Explosions at the finish line of the Boston Marathon

[Arthur_Parker]

I don't see a "false equivalency" when a free press in a free country where guns are illegal calls the US batshit insane for allowing terrorists to legally arm themselves to the teeth, before they stage street gun battles with police.

That is not the argument put forth in the Guardian piece.

There's a strong temptation when you are in the right about a subject to use any news opening to bring the subject involved up again.  In addition you've moved the goalposts to just being shootings and massacres now, I guess bombings shouldn't be counted in this thread with explosions in the title.

Your selective quoting of facts to support your case is the same tactic used by people like MediumHigh who thinks gun crime only happens in ghettos and doesn't consider suicide numbers at all.

The US should not have strict gun control laws to stop terrorists arming themselves, they should do it because it will dramatically cut the number of gun related deaths, a point I'd likely make once in a thread in the politics forum about US gun laws.

If you aren't arguing your points from an honest basis you are going to lose some people who'd normally support you.  As an example, the UK has tough gun control laws and has had far more terrorist incidents than in the US over the last 50 years, therefore more guns means less terrorism.  See?  That's fucking stupid, take it to the right thread.

[Numtini]

I have to say that I agree.  When you shut down a major metropolitan city for a day?  That's the terrorists winning, even if that isn't their originally intended goal.  They scared the shit out of you and made you totally over-react.  It couldn't have been much more effective.  And not that it should be used as a the sole measurement, but can you fathom how much money it costs you to shut down Boston for a day?

We didn't lock down the city after the bombing.

The lockdown was an active crime scene at the conclusion of a pursuit that involved a robbery and murder, a large exchange of gunfire, the subjects tossing grenades and a third bomb, and a carjacking. The cops knew where the subject was and locked down that area so they could get him without civilians getting in the way or hurt That covered several cities because Boston isn't really Boston, it's a series of small cities, and the borders were within blocks of where the subject was known to be.

[Ironwood]

Some Stuff

 

[Engels]

If you aren't arguing your points from an honest basis you are going to lose some people who'd normally support you.  As an example, the UK has tough gun control laws and has had far more terrorist incidents than in the US over the last 50 years, therefore more guns means less terrorism.  See?  That's fucking stupid, take it to the right thread.

Thank you AP. I can't state this enough.

The other thing that's bothering me in this thread is the assumption that Boston turned into some sort of Half Life 2 city with law enforcement ordering people to stay in their homes throughout the drama. My impression, although it may be wrong, is that only certain neighborhoods/townships like Watertown "got shut down" during a fairly narrow window of time. I'd like to hear someone local comment on the experience, whether staying at home during the search and capture was a voluntary 'common sense' thing or if the oppressive hand of the gummint overlords was felt pressing upon your sheep-like head.

[UnSub]

Riddle me this.  If these guys were such a damned "danger" to the population, why'd it take them 3 days to release any usable information?  

Because it's better to catch people building explosives by surprise rather than letting them know that you're coming?

[Merusk]

Yes, it was only certain districts and it wasn't "martial law" as some of the more fluttery exclamations of 'abuse of power' I've seen have claimed.  

Num lives there and can verify or not but I heard plenty of times that it was only a recommendation not to leave your house. News reports indicated you still found people on the street and businesses that opened.  However, most in the area stayed closed because they figured nobody would leave their house/ want to shop with a suspect known to have explosives on the loose in the area from the night before.  

Had the 2 not tried to make a run/ been seen in the area it would have been business as usual. Or as usual as it had been Tues, Wed and Thurs.

[Paelos]

Oh look, people in the thread using the tragedy to spew their own agenda.

Didn't see that coming. 

[Arthur_Parker]

Oh look, people in the thread using the tragedy to spew their own agenda.

Didn't see that coming. 

My last word on the Guardian, what that guy could have done is focused on a gun event in the US (it's not like he'd have had to wait that long for one).  Tell the back story of the victims and then, a lot later in the piece, ask why these victims don't deserve the kind of national attention that the victims in Boston rightly got. 

That's a much more effective way of A. getting the point across & B not being a complete dick while doing it.

[Numtini]

I live about two hours south on Cape Cod, not really the same, but we get the same TV channels.

The only area that was really locked down was Watertown where the actual bomber was. The rest of the affected had a stay off the streets order and the T (subway) was shut down. However, this wasn't some kind of gestapo thing, it was more like what they do during a hurricane. If you had gotten into work, they made it clear it was fine for you to drive home. They let cabs run because people were stacking up at the airport. The press was wandering around. BTW they also found a pipe bomb in another section of Boston, it turned out to be unrelated, but that had a lot to do with why they didn't specify just a sliver of Boston proper.

The thing is, we don't have the us vs. the government thing here for the most part. It was more of a cooperative thing. "Please stay off the street so we can do our job." Twitter told me during the day that there were a few libertarian nutbags wandering around exercising their right to be in a place where they might get shot and nobody was rounding them up and beating them with rubber hoses or anything.

The Guardian article was a guy making a good point about gun violence in a dickish way and comparing apples and oranges in terms of "overreaction."

[Engels]

And on what I hope is a more positive less contentious note, a Marine visits one of the bombing victims and tries to cheer her up.

[HaemishM]

So explain exactly what the War on Terror has achieved?

Fuckall. Next question?

[DraconianOne]

And on what I hope is a more positive less contentious note, a Marine visits one of the bombing victims and tries to cheer her up.

Thanks for posting that - great of those guys to go around and see the victims.

[IainC]

So explain exactly what the War on Terror has achieved?

Fuckall. Next question?

It's been a way to funnel public money to the defence industry at rate that's unprecedented in peacetime and it's ushered in a whole raft of new powers for police and government that would have been unthinkable even during the cold war.

[HaemishM]

So like the War on Drugs, it's made the rich richer, funneled taxpayer money away from useful shit and made life generally shittier for almost everyone involved.

Americans like punching ourselves in the dick when we think action is required, simply so SOMETHING can be done even if nothing gets accomplished.

[IainC]

Well yes. Otherwise the terrorists would win.

[Ingmar]

Anyone else find this OpEd from the Guardian a bit offensive?

Not trying to stir the pot here, but how does this shit even get past screening?

Not offensive in the slightest.

[Ingmar]

Oh look, people in the thread using the tragedy to spew their own agenda.

Didn't see that coming. 

Don't have a problem with it. The people on the other side of whatever the core issue behind something is always use the tragedy to stifle discussion of it with 'too soon' etc. type stuff anyway.

[angry.bob]

So...

I was completely wrong about general attributes of the people who did it, that'll teach me for a week or two.

On the bright side, there are awesome new conspiracy theories about it being a false flag operation by Russia to get us involved in "taking care" of Chechnya for them.

[jakonovski]

So the surviving brother has been charged with the use of weapons of mass destruction. Is this some quirk of legislation or is the specter of Dick Cheney floating through the halls of the justice department?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22257451

edit: or yet another media fail?

[HaemishM]

I think it's an attempt to put the death penalty on the table, since Massachusetts doesn't have the death penalty but that charge is a federal charge.

[IainC]

It means an indiscriminate weapon affecting a number of people at once. We are just used to hearing about it in the context of military ordnance. The actual indictment has been made and can be read online, it's a Federal charge brought by the US to a federal court. They're going to kill that kid for sure.

[Margalis]

A square mile of Watertown was locked down. Think of the economic damage. Why it must have been in the dozens of dollars!

Also Watertown is...wait for it...a town. Not a city. Who'd have thunk it?

As far as that guardian shit:

Why does England lose its head over 'horse meat' and 'football' but ignore roughly a billion more important things?

That piece is just super dumb in general. I love the idea that the LA/Dorner stuff was handled better. The fuck? If something is a "freak out" it's probably shooting a little asian paper delivery woman because her car is blue.

[Ingmar]

News was saying that the stay-home order covered well over a million people - is that incorrect? Was apparently Boston proper as well as Watertown where they had the actual cordoned off area.

[Margalis]

Boston is geographically very compact. If some guy has a shootout in Cambridge he can be in Boston proper or Watertown or wherever in like 8 minutes. Even on foot you can get from Cambridge to Boston in 20 minutes or less.

It's not like LA where a guy shooting someone in West Hollywood might as well have been in Honolulu. A lot of people would choose to stay inside regardless of any recommendation, and that wouldn't be a bad choice. Nobody stayed inside during the Dorner shit in LA because Dorner wasn't a mad bomber and also LA is so spread out that your chances of coming across him were essentially zero.

It seems pointless to me to criticize by saying that if this type of incident happened a lot this sort of lockdown each time would be silly - they don't happen a lot. FFS, people got Monday off for "Patriots Day." All the economic damage or whatever from the lockdown was voluntarily inflicted that same week. (And probably made up by the later partying anyway)

My friend lives pretty close to Watertown, on Friday he stayed in and watched the news. Seems reasonable enough to me.

[Arthur_Parker]

I don't think anyone touched to any great extent on what the long term result will be from involving the local population.  People are going to remember staying in that day, it's a pretty stupid way to be part of something but a small part of it they were, I don't think the victory that came out of it will be remembered as a wasted day. 

I also believe the term "A War on Terror" is stupid, as the nature of fighting an unseen enemy, one that blends in with the population, means you have an awful lot more defeats than victories.  But I do remember the few victories I personally experienced, such as going to college the week after the Loughgall Ambush and for the first time enjoying the experience of being in the same classroom as people who actively campaigned for the political wing of the terrorist organisation involved.

[Merusk]

We need a "War on Terror" because if you can't package and brand it, how the fuck do politicians run on it when up for reelection and damn the other guy for improper support?   YOu act like there's other things people can do to get elected! 

[TheWalrus]

So...

I was completely wrong about general attributes of the people who did it, that'll teach me for a week or two.

On the bright side, there are awesome new conspiracy theories about it being a false flag operation by Russia to get us involved in "taking care" of Chechnya for them.

Theres a guy in my journalism class that said he thought it was a false flag so the govt could come take our guns. I am currently in some hot water over my suggestion he find an off and fornicate with it.

[Morat20]

News was saying that the stay-home order covered well over a million people - is that incorrect? Was apparently Boston proper as well as Watertown where they had the actual cordoned off area.

No. I suspect the area affected covered a million people. I mean, they shut down public transport and a lot of businesses shut down and they cancelled a ball game.

They only "locked down" a tiny area, and only when police were flat out chasing the guy. And even then, nobody was shooting you if you left. It was more of a good idea than enforced.

Hell, I live near refineries. We have 'shelter in place' orders a few times a year (there's big sirens and everything). It's done whenever there's even a tiny risk of some spill or particulate release. Nobody keeps you in your house -- the only place it's enforced are the schools, and that's because the schools do.  (It's scarier than it sounds. It's really based on entire classes of chemicals, air concentration levels that are highly conservative, and they shut down a giant radius. The guys at ground zero might need masks. The guys half a mile away can be jogging and be fine)

[Venkman]

This is pretty much how I thought it would go. Engels said it bet, but I'm glad Numtini chimed in because I believe they were much closer than even I was to Boston:

The other thing that's bothering me in this thread is the assumption that Boston turned into some sort of Half Life 2 city with law enforcement ordering people to stay in their homes throughout the drama.

This. Plus what was said earlier. I don't want to say "you had to be there", because I wasn't either. But there's a vast perception difference between the people I know who were there and the way some of the media has been covering this elsewhere. People didn't flee armed SWAT vans to the safety of their triple bolted bulletproof houses waiting for their next ration from the guvmint. It was a very different vibe.

It possibly only could have worked because of the unique combination of timing, cultural and geographical factors in Boston. I mean, "let's lockdown LA" or "... DFW"? Not nearly the same thing. I don't know, and gods-willing, we won't need to find out.

Many of us in the countries without widespread gun ownership see the problem as one and the same, and find it ironic that after a teenage terrorist is disarmed in an environment of fear, it's back to your regularly scheduled gun massacres but everyone somehow feels safer.

ArthurParker responded better than I could have to the other piece, but I wanted to respond to this one.

I could talk about underfunded research in deadly communicable diseases in responses to someone's gun deaths into someone else's vehicular homicide or the amount. But that's not a formula for resolution.

That doesn't mean this stuff isn't important. It all is. But with 7bn people in the world, we have some capacity to multitask as a species. Not everything needs to be one to six degrees of separation from one's own pet issue.

[schild]

Ever been to Dallas? That city, along with Fort Worth, may as well be shut down on Sunday.

Just, the worst major city in America.

[Tale]

It's looking likely that Tamerlan Tsarnaev killed three people in 2011 on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, by slitting their throats, almost decapitating them, covering the bodies in pot and money.

One was a Jew or at least had links to Israel. Another victim's memorial page says Hanukkah isn't the same without him and has a comment in Hebrew. The third was said to be Tamerlan's closest American friend, but he didn't go to the funeral.

The cops thought at least one, maybe two people were involved in the killings. Tamerlan and Dzhokhar?

[Goumindong]

In fact one of the people incorrectly blamed for the attack is still missing as of today.

while this is true and it is also true that the Internet sludges were shit lets be honest and say that
That guy was missing at the time of the bombing. The insinuation that he may have been harmed by the sleuths or in the bombing is false

[schild]

I don't see why a connection is being made between the Boston bombings and the triple homicide.

[Rendakor]

Because one of the bombers knew one of the victims and HE WAS EVIL!

Or some homicide department wants three easy clearances with a dead suspect.

[Krakrok]

Some other article about the homicide talked about people (former friends) that knew Tamerlan thought it was odd that he didn't go to the memorial of his "best friend", went to Chechnya to live with his father for 6 months afterward, and claimed he seemed "hollow" when he came back.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/boston-bombers-former-friends-suspect-him-in-unsolved-triple
---

Photo by Watertown resident supposedly.
http://pic.twitter.com/avr3OzzIMX