What If the Tsarnaevs Had Been the “Boston Shooters”?

[cali]

Here’s a little mental experiment. Imagine, for a moment, that the Tsarnaev brothers, instead of packing a couple of pressure cookers loaded with nails and explosives into their backpacks a week ago Monday, had stuffed inside their coats two assault rifles—Bushmaster AR-15s, say, of the type that Adam Lanza used in Newtown. What would have been different?

Well, for one thing, the brothers would probably have killed a lot more than three people at the marathon. AR-15s can fire up to forty-five rounds a minute, and at close range they can tear apart a human body. If the Tsarnaevs had started firing near the finish line, they might easily have killed dozens of spectators and runners before fleeing or being shot by the police.

The second thing that would have been different is the initial public reaction. Most Americans associate bomb attacks with terrorists. When they hear of mass shootings, they tend to think of sociopaths and unbalanced post-adolescents. If the Tsarnaevs had managed to carry out a gun massacre unharmed and escaped, their identities unknown, would the first presumption have been that the shooters were Islamic extremists? Or would people have looked in another direction?

Third, had the attack been carried out with assault rifles rather than explosives and nails, the gun-control bills that perished on Capitol Hill just two days after the Boston bombings may have met a different fate. After yet another gun massacre, this one on the streets of Boston, it’s hard to imagine the White House wouldn’t have been able to summon up sixty votes in the Senate for expanded background checks. The proposed ban on assault weapons would surely have gotten the support of more than forty senators, too, and the proposal to ban multi-round magazines would also have gained more support—that’s if the gun lobby hadn’t managed to postpone the votes until emotions had cooled, which it would certainly have tried to do.

<snip>

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2013/04/the-boston-shooters.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

[MillennialDem]

1. Depends if the crowd rushed them or ran. It's possible they could have

killed 50 or killed 5 or killed 0.

But regardless of initial reaction once it was found they were Muslim idiot freepers would be calling for "death from above" for the entire Middle East (even though the brothers are not from the ME).

[newmember]

2. They would have had to decided it was a suicide mission first

They didn't have that mindset.
Whether it was a rifle or a bomb , people that have decided to give ones life up can't be stopped.
As for the gun control aspect of it. You won't change minds.

The advocates against gun control would say if everyone had a gun someone would have been able to stop them sooner.

The ones for more gun control would say .....see we need stricter gun control.

[graham4anything]

3. They did have guns and with a gun Zimmerman'd a policeman. They were gun/ct fans.

They were fameseeker killerhaters with guns and other weapons that could be found in a gun store (like the grenades). They were consiracy theory folks.

There is nothing to suggest it was terrorism at all.

Just two haterfameseekingthrillkillers like that horrible Woody Harrelson movie and like the killer of John Lennon(who didn't even care who he killed, only was in it for fame.)

[KharmaTrain]

4. A Lot Trickier Sneaking An AR Onto Boylston Street...

...it's not a weapon you can easily hide under your jacket or stick in a backpack. There were enough security and others on site that someone would have noticed anyone heavily armed and they would have never had the amount of surprise that made their Marathon attack so sensational. Remember...they were able to slip their bombs un-noticed in a very crowded street. Their terror...and that of any future bomber...was being able to operate in virtual daylight. Had they had a better escape plan...a more organized/professional approach...we'd still be hunting for them today. The concern is that this attack is that it was so successful...bombs were able to be planted and go off in a high profile, very crowded situation and this surely has to have encourage others. While I know some want to tie this into the gun control debate, this is a whole different public safety matter...