; you've demonstrated.

  24. #24
    Regular Member ()pen(arry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
    Posts
    740
    A response is, of course, appropriate. Even a rapid, precautionary response is appropriate.

    Here's what that response ought to look like, given the evidence at hand: Shoreline police send a handful (<=6) officers to the school in question to establish a security presence, without interfering with normal activity; Shoreline police send an officer or two to each other school in the district to observe the campuses, without interfering with normal activity; if Shoreline doesn't have enough officers for all of this, it obtains good-will assistance from neighboring jurisdictions and properly deputizes all responding resources; Shoreline notifies neighboring districts and jurisdictions of the situation, leaving them to respond to the report as they choose.

    Here's what happened: Shoreline put every single school in the district on lock-down, which is short hand for paramilitary tyranny, for most or all of the school day; parents couldn't contact their children, much less remove them from the situation; if there was a threat inside any given school, the children and staff were locked in with that threat.

    Well. If it's that easy to terrorize an entire school district, subvert all rights, and expend those resources, with absolutely no evidence beyond an unsubstantiated claim that something happened in broad daylight during heavy parental traffic, I guarantee you there will be miscreant children effecting these outcomes around the country in the near future. Teach a child that you're a dumb, panicky cow, and that child will treat you like a dumb, panicky cow. And you'll deserve it, every time.

  25. #25
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by ()pen(arry View Post
    A response is, of course, appropriate. Even a rapid, precautionary response is appropriate.

    Here's what that response ought to look like, given the evidence at hand: Shoreline police send a handful (<=6) officers to the school in question to establish a security presence, without interfering with normal activity; Shoreline police send an officer or two to each other school in the district to observe the campuses, without interfering with normal activity; if Shoreline doesn't have enough officers for all of this, it obtains good-will assistance from neighboring jurisdictions and properly deputizes all responding resources; Shoreline notifies neighboring districts and jurisdictions of the situation, leaving them to respond to the report as they choose.

    Here's what happened: Shoreline put every single school in the district on lock-down, which is short hand for paramilitary tyranny, for most or all of the school day; parents couldn't contact their children, much less remove them from the situation; if there was a threat inside any given school, the children and staff were locked in with that threat.

    Well. If it's that easy to terrorize an entire school district, subvert all rights, and expend those resources, with absolutely no evidence beyond an unsubstantiated claim that something happened in broad daylight during heavy parental traffic, I guarantee you there will be miscreant children effecting these outcomes around the country in the near future. Teach a child that you're a dumb, panicky cow, and that child will treat you like a dumb, panicky cow. And you'll deserve it, every time.
    +1
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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