Archive

Bomb scare at Ford City polling site fails to disrupt voting | TribLIVE.com
News

Bomb scare at Ford City polling site fails to disrupt voting

The word “boom” scrawled on a restroom stall sparked a search for a bomb at a Ford City polling site while voters continued to cast ballots in Tuesday’s primary election.

What was treated as a bomb threat occurred about 1:40 p.m. when an employee noticed the word at the 1st Ward North polling place in the Klingensmith Healthcare Building, 404 Ford St.

“The threat was vague, but we still took precautionary measures,” Ford City police Sgt. John Atherton said. “No bomb was found. It is unknown if it was an act to disrupt the election.”

Police, Armstrong County sheriff’s deputies and K-9 units from Armstrong and Allegheny counties conducted an hourlong search while about 100 voters and workers stayed inside the building. Two or three people voted while the search was being conducted, Atherton said.

The polling place, one of four in the borough, had 36 voters between the time it opened and when the search ended.

“People were still able to vote uninterrupted – they were still able to exercise their right to vote,” Atherton said.

Brigid Beatty is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.