<p>
yes, and we’re also where the 9/11 planes were flown out of. Excuse us if we’re erring on the side of caution.</p>
<p>Yeah, and there are planes taking off EVERY DAY! :eek:</p>
<p>Caution? Read post #32. The police reaction to these toys brings memories of similar cautious behaviour immediately post September 11, when many non-caucasians and dark complexion folks were “removed” from airplanes because of a fellow passenger’s ambiguous “discomfort.”</p>
<p>I think the intent was to cause exactly what happened. It was to cause a fake bomb scare and then generate thousands of minutes of free advertising throughout the world. </p>
<p>The packaging was such and the locations were such to simulate a potential bomb. At first I kinda thought “what a bunch of dummies, those Boston cops.” Then I saw the dreadlock kid being taken into jail. A big assed grin across his face… right there I knew he was happy because he got exactly what he wanted… free pub. Marketing history. </p>
<p>Now the problem becomes as it sorts out, do we treat these guys as harmless “artists” or like someone who calls in a bomb threat? </p>
<p>I can’t say I support what they did in any way. While they may think of it as Marketing magic, it was pretty selfish. They had to think this would happen, now I would like to see them wrong in one aspect … getting off with a slap on the wrist. I would like to see them do some time. It was the wrong thing to do.</p>
<p>
I hope Interference Inc, the marketing firm involved, is held accountable. Seems a little simple to just charge the kid who installed the boards.</p>
<p>DEAN J - I have a feeling that the city of Boston is going after the big-guns on this one - to cover the 1/2 million dollar bill. The 2 guys arrested don’t have 2 nickels to rub together - it will be the deep pockets on this one - including Turner and down the line to the marketing firm. I would not be surprised to see the 2 guys get off somewhat easy - but not completely - all they wanted to do was make a few bucks it seems.</p>
<p>NECN has [some</a> video of the two suspects in court and talking to reporters](<a href=“Video - NECN.com”>Video - NECN.com). They’re “out there”.</p>
<p>Ya - the interview with them - and their response about the 70’s haircuts/styles was kinda comical - guess they don’t want to talk publically - kinda cocky in a way - but in a way - I don’t blame them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most terrorist bombs have historically been hidden in motor vehicles. I expect that the mayor of Boston will now hysterically round-up any unattended car as a terrorist threat. It’s best to be safe, right?</p>
<p>Why would a terrorist cover a bomb in LEDs, and have exposed components when they could put it in some fiendishly clever disguise like, say, a box, paper bag, or Ted Kennedy’s alcoholic nose? In only one out of ten cities did officials flip out, and in only one was a pretty clever marketing scheme referred to as a “hoax.” (By the way, it wasn’t a hoax any more than the Goodyear blimp is a “hoax.” The word “hoax” suggests that the advertisers wanted people to think they were bombs, something that I believe is not in evidence based on the pictures I’ve seen on the Web. If other devices lacked the lurid cartoon character, were large, round and red with a fuze sticking out the top I will gladly retract this entire post.)</p>
<p>That officials reacted as they did is not the fault of the advertisers. I doubt that putting advertising in public property is a felony, even in Boston. I look forward to seeing how the DA actually files charges. I predict a small fine, a stern lecture, and a light slap on the wrist for the nefarious perpetrators.</p>
<p>“That officials reacted as they did is not the fault of the advertisers. I doubt that putting advertising in public property is a felony, even in Boston”</p>
<p>I’m not really buying into your arguement on this one. The presence of a cartoon character on the outside doesn’t immediately dismiss the possibility of a bomb. Remember the Russians in Afganistan used to put explosives in children’s toys and leave them about. We used to write on the bombs we dropped/shot at the ememy. The writing does not change the bomb to a letter. </p>
<p>I think what will be at issue is the intent to make the packages resemble a possible explosive. For that, I think they’ll get some time.</p>
<p>Opie,</p>
<p>So should we send out a bomb squad every time a doll gets dropped in the road?</p>
<p>The culture of fear is a nasty thing, and I don’t know that we want to walk down that road as a people.</p>
<p>It seems to me that when this sort of overreaction occurs, fear has become our watchword, and I shudder to think the terrorists have won.</p>
<p>The terrorists win if 3000 people get killed in Boston. They don’t win because the police adopted a better safe than sorry approach.</p>
<p>If all of the “bombs” were indeed clearly festooned with the cartoon character and flashing lights, I agree that it was probably an overreaction. If the panic continued after the first one was found to be harmless, it was probably an overreaction. But from everything I’m hearing, some of these things looked pretty non-descript, and were left in places that don’t seem to have a lot of marketing potential. I’m glad the cops were vigilant.</p>
<p>Terrorism isn’t predicated on killing people-- that is merely a means to an end.</p>
<p>Terrorism is predicated on changing lifestyles and making a credible threat. To that end, the latter is terrorists winning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If this is true, it would certainly be some sort of minor crime. The pictures I’ve seen on the Internet all look a lot more like one of my son’s electronics projects than a bomb. In a world where someone who steals a dozen $25,000 cars gets a year’s probation, it’s hard to see someone doing hard time for a crime where no one was injured or suffered property damage.</p>
<p>(By the way, unless some of them were WAY bigger than the pics I’ve seen, even if they were bombs they would be more like hand-grenade sized than Oklahoma sized. ICargirl mentioned 3,000 dead in Boston – no way explosive packages this size in the locations they were in would have caused more than a few casualties. Of course, they weren’t bombs, so that’s moot.)</p>
<p>One person’s “better safe than sorry” is another person’s “police fear state”. This was an instance where after the first item was found to be a no-op, the rest of them could have been quietly rounded up and removed. A virtual city-wide lockdown was far beyond necessary.</p>
<p>If we live in a state of constant fear and react in that way to every event that is out of the norm or is initially unexplained, the terrorists will have won without ever having to conduct another despicable act.</p>
<p>Well since we kow terrorist can make shoe bombs I think we should shut Boston down every time we find an unattended shoe - and I’ve seen a few of them in John Kerry’s over the years.</p>
<p>By the way why would Massachusetts lock these guys up when they didn’t lock Ted Kennedy up for drowning someone and lying about it?</p>
<p>“So should we send out a bomb squad every time a doll gets dropped in the road?”</p>
<p>Ari, Ari, aRi? are you mad at me? 
In afganistan yes, they had to teach their children to not pick up the dolls and toys left out in the open. They didn’t have the luxury of a bomb squad. </p>
<p>The point was a bomb doesn’t have to look like a bomb to be one, nor does it stop being one because of something attached to it that is harmless in appearence.</p>
<p>How uneasy would you feel on a bus, train or public place when you see a backpack minus the owner? Remember Atlanta? </p>
<p>In my day, where I grew up, you learned to look around all the time. Often seeing them before they saw you, was the difference between making it home and taking a beating. </p>
<p>With all that’s happened I can’t blame them for their actions. What would you be saying if they did nothing and something blew up? </p>
<p>Closing roads to traffic or emptying a building is far and away better than giving up constitutional rights. I’d rather have them be wrong a 100 out of a 100 times, then miss one incident and lose another constitutional right.</p>
<p>“Terrorism is predicated on changing lifestyles and making a credible threat. To that end, the latter is terrorists winning”</p>
<p>If terrorism defense makes me 15 minutes late for work while they deal with something, I can handle that. MY governmetn making me spend $100 for a passport to go across the border for a weekend in Vancouver or having my phone tapped, is the terrorists winning. Not being stuck in traffic. If so, the terrorists win everyday in Seattle.</p>
<p>“If this is true, it would certainly be some sort of minor crime.”</p>
<p>I don’t think so this time. The days of taped up road flares in somebody’s locker is over. If this was a HS, say in Colorado and somebody called in about a certain thing that was going to happen… would everybody be fine with it? Just a joke? </p>
<p>I think these guys got out of it exactly to a t what they wanted. 10 years ago, nobody bat an eye…boys will be boys… not so much today.</p>