Security theater martial law and a tale that trumps every cop-n-donut joke ever

http://www.popehat.com/2013/04/20/security-theater-martial-law-and-a-tale-that-trumps-every-cop-and-donut-joke-youve-ever-heard/

by dfc • 13 years ago

136 173 13 years ago

popehat.com

Shivetya• 13 years ago

Okay, I am pretty amazed about the Dunkin Donuts exception. That is one of those items so bizarre you know it has to be real.

That being said, it was definitely an over reaction. That will take a few weeks if not months to get sorted out as the analysis kicks in. I am more curious who raises a stink as opposed to those who don't.

hga14• 13 years ago

I'm not so sure. Compared to the other examples he lists, London was suicide bombers so they were, ahem, finished with their deeds, and the other locations were well armed (even Maryland). By long standing public policy there are very few guns, and almost no (legal) handguns owned by the people of Massachusetts (if they were honest the government would stop using the symbol and likeness of a Minuteman). In a region that's deliberately filled with sitting ducks as it were, "sheltering in place" was perhaps the best thing to do.

Minus of course what I've heard is the error in drawing the door to door search perimeter just a little short of where the suspect managed to run; not security theater but an honest but very embarrassing failure.

mogrim4• 13 years ago

After the Madrid bombings they didn't shut the city down, and they weren't suicide bombers. They didn't shut London down during the IRA bombing attacks during the 80s either.

And that's two examples I've lived through. TBH I find it hard to think of a single example of a terrorist bombing leading to a city shutdown, apart from this one. It makes clear sense to shut down a local neighbourhood, a couple of streets... but a whole city??? WTF???

csixty46• 13 years ago

I'm not amazed, No doubt the BPD put in a lot of overtime this week already, and I'm sure having a place close by for coffee and sweets must have felt great. Plus, DD is as Boston as you can get. Maybe a little reminder of what they were out there for.

Camillo• 13 years ago

http://i.imgur.com/32jXq84.jpg

(Seriously, though, they taste like plastic.)

neltnerb3• 13 years ago

I suspect that the people working at the Dunking Donuts were proud to be able to support the police officers working 18 hour shifts to get the guy! We take care of each other in Boston.

callahad2• 13 years ago

Dunkin' Donuts stores in Watertown open between 5:00 AM and 6:00 AM. The MBTA suspended transit at 5:30 AM. Ergo, the stores were already staffed and/or open when the lockdown went into effect.

For those employees, "shelter in place" meant staying in the store. Which in many cases had already opened for the morning. It's not a huge leap from that to staying open.

bsg757• 13 years ago

Being rational will not help drive blog views.

dfc• 13 years ago

I submitted this link but I am not sure what the deal is with the author mentioning military golf courses. The first round of golf that I ever played was with my father at MCBH Kaneohe. For service members stationed on oahu the greens fees at the civilian golf courses can be exorbitant. There is no way my father could have afforded to take me out golfing three or four times at a civilian course during my visit. Are people surprised to hear that the military has their own golf courses? They also have their own grocery stores, gyms and movie theaters.

blaines2• 13 years ago

Yeah the author was definitely off topic there. Maybe they are unaware of how hard it can be to move around the world at a moments notice. I believe golf courses and the other facilities are hugely beneficial to our service members and are well deserved.

bridgeyman3• 13 years ago

Everyone was pretty scared after the marathon bombing. In the days after, there were tons of bomb warnings as everyone reported anything even semi-suspicious. My neighbors even reported an Amazon package for me because it wasn't delivered by UPS!

Once there was a cop killed on our campus, followed by robberies and a car chase with bombs, things were looking pretty grim. If they weren't caught, the next few weeks would have felt very unsafe. After the drama with the lockdown and the suspects being caught then the atmosphere went from really insecure to people actually celebrating. If it was just a piece of theater, it was pretty effective.

hga14• 13 years ago

His comparison to the Beltway sniper is apropos.

I happen to be someone who's connected to both, one of my stomping grounds was Building 20 where I founded a student run computing center with the Logo Lab's surplus PDP-11/45, serial number 413 (so 313th made), the Stata Center replaced it.

And the woman killed in Virginia at the Home Depot ... well, that was "my" Home Depot, as well as the location of a favorite Chinese restaurant, it was even pretty easy to figure out where the sniper likely fired from.

Were we "scared" in the D.C. region? You better believe it, I certainly didn't go outside without wearing my body armor and carrying my handgun, but we didn't shut down the region. Then again, look at the above, Virginia is shall issue and well armed, Maryland is seldom issue but still well armed, Massachusetts has done just about everything it can to disarm its population....

kvb6• 13 years ago

I don't think it's apropos at all. The snipers were killing individuals, not maiming hundreds at a time. And I don't see how the level of gun ownership matters (in either case). How was carrying your handgun going to help you if the sniper shot at you? How would it have helped MA residents?

kevincennis4• 13 years ago

I keep hearing people claim that this was an overreaction, and frankly, it sort of confuses me.

Here's what we know happened before the lockdown:

- These two suspects allegedly planted two bombs that killed three and injured over 170 others.

- These two suspects allegedly killed an MIT police officer.

- These two suspects allegedly carjacked an SUV and held its driver captive for some time.

- During a chase with police, these suspects allegedly threw homemade explosive devices at law enforcement.

What we don't seem to know yet (and definitely didn't at the time):

- Did they have more explosives? There's certainly reason to believe they may have.

- Did they have other attacks planned? We don't know one way or the other, and that's sort of the point.

I really don't think it's unreasonable that given what we knew, and especially what we didn't, residents of Boston (myself included) were asked to stay indoors while authorities attempted to locate suspect #2. Remember, they didn't lock the city down immediately after the bombing. They did it after what the Boston police commissioner is calling the "execution" of an MIT police officer, a carjacking, multiple IED detonations (or attempted detonations, I'm not totally clear), and a shootout with police in a residential neighborhood.

wtvanhest• 13 years ago

Further, I live in Boston and they didn't say you couldn't go outside, they just advised you not to. I walked across the Boston Common where people were playing with their dogs and grabbed a coffee from the coffee shop.

People from outside of Boston probably didn't realize it, but it was really just 1 neighborhood locked down with the mass transit everywhere else not working.

Weird day? Yes! Martial law? No.

herewego4• 13 years ago

I'm in Boston and I completely agree. It was a 20 block area, which is not even close to the entirety of Boston and it's surrounding neighbourhoods.

bricestacey• 13 years ago

I went out too. Lots of shops, restaurants, bars still open in North End area.

corresation• 13 years ago

Is Boston normally an incredibly quiet city? Incredulous at reports of the lockdown I looked at Boston highway cameras and it was close to a ghosttown. Helicopter video feeds of the Boston downtown showed, again, a ghosttown. Various post-apocalyptic pictures have emerged of Boston proper with hardly a soul in site.

I have never been to Boston (though will soon en route to a Patriots game), however I find it hard to believe it is normally that quiet.

afterburner6• 13 years ago

They did it when they knew what area to lock down, didn't they? As in, when they thought they knew where the suspect was. Turned out the suspect was just outside the initial Watertown lockdown area (so it's a good thing they quickly expanded the lockdown, and it shows they got the area roughly right).

I agree with you in general. Seemed like a good call, not a sign of a police state. These were extremely temporary and timely measures, and normality resumed quickly.

dantillberg• 13 years ago

I vehemently oppose long-term civil liberty restrictions as much or more than the next guy, but I totally agree with parent.

Police were in an active search for a man believed to be:

- suicidal, intent on taking as many people down with him as possible

- armed with automatic weapons and numerous explosives

It would seem reasonable that he could show up at a bus or a subway stop and cause dozens of casualties.

herewego4• 13 years ago

To your point, people often forget that the lockdown likely played a part in the inability for the second suspect to escape. An entire city looking for you is certainly a possible cause for the second suspect to have been hiding in a boat.

The process certainly could have lead to the capture, even if indirectly.

mogrim4• 13 years ago

I don't think that's forgotten, there's certainly no doubt in my mind that by removing a large chunk of the population it made it a lot harder for the suspect to get away. What I do doubt is the proportionality of the response.

dhimes• 13 years ago

Agree. OP also misses a big point: they 'shut down' because they thought they knew his identity and roughly where he was. Contrast this, for example, to the DC sniper, where they knew neither.

The only reason I can figure that these two bombers weren't in Mexico or someplace else far away by Thursday is that they weren't finished with their terrorism. I think a lot of us were thinking that.

On a related note, Gov Patrick impresses me with the way he handles emergencies. I don't always agree with his politics, but he's a helluva leader.

We were all on edge (I live on the North Shore); we knew that he may be able to get out of the city and seek to continue his rampage elsewhere. I think the authorities did an outstanding job all around, and perhaps got a little lucky. But the 'lockdown' seemed to help them get the job done in a deliberate, systematic way. Other cities will learn from this.

kabdib• 13 years ago

If it's that gawdawful bad, then declare martial law already.

This is a seriously bad slippery slope, and I can see this escalating like SWAT teams have done in the last 20 years. How long until a "child abduction alert" turns into a city-wide lockdown and door-to-door search?

Wait for one of these to happen on an election day. That would be interesting.

ctdonath• 13 years ago

Identify one warrant issued for the search of a home in this incident. Count homes searched.

jeffcouturier• 13 years ago

This skips one critical fact that invalidates the entire premise of the post.

The lockdown had little to do with public safety and everything to do with a manhunt. The city was shut down to prevent the suspect from getting out, not to protect people.

blaines2• 13 years ago

Did they say that when asking people to stay home or did they tell people they would be safer at home?

bridgeyman3• 13 years ago

I think public safety was part of it. It pretty much eliminated the easy targets. There weren't any crowded places to plant a bomb.

gambler• 13 years ago

How does this invalidate the premise of the post?

youngerdryas2• 13 years ago

Typical tone deaf nerd rage. If Bostonians didn't agree with the lockdown we would have likely ignored it, we are not particularly obedient.

brown9-22• 13 years ago

Your second sentence is a good point - it was a request from the government, not a demand.

InclinedPlane5• 13 years ago

I think that may be a distinction without a difference.

All public transit was shut down. In Watertown specifically businesses were not allowed to open and anyone in a car was subject to being swarmed by heavily armed police and taken into questioning.

Edit: clarified the parts that were specifically about Watertown vs. Boston as a whole.

jellicle2• 13 years ago

Requests from the chief of police carry the force of law (including felony convictions for disobeying them). Failure to obey a lawful order from a police officer is a felony in every state.

breck• 13 years ago

Totally agree. Beyond the loss of life and injuries, I don't think this poster understands how great a symbol the Boston Marathon is to the city. This attack was extremely personal. I'm sure everyone in Boston wanted to do something to help, and if staying off the streets for one day helped, nearly everyone was happy to do it.

stefantalpalaru2• 13 years ago

Millions of people stayed at home an entire day, frightened, watching the news and waiting for a 19 year old to be captured by a heavily militarized police force? In the 21st century? During peace time? In a first world country?

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

I wasn't frightened. I considered it the best, most effective way of helping Law enforcement to do their jobs. Which, BTW worked. One day of lockdown and the crisis was over. Compare that to the DC snipers referenced in the article.

stefantalpalaru2• 13 years ago

Will you be willing to help law enforcement again by staying in your home each time an armed suspect is on the run?

youngerdryas2• 13 years ago

That comment is only being upvoted because it implies that America isn't a first world country which some insecure souls need to believe contrary to all evidence.

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

Of course not. It depends completely on the situation. No one here complained about the shelter in place request that I've heard of. People seem happy this was resolved so quickly.

hga14• 13 years ago

Errr, did you/are you ignoring that the lockdown was a complete and total failure? That only until it was over did a subject (see my other comments, can't call Massachusetts residents citizens by the traditional meaning) exit his house and notice something amiss on his property (evidently outside the search parameter), resulting in him calling the police?

InclinedPlane5• 13 years ago

By this logic attempting to look for Sunil Tripathi also "worked".

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

pivo• 13 years ago

We weren't forced to stay at home, nobody was arrested for being on the street, it was entirely voluntary. I think most people here were pretty happy with the outcome too. I simply don't have anything to complain about with regard to how the city handled the situation. In fact, that both suspects were accounted for by the end of the day was for me almost too good to be true.

kevincennis4• 13 years ago

Agreed. This seems to be the general attitude of most people who were actually here.

I was about a mile south of all of this in Brighton, and I can tell you that nobody I spoke with felt particularly scared. It was more like "let's stay inside and let them find this guy".

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

Exactly. Very expertly handled by all involved. Including apprehending the suspect without killing him. This guy killed an 8 year old and two young women and a fellow officer yet he is still alive. Remarkable restraint in my opinion.

manys• 13 years ago

Due Process should not be remarkable.

csixty46• 13 years ago

Yeah. People were still walking their dogs. My wife & I went out for a calzone at 12:30 and the place was packed. I don't think a single person I talked to online or off was "afraid". We were just staying out of the way, and with the T shut down there wasn't much to go out & do anyway.

kvb6• 13 years ago

I felt that locking down Watertown, Newton, and Cambridge was unobjectionable, but my only quibble would be that I'm not sure it made sense to shut down so much of Boston itself.

larrys4• 13 years ago

"We weren't forced to stay at home"

People who weren't able to go to work and aren't salary most likely won't be paid. Or, employers will have to pay to employees who performed no work. The money has to come from somewhere, right? Unless of course the government wants to spread the cost over all the citizens and cover all expenses. And everything that comes as a result of the lockdown or whatever you want to call it.

Ficticiously I can tell you that if I had servers located in that area and something happened where they couldn't be fixed remotely and were down (for an unrelated reason) I'd be pretty upset if the tech people or remote hands weren't at their job. Or the new motherboard couldn't be installed because the repairman wouldn't go to the colo. Why? Because my customers that are all over the world aren't going to give me a pass on this nor do I want to make excuses as to why things aren't working. Further, this was not an "act of god" in the sense of a disaster that there was no control over (a person made the decision to "suggest" nobody go outside and that will have consequences).

It's easy for people who have only minor things as a result of a lockdown (cancelled classes or you work for a big corporation or you are unemployed) but not everybody falls into the same category. We all aren't government employees who get paid regardless, right?

The point is simply that a cost benefit calculation needs to be done. (Like they do when they try to justify hosting the Olympics or Superbowl). The comparison (if correct I haven't checked) to Detroit is valid somewhat. Obviously in any case we can assume that if there was 1 or 2 of these bombings per month any city wouldn't be shutting down they would realize that it simply can't be handled that way.

Fwiw - I'm not in the Boston area and had no consequences as a result of the decision.

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

FWIW I work in Boston and only get paid for the hours I work. I had no problem losing part of an 8 hour day for this.

kevincennis4• 13 years ago

> Ficticiously I can tell you that if I had servers located in that area and something happened where they couldn't be fixed remotely and were down (for an unrelated reason) I'd be pretty upset if the tech people or remote hands weren't at their job.

If I were the guy who was supposed to be working on your servers, I suspect I'd be much more concerned about the apprehension of a suspected terrorist (or murderer, if you prefer that term) than I would be with a customer's disapproval of a lock-down decision I had no control over. I don't see myself losing much sleep over the fact that you were "pretty upset".

Anechoic6• 13 years ago

I'd be pretty upset if the tech people or remote hands weren't at their job

Chances are the "tech people or remote hands" were on the job. Again, this wasn't martial law, folks that had reason to be out and about were out and about. If a colo felt it was important for staff to be on hand, there were likely staff on hand.

bridgeyman3• 13 years ago

This was all just a tactic to raise the fertility rates in Boston. 9 months from now we will experience The Great Boston Baby Boom.

tunesmith3• 13 years ago

This is ridiculous. It wasn't martial law security theater - it was unprecedented community-level collaboration. Security forces had absolutely no way to force/require the citizens to stay in, and probably wouldn't have been anywhere near as effective in coordinating if the citizens hadn't helped out.

hga14• 13 years ago

All their efforts and "coordinating" were a complete and total failure.

Repeating again, a point made in the original, it was only after the shelter in place request/implicit order (after Dornan in California it's take it as a "if you want to stay unperforated, stay indoors..." sort of "request": http://12160.info/forum/topics/two-women-shot-in-manhunt-for...) was lifted that a Massachusettes subject exited his house, noticed something was amiss and called the police.

afterburner6• 13 years ago

And it was the lockdown that prevented the suspect from getting anywhere until that point.

tunesmith3• 13 years ago

I think you are conflating two points.

The story of the week was about citizen help. Citizen help in supplying media, helping to identify suspects, supplying additional photos, reporting news, finding/reporting the final location of the second suspect.

I agree with that. But to then to say that therefore, everything would have gone better had the police told no one to stay indoors, that's quite a leap of logic.

It's also worth noting that it was the fbi or police force's decision to lift the recommendation. It's just as easy to argue that that was wise on their part, as it was to ask for photographic help, etc.

All in all this seems like a strained effort to make the police forces appear incompetent or unnecessary.

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

I lost a lot of respect for popehat after reading that. How do you measure the cost of people's lives? The shelter in place request was just that, a request. It was to help law enforcement do their jobs. It clearly worked.

He makes reference to the DC snipers but fails to mention the cost of having those terrorists free for weeks. In Boston both men were caught in a matter of days with no more civilians hurt. I'll take Boston's solution over that of DC's. He also doesn't seem to take into account the very large number of non-fatal injuries sustained. And the potential for even more given the use of explosives. Trying to minimize the risk by discounting the injuries and only considering fatalities is pretty shallow analysis.

Also making light of the police and donuts does not improve my opinion of his stance.

msabalau• 13 years ago

Indeed. Our governor recommended that people stay in their homes, and that businesses shut down. In exactly the way that he earlier in the year he recommended that they do so in a big snowstorm, both for safety and so that the streets could be effectively cleared. Indeed, in the snowstorm case was more restrictive, as one could have been theoretically fined for driving (although it was made clear that this wasn't something which there was any intent to pursue).

People by and large accommodated yesterdays request because it seemed reasonable. Also it gave them a chance to stay home with their loved ones and follow the news. Finally, I'd observe that terrorists who throw bombs and fire weapons in the street are scary. In any event, there were some people on the streets yesterday, just not many.

If someone actually feels that their rights were actually abridged, for example if they were arrested for assembling outside, they have recourse to the courts, and I'd be happy to consider donating to their legal fund. And, of course, should someone feel that this was mishandled as a case of public policy, they are welcome to run on that platform and make that case.

dspeyer• 13 years ago

You have to be willing to measure the cost of lives. No one likes doing it, but there's always opportunities to spend a lot of money to save a few lives, and a limited amount of money. If you don't make tradeoffs intelligently and deliberately, you wind up trading many lives for few lives.

kvb6• 13 years ago

Sure, but that goes both ways. What's the monetary value of the peace of mind of people throughout the Boston area? There's plenty that doesn't show up in GDP that still has real value.

danielweber2• 13 years ago

Popehat is a group blog, FYI. Members don't get veto powers over other people's blogs, and often you can find other members of the group disagreeing in comments.

rtpg• 13 years ago

Everything that mentions the number of deaths seems to forget the fact that this guy didn't 'just' kill 4 people, he also injured over 150 people (a lot of missing legs on those injuries too...)

There's a huge difference with the other examples. Namely in how indiscriminate it all is.

goostavos• 13 years ago

Agreed. Seems to be purposefully left out to support his position.

The snipers death toll was, what, 7% of the total number of injuries at Boston? Once you factor in why bombs are terrible the comparison falls apart a bit in my opinion.

aptwebapps2• 13 years ago

The other cost is that is a sort of reward for the terrorists to overreact like this.

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

Or perhaps future terrorists will decide that Boston is too small and cohesive a community to attack. Next time they go to a city where they have more chance of sneaking off in a crowd. I'm not one to think that bombers of civilians are really that brave.

aptwebapps2• 13 years ago

"Or perhaps future terrorists will decide that Boston is too small and cohesive a community to attack."

Because of the shutdown? That was what I was talking about. If so, I'm not sure that I see it. At any rate, I was just making the standard "don't let the terrorists win" argument.

revelation2• 13 years ago

Apparently the holy scripture, aka the constitution, isn't worth the paper it was written on. Soldiers in cities? That shit would not fly here. You get a congressional inquiry for letting AWACS control the air.

thoughtsimple10• 13 years ago

Police. Not soldiers. Unless you mean the soldiers that ran the marathon with full packs and then helped the first responders after the blasts.

revelation2• 13 years ago

http://25.media.tumblr.com/b2af26395aeac454b95f064a48155d0e/...

These look like soldiers. I think theres another one with Humvees.

callahad2• 13 years ago

Members of the Massachusetts National Guard were on hand during the Marathon, and assisted during the subsequent lockdown and manhunt, at the request of the Boston Police. Cite: http://www.army.mil/article/101170/

(Note: I do not disagree with the Guard's involvement; just correcting the misstatement that military were not involved.)

twistedpair7• 13 years ago

It was mostly Boston Police, Massachusetts State Police, and SWAT and local police from across the state. The only military was the Mass National Guard with air support in the visual search. Military bomb search and disposal units were also involved.

pvnick• 13 years ago

That article was in very poor taste. I'm typically a libertarian, anti big government, with a slight conspiracy theorist side to me, but I was thrilled to see the well-coordinated and well-executed manhunt that captured the suspect alive. It was a rare moment, I was in full "'MURICA" mode yesterday. To complain about the process is just contrarian nonsense.

peterjancelis4• 13 years ago

Totally agreed.

The blackhawk helicopters flying over Boston were a clear breach of Posse Comitatus and the warrantless searches (or self-warranted, any type not warranted by a judge) was a clear breach of the 4th amendment.

wahnfrieden2• 13 years ago

Search without warrant just means evidence cannot be used in court. Are you a lawyer?

kvb6• 13 years ago

Which warrantless searches? Weren't houses only searched with their owners' consent?

peterjancelis4• 13 years ago

There are pictures of citizens leaving their houses with hands in the air. Explain to me how this does not constutite 'under duress'.

bsg757• 13 years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley

"Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989)[1], was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace."

peterjancelis4• 13 years ago

Surely pubic airspace does not include the interior of homes?

twistedpair7• 13 years ago

@peterjancelis are you even remotely familiar with what you're talking about? It was all legal. Read up.

peterjancelis4• 13 years ago

You seem to be aware of more case law than me. Please explain to me how this was legal. Honest question.

twistedpair7• 13 years ago

peterjancelis, you're incorrect on all counts:

Posse Comitatus Act:

"The Bill/Act as modified in 1981 refers to the Armed Forces of the United States. It does not apply to the National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. "

* The National Guard of Massachusetts has blackhawks. They are used in times of emergency. This was one such case.

* Governor was there. Invited them. Same state. Law enforcement capacity.

4th Amendment:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Warrants are required for evidence to be used in a court of law. This was not an evidenciary expedition.

* People were not seized from their homes

* People's effects were not seized from their homes

* Searches were in cooperation with home owners (remember, everyone staid home Friday)

* There was probable cause as the suspect was in the area as proven when they found him a few hundred feet from the search area

* There was a clear risk to public safety (7 bombs set off, hundreds of rounds fired, a cop dead, another near death, 15 police hopitalized)

No, I'm not familiar with case law at all. I just took American History in high school and know how to search Wikipedia.

Anechoic6• 13 years ago

The blackhawk helicopters flying over Boston were a clear breach of Posse Comitatus

You realize that the MA National Guard has blackhawks, right?

Evbn11• 13 years ago

Of course he doesn't. Facts interfere with nerdrage.

considerthis• 13 years ago

Cost analysis here: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/04/what-will-...

twistedpair7• 13 years ago

What's the cost analysis of successful terrorist attacks? Remember, we're talking cost/benefit here. One verses the other.

9/11 was in the trillions (i.e. property loss, insurance pay outs, market collapses, wars.) The markets this week were dropping in response to Boston, that's on the order of billions. Count all the cancelled events during the week (not talking about Friday's public safety) and people not going out and conducting commerce and you're in the millions.

Compare that to the cost of say 20 lives? He had home made bombs on his person the last the police had seen him. His brother had a suicide vest. What if the MBTA was running and he blew up a bus full of souls? Worth $100M? I bet the negative market reaction would have been far greater than that.

Still, a crucial flaw in these calculations is that most of the "lost" business will be made up. People will go out and do more than their share of commerce today. There are sandwiches on Friday that won't be sold and floors that were not cleaned, but big ticket items were only demurred and will be serviced, produced, or purchased in due time.

neltnerb3• 13 years ago

During the event, the thing that kept coming to mind was... if the suspects actually have bombs set up, why on earth would you want to gather thousands of police officers around the scene? How many people does it take to monitor a boat to make sure no one leaves it?

But when it comes to a lockdown during a manhunt? That struck me as completely reasonable given that they (a) knew roughly where the suspects were, (b) knew they had access to explosives, and (c) didn't want to risk hurting civilians.

It's easy to play armchair police commissioner. See, I did it too right in the first paragraph. But I'm not the one calling the shots, and they did lift the lockdown when they thought they'd failed to catch him. I really have a hard time writing the response off as security theater when it seems like such a totally reasonable response for an efficiency perspective. And the odds of them planting future bombs was high to say the least, unlike some random stickup (which also happen not infrequently in Boston).

This was a very different situation than an armed robbery.

john_w_t_b2• 13 years ago

What message does this shutdown send to other potential rampage killers and sociopaths? You can shutdown society and have millions of people read your life story by committing one of these crimes. We should be treating these murderers more like internet trolls. Try to ignore their message and get them out of circulation as soon as possible.

twistedpair7• 13 years ago

Of course you don't want to cower in fear and act terrorized. Yet, sending the message that any steps necessary to catch terrorists will be taken within reason is a powerful deterrent. You can't just fade into the shadows. The entire city will contribute to finding and neutralizing the threat.

john_w_t_b2• 13 years ago

For any crime, there's a risk-reward balance. On the risk side, many rampage killers are suicidal and don't seem to fear the consequences of law enforcement. We need to focus on taking away the reward for these crimes i.e. public attention.

Evbn11• 13 years ago

It tells them that if they pull a stunt like this in Boston, half a million people will cooperate to catch them and they won't escape. Good.

pmorici• 13 years ago

There are some interesting bits here with respect to debating if telling everyone to close shop and stay home was an effective thing to do but I think the breathless martial law wasted government spending line of argument isn't really convincing in this particular instance

thedaveoflife• 13 years ago

>First, the unprecendented shutdown of a major American city may have increased safety some small bit, but it was not without a cost: keeping somewhere between 2 and 5 million people from work, shopping, and school destroyed a nearly unimaginable amount of value. If we call it just three million people, and we peg the cost at a mere $15 per person per hour, the destroyed value runs to a significant fraction of a billion dollars.

The assumption being that the people who didn't spend that $15 will not just go out and spend it today?

raldi2• 13 years ago

> The assumption being that the people who didn't spend that $15 will not just go out and spend it today?

By that logic, every even-numbered day should be a national day of leisure.

oconnore• 13 years ago

For most retail stores, that would actually be very efficient.

afterburner6• 13 years ago

It occurs to me re: Dunkin Donuts, if you're going to keep a huge number of police in an area for an exhausting open-ended search, you'll want caffeine and sugar readily available in large quantities at many locations...

csixty46• 13 years ago

And warm coffee especially. It was a wee bit chilly yesterday evening.

learc83• 13 years ago

Yes, locking down an entire city, is an effective method to conduct a manhunt.

But just look at these pictures, http://imgur.com/a/Asgdb#0

Two untrained losers were able make a major American city look like a warzone.

I hope there aren't other potential bombers out there thinking "that's all it takes..."

kvb6• 13 years ago

Well, presumably the response differs depending on the expected frequency of such incidents. Given that this sort of incident is thankfully rare, I don't think it's an inappropriate response. If copycats are inspired by it, tactics will have to change.

sek• 13 years ago

Yeah that's what I thought too, a lot of spreekillings are about attention.

I also think they were waiting to show their big toys out on the street. Armored vehicles for a 19 year old without military training and equipment?

Evbn11• 13 years ago

Hi, Mr Troll. This kid shot a college security guard to death, so the armor came out so he wouldn't kill 20 more.

I didn't see you volunteering to chase him down in your tshirt and shorts. Considering that you do your police work from tour computer , I would predict that he could outrun you anyway.

kevincennis4• 13 years ago

I know I already commented, but one other thing bothers me about this article and I feel compelled to address it:

"Yes, that's right – it wasn't until the stupid lock-down was ended that a citizen found the second murderer".

Obviously this is pure speculation, but it certainly doesn't seem unreasonable to think that if it weren't for the "stupid lock-down", the suspect probably wouldn't have been forced to hide in a boat in the first place.

billwilliams• 13 years ago

How many people who are calling the events from boston "martial law" and "security theater" are from Boston or more specifically Watertown?

Until an armed man with explosives is hiding in your back yard, your opinion is not particularly useful.

sehugg• 13 years ago

I don't think the decision was necessarily wrong, but it shouldn't be taken lightly either. We may be able to learn from it.

A man in Watertown, David Henneberry, found the suspect in his boat only after the curfew was lifted. The suspect himself was identified using footage voluntarily donated from citizen's cameras!

This is what we should be celebrating -- the collaboration between citizenry and police. This is not the time for STFU. We may do even better next time.

MrFoof• 13 years ago

>If we call it just three million people

Which would be ludicrously inflated. Belmont, Waltham, Newton, Cambridge, Watertown and the Allston/Brighton neighborhoods of Boston -- which was the original cities/neighborhoods suggested to stay at home -- is 375,000 people. When you add the rest of Boston in (8AM Friday), you're at about 900,000 - 950,000 people. 5 million would be nearly the entire state population.

Moreover, I still went grocery shopping on Friday -- I live in one of the most northeastern parts of the city (Charlestown), which was about 5 miles away from the active dragnet. There were people about. Some businesses were open, as was the case in East Boston and many other neighborhoods.

The real work closures were on account of orders by property management companies. Private security firms, from what I heard from several folks, are who refused entry into their buildings in the Financial District to any one, probably on account of limiting their potential liability. Even then, most folks I knew had received reverse-calls from their employer even before MBTA service was suspended (which wasn't until 5:30AM).

>"Four victims brutally killed" goes by other names in other cities. In Detroit, for example, they call it "Tuesday".

I'm not sure about fatalities, but Boston called it Tuesday as well. There were 6 shooting across Boston on the evening of Tuesday the 16th (which is a very abnormal amount for the city). Most are thought to be gang-related. No one thought anything of it. Even when I listened to the police scanner starting around 10:45PM on Thursday evening, I simply assumed that it was a rash of gang-related or usual criminal activity (especially being a convenience store robbery).

However, gangs don't usually tote around the equivalent of giant fragmentation grenades. There are plenty of guns in Boston, but folks using explosives aren't like gun owners (legal possession or not) -- they're psychopaths. By the time Tamerlan was recovered, law enforcement was aware the guy was wearing an explosive vest and they had already used a fair number of IEDs that evening. I doubt it was a call that commissioner Davis and governor Patrick wanted to make, but there was probably a very legitimate concern that more mass casualty events were a possibility. It was clearly a very defensive action -- after all, after 7 hours they still had a suspect who had managed to evade hundreds of police.

Another factor for the decision may have been that both attacks were on curiously popular dates for attacks: The bombings were on Patriots Day (on which Columbine, and Virginia Tech shootings also occurred), and the 19th is also the anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombings and the Waco, Texas Standoff. Terrorists loves them some symbolism.

Glyptodon• 13 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=...

The governor makes it sound like "all of Boston, all of Boston" ...

bane• 13 years ago

If there was ever a way to drag all the self-deluded over-protected entitled iron-balled Rambo types who claim Batman level crime, anti-terror and anti-IED fighting expertise out into the light to provide some of the most ignorant and frankly stupid commentary I've probably ever seen, typed safe from their keyboards, this event was it.

InclinedPlane5• 13 years ago

I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand I do think there are many concerning aspects to shutting down a city for law enforcement purposes, even if much of that happens more or less voluntarily. On the other hand this was a rather unusual situation where the suspects were at large, well armed, known to be in a specific area, and their names and faces were known. I can't think of many other equally comparable situations.

What I do know for certain though is that there's far too much emotion in this discussion right now. This is an important topic that deserves thoughtful, relaxed discussion, but I don't think that's happening or even possible at the moment.

conanbatt2• 13 years ago

Although one point or another in the post is disagreeable, there is something perverse is such a "shutdown" reaction. The reality is that all situations create precedent, which mean that a party with interest in shutting a city down only needs a single hand made bomb to create such distraction.

Evbn11• 13 years ago

And when such a party is apprehended, there will be no more parties to start trouble.

conanbatt2• 13 years ago

Those are never "apprehended" because they are not silly.

In argentina, the "news" that Maradona was dead flew around several times, creating distraction in key days of political trials.

A city-wide shutdown is an opportunity for a vast number of people, both legal and criminal in activity. And now , you can consider a home-made bomb that doesnt even kill someone knowing the reaction.

A little paranoid maybe :)

Anechoic6• 13 years ago

In my life I've had police point their weapons at me, I've had a cop blatantly lie in testifying against me, and I've been threatened with arrest for having the audacity to wave 'hi' to a cop as he was driving by and for sitting in a car with white women (yeah, I'm black, how did you know?). I am certainly sympathetic to the view that police and police powers need to be approached with skepticism.

That said, the critics that have popped up over the past 14 hours seem to twisted skepticism into a view that no law enforcement officer anywhere should ever be trusted under any circumstances and cooperating with the police for any reason is leading us down the slipper road to fascism.

I look at the past 24-hours and see the best of civilization. Law enforcement and private citizens worked together which allowed an alleged murdered to be captured alive with no civilian casualties and limited property damage. The Boston area was back in business as of 8pm last night, and come Monday, folks will be back to work. I can't see this as anything other than a success.

I'm curious - other than RMS, is there anyone within the affected area that felt the response and the search was inappropriate?

Evbn11• 13 years ago

This a viewpoint that needs more echo's.

Every libertarian gun fan is just jealous that the cops got to use the big toys this week. In their fantasies, the bomber would have been in their boat, and they could have shot him themselves, and they would be the hero. And we would never get a proper investigation into how this all started.

Security theater martial law and a tale that trumps every cop-n-donut joke ever

Related Stories