Pacowy wrote:You seem to be assuming without foundation that the search process was "random". AFAIK it focused on (a) buildings understood to potentially house relatives or friends of the bombers; (b) buildings where tips (e.g., from neighbors) indicated the possible presence of the bomber; and, (c) buildings not in compliance with the lockdown protocol (e.g., open or unlocked doors) that would provide access for the bomber. Even at these locations, I'm not aware of any no-knock, forced-entry searches, or anything about the searches conducted that would plainly be unreasonable taken in context.
Absolutely incorrect. They search EVERY house in a 20 block radius. And they didn't ask "May we come in?" They pointed their weapons at the door, and ordered everyone out.
Pacowy wrote:I'm curious about your reference to lockdowns. In response to the repeated problem of mass murders in schools, many schools have implemented a protocol of having the teachers lock all of the classroom doors when such a danger is perceived to be present. It makes it harder for perps to get from room to room, potentially making it harder for them to get at potential victims. Are those lockdowns reasonable, or does any individual student always have the "right" to walk out, even if it realistically could result in the death of everyone in the room?
They didn't lock down "A" building. They locked down an ENTIRE town. Plus stopped all mass transit in the area and declared a no fly zone. That's VERY different than locking a school down with a known active shooter inside.
And frankly, the whole, hide under the desk, put your head between your legs and kiss your @ss goodbye "strategy" isn't one I recommend.