Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Boston Marathon, a terror act


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
101 replies to this topic

#81 Alpha_ProgDes   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4688

Posted 20 April 2013 - 05:16 PM

That's pretty crazy shit. Closing an entire city, telling people NOT to go to work and drive, cops everywhere, that must be the first time i see that in my entire life. Does it hapenned elsewhere before? Im from canada so i dont know, here nothing bad ever happen, small town of 2000 habitants lol... streets look like this ALL the time.

 

The show of force was a bit excessive, yes. 

 

You got local, state, and federal departments all in one spot, all armed for war.
Just to capture a 19 year-old nutcase with a shotgun.

 

Just how many trucks of tatical army men do you need to get this weeny guy?

 

Unless you're a dictator of a country, I don't see how one person can start a war with an entire country, but apparently, this guy has done just that.  Pretty crazy or pretty sad, depending on how you look at it.

 

First, you don't know who that guy knows or what he's done up to the bombing. Second, US vs "one guy" is a bit of an overstatement. Either one of those guys was no Jack Bauer.


Beginner in Game Development? Read here.
 
Super Mario Bros clone tutorial written in XNA 4.0 [MonoGame, ANX, and MonoXNA] by Scott Haley
 
If you have found any of the posts helpful, please show your appreciation by clicking the up arrow on those posts Posted Image
 
Spoiler

Sponsor:

#82 Bregma   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 5133

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:00 PM

That's pretty crazy shit. Closing an entire city, telling people NOT to go to work and drive, cops everywhere, that must be the first time i see that in my entire life. Does it hapenned elsewhere before? Im from canada so i dont know, here nothing bad ever happen, small town of 2000 habitants lol... streets look like this ALL the time.

October 1970.  It shames me that someone who claims to be Canadian would display such ignorance of his or her own history.


Stephen M. Webb
Professional Free Software Developer

#83 megabaki   Members   -  Reputation: 126

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:25 PM

First, you don't know who that guy knows or what he's done up to the bombing. Second, US vs "one guy" is a bit of an overstatement. Either one of those guys was no Jack Bauer.

 

Well, Bostonites won't be applauding after they get the bill for half a billion dollars for shutting down an entire city.  You can thank the Republicans for building up our security forces and our wasting money on security programs that do nothing to keep us safe.  Even now, they're trying to sneak pass bills in Congress that continue to erode our constitutional rights, while filling their own pockets with money.



#84 Cornstalks   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6985

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:40 PM

Even now, they're trying to sneak pass bills in Congress that continue to erode our constitutional rights, while filling their own pockets with money.

I think you just described every politician (not just Republicans).

 

Anyway, let's spice up this thread a little:

904448_10151567173874399_225667092_o.jpg

 

That's photo is from today (Saturday) from a marathon in Salt Lake (where I live). I guess even citizens were beefing up security after Boston.


[ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

#85 BladeOfWraith   Members   -  Reputation: 245

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:43 PM

My first three results from fox news on vaccines all state there is no risk.

My first three results say the opposite. I think your google search is falling victim to their PR cleanup attempts.

I think you've just created another ignorance based conspiracy :)

You didn't bother to actually watch any of those videos I take it?

 

Video one:

Donald Trump says he thinks they cause autism, at which point, the Fox News host Gretchen Carlson says "And you know that most physicians disagree with that and the studies have said that there is no link. It used to be thought it was the mercury in those vaccinations, which they have not had for years, and yet we're at the highest number in recent times of autism, so maybe it's environmental".

The Fox News host just debunked the claim and proceeded to blame pollution.

 

 

Video two "The vaccine for measles, mumps, etc aggravated an unknown mitochondrial disorder that Hannah had which did not cause her autism, the court found, but resulted in it".

So they reported on a legal ruling. Oh my!

 

Video three is the same story as video two.

 

But thanks for backing me up by mistake ;)


"You can't say no to waffles" - Toxic Hippo


#86 swiftcoder   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 9977

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:28 PM

Donald Trump says he thinks they cause autism, at which point, the Fox News host Gretchen Carlson says...

They still gave him airtime, which is more than one should for crackpot theories.


Tristam MacDonald - Software Engineer @Amazon - [swiftcoding]


#87 megabaki   Members   -  Reputation: 126

Posted 21 April 2013 - 07:50 AM

First, you don't know who that guy knows or what he's done up to the bombing. Second, US vs "one guy" is a bit of an overstatement. Either one of those guys was no Jack Bauer.

 

All foreign groups immediately denied responsibility because they don't want to fight the US on their own soil.  The news says it's counter-productive.Which means the US is mostly at war with their own citizens.  Everything that they have been doing lately, adding more and layers of security, has been to take away rights of the average citizen.  Would you feel more safe if every town is locked down, so they can search for local suspects, for everday crimes?  Give up a little freedom, and we'll find'em quicker.


This event ended quickly not because of massive dragnets, house-to-house searches, or our mighty show of security forces, but because someone phoned in a tip.

Excessive show of force, indeed.



#88 swiftcoder   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 9977

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:07 AM

That's photo is from today (Saturday) from a marathon in Salt Lake (where I live). I guess even citizens were beefing up security after Boston.

Somehow I missed this.

 

Running a marathon in a kevlar vest has got to be some kind of accomplishment - those things don't breath very well.


Tristam MacDonald - Software Engineer @Amazon - [swiftcoding]


#89 megabaki   Members   -  Reputation: 126

Posted 21 April 2013 - 10:29 AM

If foreign groups are no longer interested in waging war against us on our own soil, then why does our government continue to pass security programs that we don't need?  They must have forgotten to tell us about this little fact.  It's certainly a good way to make money, for Republicans at least.  Sell us security programs based on fear.


Edited by megabaki, 21 April 2013 - 10:31 AM.


#90 FableFox   Members   -  Reputation: 504

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:29 AM

That's photo is from today (Saturday) from a marathon in Salt Lake (where I live). I guess even citizens were beefing up security after Boston.

Somehow I missed this.

 

Running a marathon in a kevlar vest has got to be some kind of accomplishment - those things don't breath very well.

Considering he has no numbers on, he might be a running security from one point to another. But I don't have any correct info.

 

Edit: after all, that is open carry gun, power bar, and maybe flask of water inside the left pouch.


Edited by FableFox, 22 April 2013 - 09:30 AM.

Fable Fox is Stronger <--- Fable Fox is Stronger Project

#91 Cornstalks   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6985

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:08 AM

 

That's photo is from today (Saturday) from a marathon in Salt Lake (where I live). I guess even citizens were beefing up security after Boston.

Somehow I missed this.

 

Running a marathon in a kevlar vest has got to be some kind of accomplishment - those things don't breath very well.

Considering he has no numbers on, he might be a running security from one point to another. But I don't have any correct info.

Given the fact that only two people in that entire picture have a number bib visible, I'm not sure his lack of a bib says anything significant (lots of the runners put their bibs on their legs). (I'm more curious why the heck that blonde girl is running with full makeup on...)

 

Anyway, he was actually running in the race (and he ran the whole thing). This was shot at the beginning of the race, so all these people are just taking off.

 

Oh, I just found his bib. It's on his left leg (your right hand side). It's red.


Edited by Cornstalks, 22 April 2013 - 10:09 AM.

[ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

#92 BladeOfWraith   Members   -  Reputation: 245

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:07 PM

BOSTON, MA — The manhunt for the two suspects in last week's bombing of the Boston Marathon has only just ended, but FBI and Boston law enforcement agencies are already being inundated by demands that they identify the exact weapons used by the Tsarnaev brothers during the bloody two-day battle that left one local police officer dead and wounded at least fifteen others. "It is wrong for law enforcement to keep this information to themselves," NRA spokesman Wayne LaPierre said during a speech yesterday evening. "All across this nation, Americans have been waiting to hear which weapons were used by these terrorists so that our members can go purchase those same weapons. Withholding this information serves no purpose other than make it more difficult for these patriots to know which models of guns they should next be stocking up on."

NRA member Timothy Campbell of Dallas, Texas, says he has called Boston and MIT police departments over a dozen times since the murder of an MIT police officer last Thursday, but neither department has been willing to release the exact brands and models of guns used. While many cite fears that guns like the ones used in acts of terrorism or mass murder will be targeted for stricter regulation or even banning by the government, Campbell, an avid gun collector, says he recognizes that the odds that access to such weapons would be restricted are "essentially zero," he still is eager to purchase the guns as soon as the Tsarnaev weapons are identified. "I don't really know why I want to own them so bad," he said during an interview conducted this morning. "I guess it's probably a penis thing."

An executive with a prominent gun manufacturer said that having one of a company's guns used in an incident of mass murder or terrorism can represent a substantial boon to profits. The executive, who wished his identity and the name of his company to remain anonymous, noted that "the more vicious the crime, the bigger the surge in resulting sales is. When one of our guns was used in the murders at Sandy Hook, our dealers couldn't keep them on the shelves afterwards. We had to add another shift, we were selling so many."

A Boston-area Glock dealer who also wished to remain anonymous agreed. "Having one of our guns used in the shooting of an actual congressperson was probably the best advertisement we ever had. The sales were phenomenal afterwards." He says that while the company urged him to tell prospective buyers that the gun could likely face stricter regulation in the wake of the shooting, "It was nonsense, but I found I didn't even have to. Sure, everybody says those things, but the truth is people just want to own a gun that they know has become infamous. It makes them feel dangerous themselves, and that's what we're in the business of selling."

According to the gun executive, "It's one thing to say that your rifle can quickly kill a whole room full of elementary school children. Any company can say that. But to have it demonstrated and proven true, that's a completely different thing. That's when gun owners know they've got a gun they can count on. You might never need to kill that many kids before the cops come, sure, but that guy proved you could do it if you wanted to."

biggrin.png

"You can't say no to waffles" - Toxic Hippo


#93 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 30341

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:41 PM

"It's one thing to say that your rifle can quickly kill a whole room full of elementary school children. Any company can say that. But to have it demonstrated and proven true, that's a completely different thing. That's when gun owners know they've got a gun they can count on. You might never need to kill that many kids before the cops come, sure, but that guy proved you could do it if you wanted to."

biggrin.png

WTF? blink.png

 

What if it could work, because of that that time that it did work.

Whoop-de-doo.


Edited by Hodgman, 22 April 2013 - 08:58 PM.


#94 JTippetts   Moderators   -  Reputation: 8472

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:43 PM

Anyway, let's spice up this thread a little:
attachicon.gif904448_10151567173874399_225667092_o.jpg
 
That's photo is from today (Saturday) from a marathon in Salt Lake (where I live). I guess even citizens were beefing up security after Boston.

Heh. I love that guy.

#95 Servant of the Lord   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 19486

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:52 PM

@BladeOfWraith: That was posted by a site that, according to wikipedia, is: "...an American political blog that publishes news and opinions from a progressive point of view. It functions as a discussion forum and group blog for a variety of netroots activists whose efforts are primarily directed toward influencing and strengthening the Democratic Party."


Such ad-sellingly-delicious quotes would've surely been repeated across all the big news sites by now if anyone thought them even remotely credible. Are you posting it as another example of sites not worth paying attention to? If so, you forgot to link to the site, or mention its name. It was uploaded by a blogger (not a journalist), and tagged "Satire", but since you didn't mention that in your post, it makes it seem to me like you think those quotes are actually real? mellow.png


It's perfectly fine to abbreviate my username to 'Servant' rather than copy+pasting it all the time.
All glory be to the Man at the right hand... On David's throne the King will reign, and the Government will rest upon His shoulders. All the earth will see the salvation of God.
Of Stranger Flames - [indie turn-based rpg set in a para-historical French colony] | Indie RPG development journal

[Fly with me on Twitter] [Google+] [My broken website]

[Need web hosting? I personally like A Small Orange]


#96 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:58 PM

Wow. Could they have gotten a worse spokesperson?

That said, isn't the argument that less guns = less guns used kind of tautological? Should you be measuring the type of even before and after guns without requiring gun involvement?

Obviously suicides/violent crimes with guns went down, but did suicide/violent crimes in general go down after they were removed? etc.

#97 Servant of the Lord   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 19486

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:22 PM

Wow. Could they have gotten a worse spokesperson?

Just to be clear, that wasn't someone from the NRA. It's someone from the VCDL - a state-specific volunteer-ran organization. By the looks of their website, it doesn't seem that large either. It's like interviewing Bob from ye local Gun and Tackle shop. I'm trying to find the size of the organization, but I can't find much information on it. Their facebook page only has 2,903 likes. Pictures of cute kittens get more than that.

I'm not saying I'm all pro-gun... I'm just saying if your going to post dramatic news, can it actually be significant or dramatic? Of all the real executives and real politicians, there's plenty of dumb quotes to go around without making up quotes (@BladeOfWraith's linked article) or quoting someone from an organization that I can't even find any information on (@Hodgman's video link).

 

Maybe my googling is just failing me, and the quotes are real and the VCDL is a million-member strong organization... but I've spent twenty minutes or so looking, and I can't find much. If something is large, usually I can find more information than I'm able to process in less than 60 seconds.


It's perfectly fine to abbreviate my username to 'Servant' rather than copy+pasting it all the time.
All glory be to the Man at the right hand... On David's throne the King will reign, and the Government will rest upon His shoulders. All the earth will see the salvation of God.
Of Stranger Flames - [indie turn-based rpg set in a para-historical French colony] | Indie RPG development journal

[Fly with me on Twitter] [Google+] [My broken website]

[Need web hosting? I personally like A Small Orange]


#98 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 30341

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:31 PM

Wow. Could they have gotten a worse spokesperson?

That said, isn't the argument that less guns = less guns used kind of tautological? Should you be measuring the type of even before and after guns without requiring gun involvement?

I'm pretty sure for a comedy show they're going to get the worst spokesperson they can. Some obscure gun club vs a former prime-minister, with a not-very-serious moderator isn't a real debate, it's obviously more of a skit.

 

The argument is that less guns == less chances for gun incidents -- the exact swimming pool example.

If there's no backyard pools, there's no backyard drownings. If people don't have access to gun, there's no gun crime.

Yes pre-meditated murders will likely not be affected, as someone can plan around this restriction, and some heat-of-the-moment murders will still happen with knives, cliffs, etc, instead of guns... but a lot of crimes are avoided by not having guns everywhere. For example, late night shop keepers usually have a steel wire fence across the counter, so you can't jump back there, and so they can lock themselves in. That protects them from being attacked by everything except guns, which is now enough protection in most cases.

Armored vans and police carry guns openly and are almost never attacked due to their monopoly on extreme force. How often do police get injured/killed in the line of duty in the US due to everyone being able to match their level of firepower? Or how often does a policeman shoot someone because they're afraid that said person has a gun.

Both deaths of police and police killings of citizens are rarer when the general population is not as well-armed as they are.

 

If someone gets shot (or stabbed) here in Melbourne, it's a very big news story, whereas across the US, something like 230 people get shot every day.

We don't have that many homicides at all, so there's a lot of annual variance making it hard to spot correlations. e.g. in 2009, almost 300 people died by homicide, but a summer heatwave killed almost 400...

 

Yes homicides using guns have nose-dived:

fig013.png

 

The homicide rate was already on a downward trend before they got rid of guns, and it's continued, so we can't play armchair statistician easily.

homiciderate2.png

 

However, like Howard said in the video, mass killings have disappeared entirely (for now), which was the intention of the law, so it did work (so far). There's been one attempted gun massacre since, which killed two people, and it spurred on even stronger restrictions on gun types and background checks (the killer was legally found insane). 

People that have a need for guns still have them, but suitable ones. e.g. a bolt action for shooting rabbits or deer, but never an AK47 or an SKS.


Edited by Hodgman, 22 April 2013 - 10:06 PM.


#99 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 23 April 2013 - 07:39 AM

I'm pretty sure for a comedy show they're going to get the worst spokesperson they can. Some obscure gun club vs a former prime-minister, with a not-very-serious moderator isn't a real debate, it's obviously more of a skit.

Though The Daily Show is a comedy show, a lot of people still use them as a legitimate news source. Usually they get qualified spokespeople and ask them stupid questions rather than getting unqualified people who are just stupid to begin with.
 

The argument is that less guns == less chances for gun incidents

That's not my point. My point is that's a totally tautological stance. The frame should be does less guns == less incidents. If the number of incidents doesn't have a significant change, why ban guns if the incidents just involve something else instead? The goal shouldn't be to eliminate gun violence, it should be to eliminate violence.

It doesn't matter which side of the argument you fall on, that evidence has a huge logical flaw in it.

#100 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 30341

Posted 23 April 2013 - 08:01 AM


It doesn't matter which side of the argument you fall on, that evidence has a huge logical flaw in it.

Except for the part where gun massacres weren't replaced with other kinds of massacres, shoot-outs at police weren't replaced with other kinds of police killings, and staff behind melee-proof enclosures are safe from being stabbed/etc... The bit where eliminating gun violence did reduce (not just transform) violence.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS