SMITTY wrote:Now that this is over .... does anyone see what I see?
An entire city ... WAIT - SEVERAL cities, completely locked down ..... just for ONE guy. NOT a good image to project to terrorists in the world. Makes us look pretty weak.
Sadly, my gut tells me this attack was only the beginning ...
Hope I'm wrong.
Yes. I also see a good reason for citizens to have assault weapons. And of course we are going to have to outlaw assualy pressure cookers.
Great job by fed and local leos.
Sorry but I don't really see the "image" problem. This incident was carried out by people who apparently believed they wouldn't get caught, and were planning to do more. A little over 4 days later and they get a completely different outcome. Time missed at work can be made up; sporting events can be rescheduled; heck, Bill O'Reilly was advising people to plan to vacation in Boston. I'd take the lockdown any day to get the outcome that was achieved.
And I don't really want to get into the gun debate, but I don't see how this incident can be appropriated to argue in favor of assault weapons for civilians. Assault weapons wouldn't have prevented the bombings, and AFAIK there weren't any civilian casualties after that, so I don't really see the connection. It's hard to see how the job done by law enforcement personnel could have been done more effectively (though obviously it would have been best if there had been no casualties). Having civilians using assault weapons in a semi-urban environment outside the tactical decisions and chain-of-command of law enforcement seems like a recipe for creating problems that did not arise here. I'm not trying to generalize this to every hypothetical scenario - I'm just saying it doesn't seem to follow from what actually happened here.