HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Boston Lockdown = Police ...

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:02 PM

Boston Lockdown = Police State?

19 replies, 2475 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to rdubwiley (Original post)


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:17 PM

2. Nobody likes a police state,

but I'd rather be safe and have some of my liberties compromised than to be "free", but have my life taken by some terrorist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CheapShotArtist (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 28, 2013, 12:08 AM

12. A quote from Founding Father Benjamin Franklin...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Just sayin....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:22 PM

3. Boston Lockdown = Real emergency.

As soon as the emergency was over, the lockdown ended. Makes sense to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #3)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:24 PM

4. Well

I'm not sure in hindsight we could have called it an emergency, but I think they did the right thing with the information they had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #3)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 06:02 PM

9. Nope. Wrong.

They lifted the lockdown when they couldn't catch the guy, so it wasn't THAT much of an emergency, was it? The lockdown was over BEFORE they caught the guy, remember that little fact?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 29, 2013, 09:42 PM

15. bullshit. the response was far out of proportion to the threat.

 

They want this kind of response to be the norm. They want us to get used to seeing police with military weapons and transports prowling our streets and coming into our homes without a warrant.


This doesn't happen in a free nation that cherishes civil liberties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 03:39 PM

5. more like temporary inconvenience in the immediate aftermath of a man made disaster eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 04:14 PM

6. These bombers seemed less dangerous than

...someone with a semi-automatic rifle. But that is hindsight.

The police didn't really know what weapons they had access to, nor whether they belonged to a larger group. That might not be a good enough reason to close off a city.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #6)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 11:42 PM

11. Less dangerous than someone with a semiautomatic? THe police didn't know what they

had? Did you miss the part where these guys exploded bombs next to families enjoying a sport event and people died, dozens had their legs blown off, dozens may never hear again, nearly two hundred have shrapnel wounds including ear and eye punctures?? Did you miss the part where these guys were throwing more bombs at the police during their gun battle in Watertown?

We were part of the lock down (actually a 'stay indoors or you might get accidentally shot' order), and it seemed reasonable at the time. Still does in "hindsight"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FailureToCommunicate (Reply #11)

Sun Apr 28, 2013, 10:21 AM

13. Thanks for the first hand report. We've several members who were there and say the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FailureToCommunicate (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 29, 2013, 03:22 PM

14. Did you miss the part where they tallied how many people died? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 04:48 PM

7. And if it had gone the other way,

and the suspects had had accomplices, or access to a "Bush Master," or more IEDs, and had blasted their way into a subway station or day care center, with more civilian deaths, we no doubt would have OPs here bewailing how the police should have done more.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thucythucy (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 29, 2013, 09:45 PM

17. wow. some people will defend anything no matter how vile.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 30, 2013, 10:32 AM

18. And what exactly did you find "vile"?

That the governor of Massachusetts requested that people shelter in place? That many if not most citizens complied with the request? BTW, contrary to much of the libertarian hysteria about this, there was no "order"--and as far as I know, not one single person was arrested for being out on the streets contrary to the request, and not a single business that stayed open was in any way penalized or cited. Or do you have evidence to contradict this?

Or do you find it "vile" that local and state authorities were mobilized to deal with at least two people obviously willing to kill civilians, including a child, by setting off bombs at a public event? And who murdered a police officer in cold blood? And who obviously had both plans to continue their murder spree, and the means to do so?

Or that they took precautions in dealing with a suspect who had run over his own brother to get away from police?

What, or who, precisely, do you find "vile" in this context?

And I notice also that you didn't contest the gist of my post: that had it gone the other way, we'd now be hearing all kinds of criticism that the authorities should have done more. We're seeing it already: along with complaints about a "police state" come arguments that the FBI should have tightened its surveillance, detained the suspects pre-emptively, etc. etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:09 PM

8. The two suspects mother said that FBI was watching them for years...

The FBI said they knew a lot about these two.... So the FBI did know they were NOT connected with ALCIDA. Also it is not just Libertarians that are concerned about over police presence. Then he moves to Bloomberg's racial profiling. While he was touching on that police dept. he forgot to mention the planned physically assaults on the people at occupy wall street that was revealed. Maybe he doesn't know about that either. Glad to hear he knows racially profiling people is wrong. But I don't know how that means we are still in good shape..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/20/boston-bombing-suspect-fbi-surveillance_n_3122330.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdubwiley (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 07:17 PM

10. My god not this **** again.

The shelter in place order was voluntary people chose to follow it.

So say that marks a police state is nothing short of moronic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 29, 2013, 09:44 PM

16. You're being naive.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #16)

Reply to this thread