<p>cartera45, if they had an ID on the beltway sniper and knew he was in a given area and on the run, I have no doubt that the MD/VA police would have also “locked down” the area for the safety of the citizens until they completed their manhunt and the guy was caught. But that wasn’t the case. You’re talking about a completely different situation. Boston wasn’t “locked down” from Monday afternoon when the bombs exploded - it only started on Friday morning when they knew/hoped they had the guy ID’d and cornered in a specific area.</p>
<p>I don’t think “martial law” is an accurate description of what happened, either. There were tons of police/national guard/etc in Watertown, but not in the whole greater Boston area - or even in downtown Boston. This was a manhunt for a known murderer (attempted mass murderer) who had targeted innocent civilians. It was not an attempt to intimidate people for political gain or to repress an unpopular or revolutionary political movement. And as soon as they realized they hadn’t caught him where they expected to, the “shelter in place” order was lifted.</p>
<p>It seems to that the people most disturbed about the lockdown (“martial law”) are not the people who live in the Boston area. I haven’t heard much local outcry about this at all. Maybe it seemed more sensationalized on the news from far away? Maybe those of us who know members of MA law enforcement personally have a different take on what happened?</p>
<p>^and I would think many local people felt protected by the decision to stay in their homes, despite the inconvenience</p>
<p>local law enforcement had also just been victims of the terrorists’ actions and while they may not have been 100% accurate, they are human beings who imho were doing the best they could to protect their communities</p>
<p>People here feel constrained talking about the events because they are so immediate. But everyone I talk to thinks the same about the over-reaction. The excuse we all make - including me - is that this was a shock and shocks make you over-react. We all know the police over-reacted. We accept that. My point is that we shouldn’t or we should at least try not to, which is about next time something happens. </p>
<p>One comment: think through the responses to the note I made about them looking for 1 guy. Yes, he might have been part of a larger network but they were only trying to catch this 1 guy, ideally alive for questioning so they could determine if he was part of something larger. When you conflate the 2 issues you confuse them. A larger network might strike in NYC or LA or Chicago, not in Boston. There is no rational relationship between “larger network” and Boston. If anything, there would be a reason for additional terrorists to strike elsewhere where the police weren’t on high alert.</p>
<p>I really didn’t intend to say the decision was wrong. I’m just pointing out scenarios and asking questions about why how we treat different scenarios. We’ll never know if things would have been done differently had different weapons been used, had there not been a foreign connection, etc. It doesn’t hurt to discuss and question decisions made in these circumstances.</p>
<p>Discovered because regular Joe went outside to take a smoke. Either credit the addiction, or maybe his wife for making him do it outside. Okay, I don’t even know if there’s a wife, but I’m trying to credit a woman somehow.</p>
<p>it would seem that one lesson learned, is for police to ask all locals to take notice of their immediate environment even if from inside their homes, and provide that info to one source who could relay it to the appropriate law enforcement. who knows, maybe that happened?</p>
<p>Too bad the Watertown cops did not pay too darn attention in their botched attempt to intercept the suspects after they were spotted and … tracked. Had they used caution as you mention, the saga could have ended in the early hours of Friday.</p>
<p>I didn’t have a problem with the lockdown at all. What they knew was that the guy might have had a suicide vest, might have had more bombs, might have had guns, and was probably on foot and probably going to act that day (he knew police knew who he was and he wasn’t going to get safely back home). Should people have been taking their kids on walks to the park? They would have been. It was gorgeous outside that day, and it was probably one of the first, if not the first really nice spring days.</p>
<p>They didn’t shut the area down right after the bombing or anything but for this period of time, I completely believe that going outside without a really good reason was not a great idea. His brother had thrown a bomb at the cops. A random person had had his car hijacked (and acted extremely smartly and is lucky he’s still alive). It also cleared the streets out better for the police in Watertown. No, they didn’t end up catching him because the streets were clear, but if people were walking and driving all over the place, he could have slipped away. People walking around got noticed this way.</p>
<p>Sure it was annoying and inconvenient and I couldn’t get my laundry or grocery shopping that I had been planning for that day done, but I’m not upset that the police did it.</p>
<p>It looks like the police thought that he was wounded given the blood found in the SUV. He was shot in a few places so there was probably blood in different areas of the drivers seat. Would it be reasonable to expect that he was carrying pressure cooker bombs or heavy weapons in such a weakened state?</p>
<p>“Law enforcement sources told NBC News that blood found at the scene suggested Dzhokhar may have been wounded in the gun battle.”</p>
<p>"“We know he didn’t go straight to the boat,” said Watertown police chief Edward P. Deveau. “We found blood in the car he abandoned and we found blood in a house inside the perimeter. We had no information that he had gotten outside the perimeter, but it was very chaotic this morning.”</p>
<p>"No way he’s walking free, ever. "
-And how about ton of precedence? How about mastermind of Benghazi killings (BTW, still on USA territory, although being abroad)? He is very well known and walking free and there are no plans to even take him. Defense can easily refer to many other cases now that “poor tormented soul” of the 19 y o evil has a lawyer and all the rights in the world. I do not see how “No way he’s walking free, ever”, just wait and see, as a muslim he is NOT EQUAL to the rest of us, he is superior (by the many of “correct” political stands, which are plainly sick, sick, sick, disgusting)</p>
<p>Um, yeah. Anyway, I’m reading about the older brother’s wife with interest. A lot of people are talking about what she must have known. It’s probably not enough, however, that she knew what they were doing for her to be guilty of a crime. She has to have done something herself to have furthered the conspiracy. Is it enough, legally, if she simply did normal household things, like make meals for her husband? I’m not sure.</p>
<p>By the way, all those who think the older brother shouldn’t get a Muslim burial, ask yourselves if you’d be taking the same position if he was an adherent of your own religion–and what the founder of your own religion might have said about it.</p>
<p>As the parent of a student at Boston University, I am grateful for the lockdown! Yes, mistakes were made and some may feel that authorities overreacted, but as a mom, I do not! My daughter would have been in Cambridge, at the BU boathouse, between Watertown and MIT, in the early morning hours on Friday. I began hearing the news alerts on my phone at about 4:00am and I texted her at 5:15am and instructed her to stay in her dorm room, more than 30 minutes before her coach cancelled practice. Yes, it was just one guy, but at the time, little was known about possible connections to other accomplices and it was known that they had explosives with them. I for one think it was the right call!</p>
<p>As far as burying the older brother, I haven’t read through this whole thread, is there a reason why they can’t send him back to Russia?</p>