Boston Marathon Bombed

Discussion in 'What's On Your Mind?' started by Caradoc, Apr 15, 2013.

  1. RB

    RB Founding Member

    They way these people spray bullets I'm starting to understand why DHS needs so many rounds on hand. Bet DHS supplies local LEO groups with grants of bullets.
  2. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    nice post, and yes, this is very encouraging. Folks are uniting against this kind of over-reaction crap. From the above link:

  3. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I will disagree on the language part, innocent people, property and other LEOs (friendly fire) do not discern whether bullets were fired from each other or the subject they were pursuing. Any time more than a couple of rounds are fired, it is a large scale shootout, as it places anyone/anything in the area in danger.

    As for the size of the reaction, there are those that will argue that not enough people were used in order to bring this to a quicker resolution. Admittedly, that will be the minority, but they have vocal elements too. Personally, I think there was some pretty serious overkill and too many shots fired throughout the day, not to mention the entering and clearing homes without valid reasoning. I was always taught that in a civilian setting (such as Bostonian suburbs/downtown) you never fired unless you had a clear sight picture and certain identification of the threat - combat zones were a different story, but still the same basic thought process. I counted something like 3 separate incidents on tv/radio during the day where small arms fire or flash bangs were heard in the background - that sounds like way too much to me, as flash bangs were used either as a prep for entry (90% of the time) or a disabling item in a live action sequence. You don't just toss a flash in a McDs or fire rounds off willy nilly, too many people can be hurt.
  4. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I don't think anyone would argue that these two needed to be stopped but when police act like armed thugs we need to stop and revaluate what the (expletive deleted) we are about. The "large scale shootout" was police firing wildly at each other. The evolution was a law enforcement fail!
    KrazyKat and Elizabeth Conley like this.
  5. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Depends on what you mean by "fail." If the purpose of the exercise was to maintain an atmosphere of fear so that people like Rugape can keep their jobs, then it might have been a win. It all depends on how many people are noticing the massive overreach of their local police departments, the FBI, DHS, TSAsi, etc.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  6. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Well I meant in the traditional sense of "Protect and Serve".

    Nowadays police dress up like an army and use the tactics of gang bangers doing drive bys.
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    probably will never agree on that. I suspect that if what transpired in Tombstone Arizona a few years back had been the result of law enforcement firing wildly at each other, the incident would never have come down in history as the shootout at the OK corral. History will not be kind to the law enforcement effort here. There's been a revulsion in this country, and abroad, over the pictures coming out of this fiasco, particularly the shocking ones of scared women looking out at armed thugs wearing badges and military garb ordering them out of their own homes. You can see the effects of this in the backtracking of congressmen over the whole approach to "terror" and the loss of support from the public in the polls about sacrificing freedoms for 'safety'.

    What people need to realize is that these tactics, especially the home invasions under gunpoint intimidation, evictions, frisking, and detentions of all these people, was something all of these folks had been trained to do well in advance. I think this shows DHS hand with regard to gun collection efforts when the time comes. That should give us all pause. Those images and those activities have sent out shock waves.

    There is something deeply wrong with a person who can indiscriminately and purposely take the lives of innocent people or shatter them physically, including little kids, with a bomb. Perhaps irredeemably wrong, which is a rationale for a death penalty for this. Yet, in my opinion, there is something far worse wrong when a supposedly normal group of people can point their weapons at their neighbors as if they were their enemies, staring down and intimidating basically "their own!" little kids, young girls, and women, treating these as perps on whom they are ready and willing to pull the trigger. Declaring war on neighbors, friends, and kin.

    To these, much more than the sick excuses of humanity planting the bombs, to these more than the sick ones, one is forced to ask, "what is wrong with YOU? what is your excuse?"
  8. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Mob mentality, too much testosterone, Milgram?
    KrazyKat likes this.
  9. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    The approach in this was heavy handed, in an attempt to control the situation quickly, and as we can see, it failed on the face of it - I mean, a guy having a smoke found the kid. You are correct about the backlash over the imagery is pretty loud right now, and is only going to get worse moving forward. There is a way to do the house to house in a "friendly" enviornment, and dragging families out at gunpoint is not the proper way. I understand that is was a tense situation, and that the LEOs were dealing with possible explosives, but as a LEO, you are supposed to serve first, this includes not forcibly removing families without a valid reason. You nor I should ever have to worry about the same thing happening in our cities, most likely, we would batten down the hatches with our families and arm up - just in case some craziness leaked over into our areas. I too am troubled by some of the videos coming out, and if the political backtracking were any faster, there would be a vortex and a rip in the space time continuum.

    Agreed that people that can visit this level of violence on innocents are at the very least, broken, if not evil in nature. There will be many questions asked about the tactics, the sheer size of the LEO presence, and the videos you mentioned, and rightly so. Perhaps some better planning for the chance that something like this happens again, to prevent just such images from happening again? Perhaps a renewed focus on the "serve" mantra? I just don't know what the end result of this is going to be, but for those people that were dragged out, it will leave a lasting impression and exarcerbate any gap/disconnect between the LEOs there and the populace.

    I do not see widespread gun collection (by anyone, much less DHS) progressing at this point, too many people, too many guns, and the political capital is not there (although, there should be a caveat for California, as they are currently doing some small scale confiscations based on what I have read). Most likely we will see the continued push to create background checks, lists, insurance requirements, and most likely new taxes and further requirements on the manufacturers. After years of eroding support by outpricing the weapons and ammo for the majority of people, you may see another try at forcible removals - or the political winds could change and some of it would be rescinded, kind of hard to read the tea leaves nowadays.
    nachtnebel likes this.
  10. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Given the mood in the Boston area by law enforcement had a person battened down and armed up they would likely be dead.
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  11. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    There's a broad spectrum of "wrongness" in our societal reactions to perceived "danger" or "risk."

    For example, Daniel Wood's statement:

    The sad bit there is that not only are pathetic folks more than willing to let strangers grope them to "make them safer," but there appears to be plenty of people willing to take a paycheck for sick behaviors like sticking their hands in other people's orifices, or pointing guns at them - based on the idea that it makes those people being threatened "feel safer."
    KrazyKat likes this.
  12. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    I have to wonder what would happen to people in households that just played possum when the goon squad came banging on their door.

    To me, that seems like the safest option with the clearest legal recourse, should the goon squad break in to the home anyway.

    We've read about a lot of SWAT team raids. From the publicly available evidence:

    1. It seems readily apparent that police will break down the door if they're determined to enter. Police also appear to deliberately injure home owners who try to answer the door police are determined to break down. Too many victims have been badly injured while opening the door. Obviously these injuries result from a calculated strategy on the part of SWAT teams. If they're going to come in, they're going to come in.

    If police don't plan to enter homes that are unoccupied, you might be safe. I read of no accounts where police broke into unoccupied homes during the house to house searches in Boston. They might leave a home presumed to be unoccupied alone.

    2. When police don't have legal authority to enter, they often physically grab the person who answers the door and abuse him or her. If the person hadn't answered the door, s/he may not have been assaulted or charged with anything. Any encounter with police can be conflated into "contempt of cop," no matter how passive and compliant the victim.

    3. If excited, trigger happy goons are running wild in your neighborhood, your safest bet is probably to hunker down inside your steel bathtub and pray. When the bullets fly, they go everywhere. Bullets spray up and down the street, through car windows and through walls and doors. You should be in the most bullet resistant location you have access to. Standing out in the middle of the street with your hands in the air sounds suicidal to me.

    4. I have a sweet, dumb, trusting dog that I adore. I am responsible for her well-being. If I had actually opened the door to the thugs who killed or maimed her, knowing full well the proclivities of American LEOs, I could never forgive myself.

    I think there are clear, common sense reasons why a smart citizen would NOT interact with police running wild in his neighborhood or banging on his door issuing officious sounding demands.

    Let unauthorized police in or allow myself to be dragged outside? No way!
    Monica47 and phoebepontiac like this.
  13. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    When they don't use K-9s to follow a blood trail to a yard? This shows their hand. This isn't law enforcement. This is an excuse for practice. DHS knows no "friendly" environment.
    Caradoc and nachtnebel like this.
  14. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    I think it was more than an excuse for practice. I think it was a test. If they got away with it, (looks like the did,) then it will become SOP all over the nation.

    That means law abiding, safety and security minded citizens must come up with a safe, practical response to this new threat from our increasingly malfeasant government. Once one has a reasonable plan, and is prepared to execute said plan, there's no reason for anxiety. Living in fear is an option, of course, but that's not for me. I'd rather go forward with the inner peace that results from the tranquil certainty of a totally workable plan.

    I like to think that the need to execute a planned response to a warrantless house to house search is highly unlikely. What are the chances of a terrorist act occurring in my sleepy little corner if the world? Pretty remote.

    I don't need any weapons or extra gear to simply hunker down and wait for the goon squads to go find more gullible prey. Silence and stillness come naturally to me, and I love to lay in the tub with a good book.
    phoebepontiac likes this.
  15. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    That plan works until it's you or your property that's being sought. Folks in the ghettoes had plans. Quiet acquiescence bought a little time but not tranquility.
  16. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    I don't think they got away with it. They lied about what they were doing until the videos came out.

    Now they not only have to rationalize the illegal home invasions at gunpoint but also the raging gun battle with a wounded perp who had no gun.

    Miniaturized electronics & optics will be our great equalizer in dealing with 21st-century police states.

    Thirty years ago it was different state-of-the-art technologies that hastened the decline of Soviet Union. They tried to undo direct long distance dialing, but the genie was out of the bottle. On top of that, fax machines proved to be a royal pain in a country where copying machines had been licensed & restricted.

    Today we have photographic & video capability in almost every cell phone along some means of either connecting or uploading to the internet. Fortunately for us these technological advances are happening along with our own police state, which cannot thrive with the glare of publicity focused on it. We've only barely scratched the surface of what techology will do for us in this area; the best is yet to come.
    phoebepontiac and KrazyKat like this.
  17. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    Wounded when? And they continued to lie.
    They have to rationalize GI-jackass while failing at basic police work, diversion of resources to the purposes of DHS.
    Who knows, if the September 11 Waltham murders had been properly investigated maybe there would have been no bombing. No DHS needed.
  18. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Similarly, go back 24 years to the fall of East Germany. The Stasi was a technologically (for its time) advanced domestic intelligence agency. Most people are aware of its network of human informers, but its backbone was a massive, country-wide phone-tapping system. For all the good it did them, in the end we see the citizens of East Germany tossing out the bums in 1989:


    It will happen here, too.
  19. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    The homeowner saw blood on the tarp when he went out for his cigarette, so it's clear he was already wounded in the earlier exchange before he crawled into the boat.
  20. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Until government regulates the internet.

Share This Page