Realistic prank or something I should really worry about?

Is this just a scary-sounding pre-April Fools joke, or a legitimate threat? I’m hoping it’s the former, but something makes me wonder about this email from an obviously fictitious email address (shutdownscanlon@gmail.com)

Scanlon:

Shut down your blog.

SHUT IT DOWN NOW, YOU PATHETIC UNEMPLOYED BEGGAR!

If not, you will regret this decision as long as you live. You have 24 hours to completely remove all your stupid blog’s postings and snarky comments. (The photos we could care less about.)

Who we are, individually, is of no concern to you. Rest assured that, as a group, we hold great power – and are unafraid to use it. While we are centered in Ocean Shores, a great town that you tirelessly trash, our reach exceeds far beyond the city gates.

And if you do not immediately shut down this blog, we will take control of your Bank of America account, your various credit card accounts, even your pathetic Stephens Media 401k account.

Your credit will be so screwed, you won’t even be able to get a library card.

We will blacklist you so that no legitimate employer in Arizona will hire you. You’ll be fighting with the Mexicans for day work.

On top of that, you’ll be put on a Homeland Security Watch list, so that you’ll be strip-searched any time you try to fly.

We thought you would just blow off some steam with this blog and then disappear like a boil that’s been lanced. But you continue to disparage our mayor, our department heads, our paramedics and policemen, even our prized library.

No longer will you spread insidious half-truths and insinuations about alleged abuses at what you sneeringly call “the lie-bury.” This is where our children learn, you piece of crap! Just because an RFQ was not done the way YOU wanted it to happen, do you think we will roll over and let you ruin our most sacred institution?

That goes for your half-assed jokes about the hard-working paramedics. When you had the gall to suggest that we would replace our worn out ambulances with a “fuel-efficient limousine,” that truly was the last straw – and put a target right on the back of your skull!

And then your statement that, “The Ocean Shores Police are the best in the state – at busting senior citizen pot smokers.” Do you have any idea how many law enforcement professionals across the country you offended?

 

We are The Committee, a group that has been the behind-the-scenes players in the creation of Ocean Shores from a literally bullshit-covered cow pasture to a multi-billion dollar tourist powerhouse. Anyone wishing to do business in Ocean Shores does so only with our express approval.

And no department head makes a decision, no mayor puts something on the agenda, no finance director proposes a tax increase before first asking us.

Do you doubt or existence and/or influence? If so, ask yourself this: Why did three consecutive mayors go from being “buddy-buddy” with you to cursing you out at virtually every behind-the-scenes meeting and publically chastising you?

True, part of it is simple: You’re a JERK.

But other jerks have been treated with patronizing patience. The mayors have dumped on you because we convinced them to do so.

Why did you not get your way and be able to stay on as “long-distance editor” of the North Coast News? Because we didn’t want it. Your moving to Arizona only speeded up the process of our pushing you out the door.

Ask Bill Crawford about it, if you don’t believe it. (Oh, that’s right, he won’t talk to you . . . because we told him not to.)

But if you think you can continue to take pot-shots at Ocean Shores from long distance, and continue to allow your bitching cronies to make fools of themselves as they run down our great city, you are very, very wrong.

If the changes we have demanded have not been made, and tomscanlonsblog.com exists in or near its current form as of midnight on April 2, your identity will be taken out with the Tuesday morning trash. To prove we are serious and have great knowledge, here is your Social Security number: 175-xx-xxxx.

 

Blogmaster’s note:

It WAS my correct Social Security number; I deleted the rest, obviously.

Don’t know how they would get that, do you think this is serious or someone “pranking” me?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Realistic prank or something I should really worry about?

  1. AnonyMe says:

    Tom, while you may have angered some, I have seen nothing illegal on this blog. Until now. This threat,and that is what it is,real or prank,is clearly far into the felony category,both state and federal. The authorities should be alerted and the sender should be given a nice cell to live in as they so richly deserve. Threats are serious stuff,real or prank and should be fully prosecuted.

  2. Sad but true says:

    Dear Tom,
    I would not hesitate on this. Send it to the FBI, WA State Attorney General’s Office and AZ State Attorney General’s Office and both state police. Whoever has done this, have clearly stepped over the line and should be apprehended, prosecuted, prison sentence and no electronic media access – including cell phone for the rest of their lives. This needs to be addressed immediately. This blog is needed because no one in their right mind would move to a city so corrupt and disfunctional on purpose. Their ego is certainly out of balance.

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with this. This needs to be reported and the evil doer prosecuted. I’m so disappointed in this City, from the Mayor to the counsel members. This City is so corrupt!!!

  3. Nicky Anderson and Dougie Dog . says:

    Oh pish and tush

  4. Watching Out says:

    Tom: Everything as above. Also notify the OSPD. Someone can figure out where the message came from. I don’t think the SS number means anything anymore. My first SS card said in big bold red letters, ‘NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES”. But now it’s used just about everywhere. But do all of the above + OSPD. Ask the FBI and State AG to look into the source of the post. They know how to do it.

  5. iolion says:

    April fools!

  6. April the First says:

    Based on Ocean Shores history and animosities and hate for free speech that exists at the Taj and in the hearts of the dwellers in other city buildings, this venom could easily come from a city that does not hire or elect the most qualified and ethical people and has no enforcement of its own rules. The SS# is accessible from a driver’s license # which is available to another person each time a driver is stopped by a police vehicle. This is probably a sick April fool’s joke but somebody has violated federal and state laws with the social security number.

    • Daniel McArthur says:

      What Federal and State laws were broken? I’m just asking. I’m not keen to these type of occurrences.

      • Rule of Law says:

        A threat is an assault. Assault is still against the law. You don’t need to know the particular law. That is what you pay the state/feds to know.

        • Anonymous says:

          I hear what you’re saying, but after reading the RCW for Assault 1-4, this is clearly not an assault. Must fall under a different type of crime, maybe under RCW Title 9.15, Threats/Harassment?

          9A.36.011
          Assault in the first degree.

          (1) A person is guilty of assault in the first degree if he or she, with intent to inflict great bodily harm:

          (a) Assaults another with a firearm or any deadly weapon or by any force or means likely to produce great bodily harm or death; or

          (b) Administers, exposes, or transmits to or causes to be taken by another, poison, the human immunodeficiency virus as defined in chapter 70.24 RCW, or any other destructive or noxious substance; or

          (c) Assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm.

          (2) Assault in the first degree is a class A felony.

          [1997 c 196 § 1; 1986 c 257 § 4.]

          Notes:

          Severability — 1986 c 257: See note following RCW 9A.56.010.

          Effective date — 1986 c 257 §§ 3-10: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          ——————————————————————————–

          9A.36.021
          Assault in the second degree.

          (1) A person is guilty of assault in the second degree if he or she, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first degree:

          (a) Intentionally assaults another and thereby recklessly inflicts substantial bodily harm; or

          (b) Intentionally and unlawfully causes substantial bodily harm to an unborn quick child by intentionally and unlawfully inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child; or

          (c) Assaults another with a deadly weapon; or

          (d) With intent to inflict bodily harm, administers to or causes to be taken by another, poison or any other destructive or noxious substance; or

          (e) With intent to commit a felony, assaults another; or

          (f) Knowingly inflicts bodily harm which by design causes such pain or agony as to be the equivalent of that produced by torture; or

          (g) Assaults another by strangulation or suffocation.

          (2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, assault in the second degree is a class B felony.

          (b) Assault in the second degree with a finding of sexual motivation under RCW 9.94A.835 or 13.40.135 is a class A felony.

          [2011 c 166 § 1; 2007 c 79 § 2; 2003 c 53 § 64; 2001 2nd sp.s. c 12 § 355; 1997 c 196 § 2. Prior: 1988 c 266 § 2; 1988 c 206 § 916; 1988 c 158 § 2; 1987 c 324 § 2; 1986 c 257 § 5.]

          Notes:

          Finding — 2007 c 79: “The legislature finds that assault by strangulation may result in immobilization of a victim, may cause a loss of consciousness, injury, or even death, and has been a factor in a significant number of domestic violence related assaults and fatalities. While not limited to acts of assault against an intimate partner, assault by strangulation is often knowingly inflicted upon an intimate partner with the intent to commit physical injury, or substantial or great bodily harm. Strangulation is one of the most lethal forms of domestic violence. The particular cruelty of this offense and its potential effects upon a victim both physically and psychologically, merit its categorization as a ranked felony offense under chapter 9A.36 RCW.” [2007 c 79 § 1.]

          Intent — Effective date — 2003 c 53: See notes following RCW 2.48.180.

          Intent — Severability — Effective dates — 2001 2nd sp.s. c 12: See notes following RCW 71.09.250.

          Application — 2001 2nd sp.s. c 12 §§ 301-363: See note following RCW 9.94A.030.

          Effective date — 1988 c 266: “This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, the support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and shall take effect July 1, 1988.” [1988 c 266 § 3.]

          Effective date — 1988 c 206 §§ 916, 917: “Sections 916 and 917 of this act shall take effect July 1, 1988.” [1988 c 206 § 922.]

          Severability — 1988 c 206: See RCW 70.24.900.

          Effective date — 1988 c 158: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          Effective date — 1987 c 324: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          Severability — 1986 c 257: See note following RCW 9A.56.010.

          Effective date — 1986 c 257 §§ 3-10: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          ——————————————————————————–

          9A.36.031
          Assault in the third degree.

          (1) A person is guilty of assault in the third degree if he or she, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first or second degree:

          (a) With intent to prevent or resist the execution of any lawful process or mandate of any court officer or the lawful apprehension or detention of himself, herself, or another person, assaults another; or

          (b) Assaults a person employed as a transit operator or driver, the immediate supervisor of a transit operator or driver, a mechanic, or a security officer, by a public or private transit company or a contracted transit service provider, while that person is performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

          (c) Assaults a school bus driver, the immediate supervisor of a driver, a mechanic, or a security officer, employed by a school district transportation service or a private company under contract for transportation services with a school district, while the person is performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

          (d) With criminal negligence, causes bodily harm to another person by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm; or

          (e) Assaults a firefighter or other employee of a fire department, county fire marshal’s office, county fire prevention bureau, or fire protection district who was performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

          (f) With criminal negligence, causes bodily harm accompanied by substantial pain that extends for a period sufficient to cause considerable suffering; or

          (g) Assaults a law enforcement officer or other employee of a law enforcement agency who was performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

          (h) Assaults a peace officer with a projectile stun gun; or

          (i) Assaults a nurse, physician, or health care provider who was performing his or her nursing or health care duties at the time of the assault. For purposes of this subsection: “Nurse” means a person licensed under chapter 18.79 RCW; “physician” means a person licensed under chapter 18.57 or 18.71 RCW; and “health care provider” means a person certified under chapter 18.71 or 18.73 RCW who performs emergency medical services or a person regulated under Title 18 RCW and employed by, or contracting with, a hospital licensed under chapter 70.41 RCW; or

          (j) Assaults a judicial officer, court-related employee, county clerk, or county clerk’s employee, while that person is performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault or as a result of that person’s employment within the judicial system. For purposes of this subsection, “court-related employee” includes bailiffs, court reporters, judicial assistants, court managers, court managers’ employees, and any other employee, regardless of title, who is engaged in equivalent functions.

          (2) Assault in the third degree is a class C felony.

          [2011 c 336 § 359; 2011 c 238 § 1; 2005 c 458 § 1; 1999 c 328 § 1; 1998 c 94 § 1; 1997 c 172 § 1; 1996 c 266 § 1; 1990 c 236 § 1; 1989 c 169 § 1; 1988 c 158 § 3; 1986 c 257 § 6.]

          Notes:

          Reviser’s note: This section was amended by 2011 c 238 § 1 and by 2011 c 336 § 359, each without reference to the other. Both amendments are incorporated in the publication of this section under RCW 1.12.025(2). For rule of construction, see RCW 1.12.025(1).

          Effective date — 1988 c 158: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          Severability — 1986 c 257: See note following RCW 9A.56.010.

          Effective date — 1986 c 257 §§ 3-10: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          ——————————————————————————–

          9A.36.041
          Assault in the fourth degree.

          (1) A person is guilty of assault in the fourth degree if, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first, second, or third degree, or custodial assault, he or she assaults another.

          (2) Assault in the fourth degree is a gross misdemeanor.

          [1987 c 188 § 2; 1986 c 257 § 7.]

          Notes:

          Effective date — 1986 c 257 §§ 3-10: See note following RCW 9A.04.110.

          Effective date — 1987 c 188: See note following RCW 9A.36.100.

          Severability — 1986 c 257: See note following RCW 9A.56.010.

          • Rule of Law says:

            Nice job on all the homework, but I am speaking philosophically. Threatening your life, livelihood, possessions, bank account, reputation, etc. is to use force against you. That is assault. When a neighbor screams threats at you, you expect police to cite them with assault.

          • April the First says:

            Look at the laws concerning the use and and misuse of a
            SS# and the use of it for blackmailing and intimidation.

  7. Daniel McArthur says:

    Definately something to think about. But contacting OSPD after trashing them and belittling them sure seems questionable to me. There is no doubt that they would do the job, but in all reality, I’d not bother them anymore.

  8. iolion says:

    Contact the FBI and Google. Obtain sender’s IP. If it originated from Coast, which I’ll bet it did, contact them. The fact that they used gmail in the first place was a silly move, Google will gladly hand over source IP addresses from email headers, especially when it comes to cases of identity theft. Since the sender did use gmail, most likely, they weren’t smart enough to obfuscate their IP address via free public wifi or the sort; probably left a nice trail of bread crumbs.

    Dirty paid public servants with access to our personal information IMO – unless Tom is pranking us all.

  9. Watching Out says:

    I like the part, “When you had the gall to suggest that WE would replace our worn out ambulances……” Ah, ha. I wonder what is meant by the “WE”?

  10. I’m not sure where you are getting your information, but great topic.
    I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more.

    Thanks for excellent info I was looking for this info for my mission.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s