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

utbagpiper · Jan 8, 2015

sudden valley gunner said:
So the freedom to go to or retrieve your family from a public facility isn't a civil right? Gotcha.......

Give it a rest.

davidmcbeth · Jan 8, 2015

utbagpiper said:
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.

()pen(arry · Jan 9, 2015

utbagpiper said:
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.

()pen(arry · Jan 9, 2015

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.

The Truth · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
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

WalkingWolf · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
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

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

utbagpiper said:
Give it a rest.

NO.

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
Credulous. I don't have to presume; you've demonstrated.

+1 Some believe in magic where public employees are suddenly less fallible than the rest of us mundanes.

()pen(arry said:
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 they used it for an excuse to exercise a little martial law. Some want to quibble about degrees.

twoskinsonemanns · Jan 9, 2015

utbagpiper said:
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

sudden valley gunner said:
So the freedom to go to or retrieve your family from a public facility isn't a civil right? Gotcha.......

Not if we call it a "rather short term security measure"

Barring the parent from the child is nazi level evil IMHO. It's a common occurrence due to it being more or less widely accepted by the public.

twoskinsonemanns · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
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.

spot on post

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

twoskinsonemanns said:
not if we call it a "rather short term security measure"

Barring the parent from the child is nazi level evil imho. It's a common occurrence due to it being more or less widely accepted by the public.

lol...

utbagpiper · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
A response is, of course, appropriate. Even a rapid, precautionary response is appropriate.

...

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;

The article linked to by the OP indicates that the schools were secured for a total of 2 hours while police verified there was no threat present. That is not "most or all of the school day". For many high schools, that is slightly more than one class period.

Whether taking two hours to verify no threat is present, and then canceling school for the day is a better or worse response than looking for a potential threat while school is in session with people moving around seems like picking at nits.

Tell me that any response is made to a kid drawing a picture, or seeing someone legally in possession of a gun in the community, and I'll pile on with you. But when a direct threat is clearly expressed by someone visibly in possession of the means to carry out that threat, a response is warranted and I don't consider taking a couple of hours to verify security while not turning kids lose to become potential targets as they mill around the school grounds as tyrannical, paramilitary, or otherwise grossly out of line.

When a fire alarm gets pulled, we empty the building. Every kid knows that. We don't decline to empty the building to avoid teaching kids that pulling the alarm will empty the building. We impose proper penalties for false alarms.

Charles

WalkingWolf · Jan 9, 2015

Apples to oranges is failed argument.

When there is a fire alarm the building is not locked down and the students kept inside. They do not lock down buildings and other schools not connected to the fire alarm.

utbagpiper · Jan 9, 2015

The response is directed to the area of the threat. In most cases, that means a fire alarm in one part of the building causes some action to be taken in the entire building.

In the article linked to by the OP, it is reported that the threat was made against schools by a visibly armed man whose location could then not be nailed down. Some have already conceded that some precautionary response was warranted at all schools in the area when they responded "+1" to ()penCarry's post about what he thought the proper response was. That post made clear that some response was proper across the district.

So some are quibbling over the exact nature of the response, or trying to circle back and now claim that any district-wide response is inappropriate.

Some have suggested that because only a single school employee witnessed the threat and reported it that that should somehow factor into the equation.

I'm not going to argue whether the response was exactly what it should have been. I have taken issue with characterizing a 2 hour security effort as being "most or all of the day" or as a tyrannical or paramilitary response.

It seems we have a fundamental disagreement over the meaning or proper application of certain words. I doubt further exchanges (either honestly and directly or without benefit of quoting those clearly being responded to) is going to change that. So barring anything new or interesting, I think I'll leave the last word on this one to whomever feels the most compelling need to have it.

Charles

rapgood · Jan 9, 2015

()pen(arry said:
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 that's how it really happened, then consider the following:

kidnapping

(also spelled kidnaping) n. the taking of a person against his/her will (or from the control of a parent or guardian) from one place to another under circumstances in which the person so taken does not have freedom of movement, will, or decision through violence, force, threat or intimidation. Although it is not necessary that the purpose be criminal (since all kidnapping is a criminal felony) the capture usually involves some related criminal act such as holding the person for ransom, sexual and/or sadistic abuse, or rape. It includes taking due to irresistible impulse and a parent taking and hiding a child in violation of court order. An included crime is false imprisonment. Any harm to the victim coupled with kidnapping can raise the degree of felony for the injury and can result in a capital (death penalty) offense in some states, even though the victim survives. Originally it meant the stealing of children, since "kid" is child in Scandinavian languages, but now applies to adults as well.

WalkingWolf · Jan 9, 2015

rapgood said:
Well, if that's how it really happened, then consider the following:

kidnapping

(also spelled kidnaping) n. the taking of a person against his/her will (or from the control of a parent or guardian) from one place to another under circumstances in which the person so taken does not have freedom of movement, will, or decision through violence, force, threat or intimidation. Although it is not necessary that the purpose be criminal (since all kidnapping is a criminal felony) the capture usually involves some related criminal act such as holding the person for ransom, sexual and/or sadistic abuse, or rape. It includes taking due to irresistible impulse and a parent taking and hiding a child in violation of court order. An included crime is false imprisonment. Any harm to the victim coupled with kidnapping can raise the degree of felony for the injury and can result in a capital (death penalty) offense in some states, even though the victim survives. Originally it meant the stealing of children, since "kid" is child in Scandinavian languages, but now applies to adults as well.

Thank you for providing that citation.

twoskinsonemanns · Jan 9, 2015

utbagpiper said:
It seems we have a fundamental disagreement over the meaning or proper application of certain words.

The disagreement does seem to be fundamental. But it's more like the desire of some for more freedom and empowerment of the people, vs those with deep insecurities and fear that desire more control and protection.
It seems to resonate from thread to thread to thread.

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

utbagpiper said:
The response is directed to the area of the threat. In most cases, that means a fire alarm in one part of the building causes some action to be taken in the entire building.

In the article linked to by the OP, it is reported that the threat was made against schools by a visibly armed man whose location could then not be nailed down. Some have already conceded that some precautionary response was warranted at all schools in the area when they responded "+1" to ()penCarry's post about what he thought the proper response was. That post made clear that some response was proper across the district.

So some are quibbling over the exact nature of the response, or trying to circle back and now claim that any district-wide response is inappropriate.

Some have suggested that because only a single school employee witnessed the threat and reported it that that should somehow factor into the equation.

I'm not going to argue whether the response was exactly what it should have been. I have taken issue with characterizing a 2 hour security effort as being "most or all of the day" or as a tyrannical or paramilitary response.

It seems we have a fundamental disagreement over the meaning or proper application of certain words. I doubt further exchanges (either honestly and directly or without benefit of quoting those clearly being responded to) is going to change that. So barring anything new or interesting, I think I'll leave the last word on this one to whomever feels the most compelling need to have it.

Charles

Sigh so rape isn't rape if it doesn't last as long? A tyrannical response is a tyrannical response, you might not think it is one....but tell that to the parent trying to get their kid.

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

rapgood said:
Well, if that's how it really happened, then consider the following:

kidnapping

(also spelled kidnaping) n. the taking of a person against his/her will (or from the control of a parent or guardian) from one place to another under circumstances in which the person so taken does not have freedom of movement, will, or decision through violence, force, threat or intimidation. Although it is not necessary that the purpose be criminal (since all kidnapping is a criminal felony) the capture usually involves some related criminal act such as holding the person for ransom, sexual and/or sadistic abuse, or rape. It includes taking due to irresistible impulse and a parent taking and hiding a child in violation of court order. An included crime is false imprisonment. Any harm to the victim coupled with kidnapping can raise the degree of felony for the injury and can result in a capital (death penalty) offense in some states, even though the victim survives. Originally it meant the stealing of children, since "kid" is child in Scandinavian languages, but now applies to adults as well.

Good post, and when its done by the state with armed people in costumes we could call that.....?

sudden valley gunner · Jan 9, 2015

twoskinsonemanns said:
The disagreement does seem to be fundamental. But it's more like the desire of some for more freedom and empowerment of the people, vs those with deep insecurities and fear that desire more control and protection.
It seems to resonate from thread to thread to thread.

+1

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

Banned

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member