"Lockdown" By what authority?

Every time I hear: "so and so place (school/office/hospital/mall ) went on LOCKDOWN" I bristle. By what authority? I can't find the word(s) lock down in the code of Virginia.

So, by what authority can (the) police arrest the free movement of all persons in / around some police activity? To hear it on the news it is as if "you must remain indoors. If you are outside, go in the nearest building and stay there until we tell you you may come out.....this is for your safety."

Anyone with a lick of sense knows it isn't for their safety, its for the convenience of the police.

Is this "lockdown" notion some authority we have quietly, subconsciously, ceeded to the police? Is it becoming "Well we've always done it that way, and nobody has challenged it....we'll keep doing it."

I'll be a test case.

As I understand it, a person cannot be arrested for "violating" a campus lockdown order. It's a safety advisory, sort of like the one that says stay off the seawall during a hurricane.

On the other hand, a person could expose themself to unwanted police attention for being outside during the lockdown. They can make quite free with RAS during the lockdown.

Adhering to a locldown order does seem to violate the "3 stupids" rule: don't go stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things. Leaving the area does souind like a reasonable move - but then the folks who issue lockdown "orders" are, by definition, not reasonable.

stay safe.

There is to authority to hold anyone in a building against their will for an indefinite period of time. The administration knows this, and the police know this. Both have freely admitted that the "shelter in place" or "lockdown" orders in campus alerts are really no more than guidelines for faculty and students, with the understanding that if someone goes out that it is "at their own risk." After having talked to several friends who were on campus this afternoon, most had the same story. They understood that they were free to leave, but that if they did step outside that they would likely be "told" by LEOs to go back in. After a few hours many people did start to leave on their own.

VApatriot said:

There is to authority to hold anyone in a building against their will for an indefinite period of time. The administration knows this, and the police know this. Both have freely admitted that the "shelter in place" or "lockdown" orders in campus alerts are really no more than guidelines for faculty and students, with the understanding that if someone goes out that it is "at their own risk." After having talked to several friends who were on campus this afternoon, most had the same story. They understood that they were free to leave, but that if they did step outside that they would likely be "told" by LEOs to go back in. After a few hours many people did start to leave on their own.

Click to expand...

Understood there VaPatriot. But the news says "LOCKDOWN" (whether it's a campus, mall, or k-12 school), and the "sheeple" believe they are under a police mandate to remain indoors. I'm the same way with "mandatory evacuation orders". You can't be compelled to abandon your property. Because the police take that authority and issue that order and no one challenges it, it becomes their defacto authority.

doug23838 said:

Understood there VaPatriot. But the news says "LOCKDOWN" (whether it's a campus, mall, or k-12 school), and the "sheeple" believe they are under a police mandate to remain indoors. I'm the same way with "mandatory evacuation orders". You can't be compelled to abandon your property. Because the police take that authority and issue that order and no one challenges it, it becomes their defacto authority.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess I know exactly what you're saying.

doug23838 said:

Understood there VaPatriot. But the news says "LOCKDOWN" (whether it's a campus, mall, or k-12 school), and the "sheeple" believe they are under a police mandate to remain indoors. I'm the same way with "mandatory evacuation orders". You can't be compelled to abandon your property. Because the police take that authority and issue that order and no one challenges it, it becomes their defacto authority.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry doug but i can't understand a thing you are saying as my mind trys to wrap itself around the image burned into my retinas by your avatar pic and the thought processes itself in my mind as to where and what you were doing to take that photo.

67GT390FB said:

I'm sorry doug but i can't understand a thing you are saying as my mind trys to wrap itself around the image burned into my retinas by your avatar pic and the thought processes itself in my mind as to where and what you were doing to take that photo.

Click to expand...

I was primping for the "Number of carry rounds" thread.

"Lockdown" EQUALS "House Arrest"

VApatriot said:

There is NO AUTHORITY to hold anyone in a building against their will for an indefinite period of time. The administration knows this, and the police know this. Both have freely admitted that the "shelter in place" or "lockdown" orders in campus alerts are really no more than guidelines for faculty and students, with the understanding that if someone goes out that it is "at their own risk." After having talked to several friends who were on campus this afternoon, most had the same story. They understood that they were free to leave, but that if they did step outside that they would likely be "told" by LEOs to go back in. After a few hours many people did start to leave on their own.

Click to expand...

A so-called "lockdown" places law-abiding sheeple under house arrest. There is no Code of Virginia authority for it.

Virginia has a powerful "False Imprisonment" tort. That could be used by anyone detained without authority. The classic standard is Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Wickline, 188 Va. 485, 489, 50 S.E.2d 387, 388:

" 'False imprisonment is restraint of one's liberty without any sufficient legal excuse therefor by word or acts which he fears to disregard, and neither malice, ill will, nor the slightest wrongful intention is necessary to constitute the offense.' See also, Kress & Co. v. Musgrove, 153 Va. 348, 356, 149 S.E. 453.

" 'The gist of the action is the illegal detention of the person, without lawful process, or the unlawful execution of lawful process.' Kress & Co. v. Roberts, 143 Va. 71, 75, 129 S.E. 244, 246.

Click to expand...