carracer
Regular Member
Saw this on the Good Morning America "Ticker Tape". Details?
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.