OT: Park Ranger Shot

I'm thinking that 'the whole mountain is a crime scene, and you can't disturb it' and 'we had to ascertain if any of the people were witnesses to the crime' would be the justification if someone pushed the issue.

Orphan said:

This has been on my mind as well. Most of the sheep proibably feel safe because 6 officers are guarding them. I for one would not consent to being detained especialy if I know that there was a combat vet out there and my only protection was 6 cops.

Is there a law that allows the authoritys to detain you like this, protectove custody?

Click to expand...

Even if there is a law, is the law valid under the constitutions of our state and nation?

They shut down a public park, and then imprison the public!

Anyone else disturbed by this?

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/01/01/1966305/searchers-hunt-through-night-for.html

snip..."Evacuee Dinh Jackson, a mother from Olympia, who came to the mountain to sled with family and friends, told The Associated Press that officials ordered people to hurry into the lodge after the shooting.

Jackson said officials had everyone get on their knees and place hands behind their heads as they went through the building, looking at faces to make sure the gunman was not among them."

dadada said:

Anyone else disturbed by this?

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/01/01/1966305/searchers-hunt-through-night-for.html

snip..."Evacuee Dinh Jackson, a mother from Olympia, who came to the mountain to sled with family and friends, told The Associated Press that officials ordered people to hurry into the lodge after the shooting.

Jackson said officials had everyone get on their knees and place hands behind their heads as they went through the building, looking at faces to make sure the gunman was not among them."

Click to expand...

For officer safety, of course.


Now here's the tricky part.

They claim it's to see if the suspect was one of them.

If I refuse to comply, they can very clearly see my face... negating any reason to interact with me.....yet I'm betting they'd force compliance..

Are you guys thinking the same way every time a school is "locked down" when there has been a shooting anywhere within a few miles? The kids can't leave, but neither are you allowed to go get your children, either. I happens a couple of times a year around here.

And people who home-school their children are just weird.

My girlfriend left the house at 0345 to manage communications for the search at the incident command post in Longmire. She's a dispatcher at NOCA, but apparently they needed her at MORA; she's been on duty since 0700.

View attachment 7703Here's your suspect.

If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we all can be legally disarmed merely by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony as has been done for alleged abusers and stressed veterans. There but for Grace go any number of US.

UPDATE: Suspect believed to be dead.

http://www.king5.com/news/crime/Massive-search-underway-for-rangers-killer-136532718.html

You guys are getting upset about them holding the visitors. Let's calm down and actually look at this.
If they do not take the time to physically check each person and he was in the group then got away you and everyone else would be all over the cops for it.
If they did not put the people on lockdown and just let them leave and someone got killed for their car you and everone else would be going after the cops.
But when they do this you guys still go after the cops.
Not everything is a violation of rights.
Not everything is some kind of conspiracy.
Most cops do not wake up in the morning saying, "How am I going to f*** over someone today?"
Why does everybody always think they can do the other guy's job better? Why don't you all go get hired by a police department and show us how it's done.

decklin said:

Why don't you all go get hired by a police department and show us how it's done.

Click to expand...

A citizens review board will do fine, or contribute in kind or cash to the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies CALEA.

http://www.calea.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Accreditation_for_Law_Enforcement_Agencies

decklin said:

Not everything is a violation of rights.
Not everything is some kind of conspiracy.

Click to expand...

You're right. When I'm involutarily herded into a building, placed on my knees, and told to put my hands behind my head, I think it's for my own good. Not kidnapping or assasination.

I'm always jumping to silly conclusions.

decklin said:

You guys are getting upset about them holding the visitors. Let's calm down and actually look at this.

Click to expand...

Yes, some of us are grossly uncomfortable with the idea of our fellow [innocent] citizens being held by agents of the state by implicit threat of physical force.

If they do not take the time to physically check each person and he was in the group then got away you and everyone else would be all over the cops for it.
If they did not put the people on lockdown and just let them leave and someone got killed for their car you and everone else would be going after the cops.
But when they do this you guys still go after the cops.

Click to expand...

Most of us here understand that the Supreme Court has held that the police have no duty to protect. Therefore, we have no expectation of police protection; this is why we carry.

My record is clear: I would rather a murderer get away than give up rights. One outcome has temporary consequences in the grand scheme of things, while the other haunts us forever.

Not everything is a violation of rights.

Click to expand...

No, but holding innocent citizens against their will is.

Not everything is some kind of conspiracy.

Click to expand...

No, but when two or more people formulate and carry out an illegal action, such as holding innocent citizens against their will, a criminal conspiracy has taken place.

Most cops do not wake up in the morning saying, "How am I going to f*** over someone today?"

Click to expand...

Most don't, some do; moreover, there is an institutional mindset of depriving citizens of rights that only the best and most principled peace officers can rise above.

Why does everybody always think they can do the other guy's job better?

Click to expand...

Because the instructions for doing so are contained in the plain-letter text of the U.S. Constitution, which any idiot can read and understand.

Why don't you all go get hired by a police department and show us how it's done.

Click to expand...

There are a few honest souls who are doing it, although I must admit, not many. As for me, there are far too many unconstitutional laws on the books that I would be expected to enforce, which I could not in good conscience.

Thanks for playing, though. I was waiting for a statist to pop his head in the door.

Just watched KIRO 7, and they reported groups are going to try an use this incident to repeal the law allowing guns in NP's. Like I said in my earlier post, if they do something like that only the psychos like this guy will have guns. Guns aren't allowed at Virginia tech either, see how well that worked out?

golddigger14s said:

Just watched KIRO 7, and they reported groups are going to try an use this incident to repeal the law allowing guns in NP's. Like I said in my earlier post, if they do something like that only the psychos like this guy will have guns. Guns aren't allowed at Virginia tech either, see how well that worked out?

Click to expand...

I think if antis decide to use this incident it would be easy to counter by showing the other evidence that he had killed earlier off the park and was a criminal as such which would not care if the park was off limits.

This actually reenforces why a citizen should be armed in the park. when someone like this has broke and decides to go on a rampage, the citizens need to be able to fight back. Of course that's not how the antis will see it.

An article with a bit more information...
http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/na...rainier-park-ranger-fatally-shot-had-nj-roots

It sounds to me as if Ranger Margaret Anderson is an unwitting hero, and may have interrupted a greater scheme for this guy to go up to the Paradise Lodge area and do greater damage.

SNIP...

I note from page 2

According to USA Today, the outgoing chair of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees said Congress should be regretting its decision to allow loaded weapons in national parks. Chairman Bill Wade called Sunday's shooting “a tragedy that could have been prevented.”

Click to expand...

It makes for a nice sound bite, but I would like to hear HOW Mr. Wade thinks the old restriction could have prevented this guy from bringing firearms in when the shooter didn't even have any worry about murdering a Park Ranger, and obviously had bigger plans in mind to commit other, highly more serious crimes. If anything, the shooters larger plans may just have been stopped by a citizen or 2 carrying within the park. With everyone disarmed, its near guaranteed that the damage would have been much worse had he gotten up to the populated areas around Paradise.

Mr. Wade seems to believe that a law against carrying is some sort of magic barrier to bad things happening. I wonder what other disconnects from reality Mr. Bill Wade has. Perhaps he should be evaluated for mental instability too.

Edited to Add: I posted a comment on that one.

Decklin has a point.
Still they may have been excessive with the civilians, we weren't there. Not having to keep track of 100 people coming down, officials not knowing where everyone might run to. They already know where the cabins and lodges are and do their best to keep these people safe until they have a safe way to bring them down until the situation at hand is under control.
I'm not saying some of us could do what we needed to make our way down.
All we're hearing and seeing is the news.
We can only imagine.

Orphan said:

I for one would not consent to being detained especialy if I know that there was a combat vet out there and my only protection was 6 cops.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a variation on "one riot, one ranger".

decklin said:

If they do not take the time to physically check each person and he was in the group then got away you and everyone else would be all over the cops for it.
...
Not everything is a violation of rights.

Click to expand...

Instead of the extreme infringement described in the article(s), it may have been sufficient to keep the people wherever they were (outdoors or in their cabins) until whoever it was had looked at each one (as they left the area? or leave an officer to guard each cabin? or put marks on the doors like the first Passover?).
What was the purpose of treating them like people about to be executed?

And yes, although they have no duty to protect anyone not in custody, or prevent / stop any crime, if they had the BG in their control & let him get away I would be unhappy with them.

Griz said:

When I'm involutarily herded into a building, placed on my knees, and told to put my hands behind my head, I think it's for my own good. Not kidnapping or assasination.

Click to expand...

+1

decklin said:

Most cops do not wake up in the morning saying, "How am I going to f*** over someone today?"

Click to expand...

Probably not.
But too many will take an opportunity which presents itself in order to make someone's life difficult if they disagree with what that person is doing, no matter how legal it may be. There are ample examples of that in the experiences of members here.
"You may beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride."

slapmonkay said:

I think if antis decide to use this incident it would be easy to counter by showing the other evidence that he had killed earlier off the park and was a criminal as such which would not care if the park was off limits.

This actually reenforces why a citizen should be armed in the park. when someone like this has broke and decides to go on a rampage, the citizens need to be able to fight back. Of course that's not how the antis will see it.

Click to expand...

The guy allegedly had an order of protection against him and had apparently threatened violence against at least himself. Isn't that by itself enough to bar him from owning firearms? (Question h)

Just Us said:

Decklin has a point.
Still they may have been excessive with the civilians, we weren't there. Not having to keep track of 100 people coming down, officials not knowing where everyone might run to. They already know where the cabins and lodges are and do their best to keep these people safe until they have a safe way to bring them down until the situation at hand is under control.
I'm not saying some of us could do what we needed to make our way down.
All we're hearing and seeing is the news.
We can only imagine.

Click to expand...

Thank you, that is part of what I was trying to get across. And who said they were being forced to wait like they were going to be executed? I am sure they only had them on their knees long enough to verify ID. It is not just for officer safety but for everyone present. It is difficult for someone to shoot if their hands are behind their head. Them being on their knees makes it difficult for the person of interest to run. It also gives you an elevated position to pull security.
The biggest thing is that you were not there and do not know what happened. It is easy to pick something apart from your keyboard. Can you honestly tell me you know exactly how you would react in this situation? I can't. And I don't know any soldier who can and all we do is train for situations.
No matter what happens or what anyone says there will always be a "better" solution.

decklin said:

And I don't know any soldier who can and all we do is train for situations.

Click to expand...

NOT! 'Nuff said.