The RJ published an article yesterday which claims "officials" have known about "flaws" in the RJC security camera system for more than six months, and have done little to fix the problem. From the article:Just in case you had some wild delusion that you were safe inside the courthouse, the RJ went ahead and gave some fairly specific secret entry points for the RJC:The Review-Journal saw camera obstructions outside firsthand from the 17-story courthouse's main control room operated by marshals.
As the marshals remotely panned two separate cameras mounted near the main entrance on the north side of the building, palm trees and other trees clearly were blocking several camera angles.
Cameras posted above a covered parking lot for judges across the street from the south side of the building encountered obstructions from the metal rooftops, making it nearly impossible, for the most part, to see anyone going in and out of their cars.
When the cameras were panned to a walkway leading to a private courthouse entrance, it was clear that the cameras would have a difficult time picking up anyone hiding in tall bushes near the walkway.
Just remember that the next time you get frustrated waiting with the great unwashed at the northern entrance metal detectors ... you are just a metal rooftop and some tall bushes away from the VIP entrance, Mr. Bond.
(LVRJ; Thanks, Tipster!)
What entrance on the south side are they talking about? The actual doors with the Wackenhut guy (or whatever private security company) who stands there all day, or the loading dock where the marshals stand around smoking cigarettes? Seems like much ado about nothing. We know the building isn't secure. I'm a county employee, and though I'm not supposed to be armed I accidentally walked in with my personally owned handgun in a briefcase. Nobody noticed, not even me until later on. If you have the right ID they wave you right on through.
ReplyDeleteFrom the RJ:
ReplyDelete"Sources said the marshals had trouble identifying potential threats. . ."
So true.
Maybe the County should hire some of those awesome TSA people to take over for the Marshalls.
ReplyDeleteI thought most shooters in places of business were employees anyway. I wonder what the stats are for government buildings.
ReplyDelete10:16. Your close, but let's focus on the word 'shooters' and ask ourselves why SCOTUS couldn't have dealt with the gun issue better. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if five of those dummies had a clue.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, though a little off topic, the supremes threw us to the wolves with that one.
ReplyDeleteAre people really that ignorant of the 2A here? I'd say the four dissenters in McDonald should brush up - starting with the Heller case.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the marshals should spend more time on security and less time giving people parking tickets and handing out citations for petty offenses that are properly within Metro's jurisdiction. It's hard to take them seriously when they seem to have a lot of extra time on their hands.
ReplyDelete12:23- confused, do you mean that we should be able to carry everywhere?
ReplyDeleteOr not at all?
10:16
10:16. Your probably right but your going start a whole other discussion with the 'Sarah Palin' crowd if we go downd that road.
ReplyDeleteDoes it matter if there are cameras considering who is watching them?
ReplyDelete@12:23 and 12:29- Are you lawyers? Do you realize Nevada has its own Constitution? Read it, our State Constitution guarantees the right to own a gun.
ReplyDeleteI should be able to stroll to court with a rifle flung over my shoulder and a sidearm on my hip.
ReplyDelete@6:18. It's time to start looking beyond the various, 'constitutions,' and see them with a more contemporary vision.
ReplyDelete@8:07,
ReplyDeleteYes, let's repeal art. I, sec. 5, because that's incompatible with my contemporary vision.
These so called marshals are mostly wanna be cops who couldn't get hired or were fired from other departments. Lt. Glasper is a man who couldn't cut it at metro due to "integrity issues". Judge Hardcastle has a 70 year old working as her bailiff for christ sake. Total waste of taxpayer money.
ReplyDeleteFirst off it's Marshal with one L not two. Second, how about we get rid of some of the P.O.S Judge's that have the P.O.S Marshal's. Third, there are some very good Marshal's, that have gone through the same if not better training then these so called Metro officers that defense attorneys love because there arrest packets are a joke. Some Marshal's just chose to work Monday through Friday with weekend and holidays off to put up with A** hole Judge's that think they are God and SOME attorney's that aren't much better, just so they can spend time with their family. The Marshal's have to do the same yearly training that every other officer in the town does and has just as much jurisdiction as Metro. As far as writing citations they have that right and a simple traffic stop is all it takes to get a dirt bag off the street that may be wanted. As far as security goes, the Marshal's work with what they have. The county would rather give $7,500 to the new Judge's to buy office furniture instead of worrying about the safety of the public or building. Give them a desk and chair, if they don't like it they can buy their own. How about them clerks at the windows, a person wanted for 3 counts of attempt murder comes in to check on a case and they call the Marshal's 10 minutes after the person leaves and expects the Marshal's to find them. I could go on and on but some of the sarcastic a**holes on here aren't listening so what good would it do.
ReplyDelete10:14 - perhaps instead of correcting others on the spelling of "marshal," you could spend your time learning how to use, and how not to use, an apostrophe.
ReplyDeleteTo 10:14 - the points about marshals writing citations was that they claim they have insufficient resources and not enough people to open both gates, but they apparently do have sufficient time as reflected by the fact that they spend it issuing parking citations, arresting people for matters unrelated to security, and otherwise issuing misdemeanor citations. We have police officers who can perform these functions and don't need whiny-ass marshals complaining about their inability to do their own job while at the same time taking on another agency's responsibilities.
ReplyDeleteI love the teabaggers and neocons view of the Constitution. The only amendments they believe that have any validity are the 2nd (and they leave no leeway for intepretation other than their own) and the 10th. Oh yeah, and the 1st Amendment as long as it applies to corporations being able to spend unlimited amounts of money to get a candidate elected.
ReplyDelete@ 1:40
ReplyDeleteYou didn't do well in ConLaw, did you?
Hey Mr. Marshal (poster at 10:14)
ReplyDeleteIt's called separation of powers. You are part of the judicial branch, not the executive branch. The judicial branch does not prosecute crimes, it acts as a fair and neutral forum for resolving those charges. The courts have no business in initiating prosecutions. If you want to be a cop, or otherwise act in a prosecutorial function, join the police force or DA's office and get out of the judiciary.
@1:51
ReplyDeleteTeabagger!!!
Hey Mr. 2:45,
ReplyDeleteClark County Marshals are a division of Metro. They are tasked with the protection of the judges and the county court buildings, but they are still part of the executive branch. The courts don't have their own police force. Not even in Las Vegas
1223, 1229 and 140
ReplyDeleteYou liberal dicks can suck eggs. As a gun toting attorney, the 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct and it is to us conservatives as abortion is to you liberal jackoffs. Only difference is, our sacrament is actually a part of the US Constitution.
6:18 here... Why are we still arguing over the 2nd Amendment?? Let me help you since you're all too lazy to google Nevada Constitution.
ReplyDeleteSec. 11. Right to keep and bear arms; civil power supreme.
1. Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes.
Who cares how the Second Amendment is interpreted. Our Constitution makes it simple. We have an absolute right to own guns. And no I am not a tea bagger...gun toting liberal democrat.