Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There are many threads alluding to false flags, testing grounds, violations of rights, and tyranny with respect to the Boston bombings and apprehension of the surviving terrorist. Apart from some constitutional violations, I think the larger conspiracy theories are without merit. As for the constitutional violations, if they occurred, the citizens that were wronged have access to the courts to seek redress.

Now, let's engage in an exercise. For those concerned about Government intrusion, please enlighten me by engaging in the following exercise.

Scenario:

You are a law enforcement official with full authority to direct state and federal agencies in wake of Boston bombings. Assume the authority that you have meets constitutional muster.

The facts are as they were last seek. People have been killed. One cop has been killed. The terrorists have explosives and handguns in their possession. They may be part of a larger cell. You do not know if they have access to a cache of even more powerful and deadly explosives. They exhibit no hesitation in killing innocent civilians, and they are on the loose in a major metropolitan area.

What do you instruct all the LEO's under your authority to do to apprehend or otherwise stop the terrorists? Please provide specifics.

Remember you have had six days to think about the response. The people involved had to implement a plan in real time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
Here is the question that needs to be answered:

How/why did the LEOs lose all contact/sight with the suspect when the brother was shot?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Here is the question that needs to be answered:

How/why did the LEOs lose all contact/sight with the suspect when the brother was shot?
I was listening to the scanner when this went down.

The answer is because the officers were told by dispatch to retreat due to explosives being actively used.

The officers were truly heroic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,361 Posts
Surprised dogs couldn't pick up his trail of S _ _ _ after the gun fight and the killing of his brother right before his eyes................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,567 Posts
I am interested to see if you get any intelligent responses to this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,856 Posts
In the grand scheme of things, this was terrible, but not WWI or WWII caliber.
You don't stop everyday activity for 75 square miles around to get to the bottom of things.
This was another test to see how far the American people are willing to bend to crazy mandates.

Look at it this way. If America frightens you, feel free to live somewhere else. There are plenty of other countries that don't suffer from excessive liberty. America is where the Liberty is. Liberty is not certified safe." -- [email protected]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
I was listening to the scanner when this went down.

The answer is because the officers were told by dispatch to retreat due to explosives being actively used.

The officers were truly heroic.
Retreat?

Why lose visual contact?

Why not, keep a safe distance but do not break visual contact?

Why didn't they track him from the air?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I've still yet to see a response to the original question.

I think the lack of a response is very telling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,956 Posts
Ive had some training in this sort of thing though from a different type agency so here goes.
Set a wider perimeter than they did asap. Once visual was established the air would have had at least two leo thremal image capable helios in the air at all times keeping constant aerial contact. Not hard to do once the suspect had been located visually even if LEO did have to draw back. Shaking a helicopter is not an easy thing to do once the vehicle and suspect is visual and the helo picks them up. Im assuming someone by that time had at least one over the area. If not there should have been.

With that done the odds that the remaining suspect could have driven off thru city streets shut down by the perimeter and gotten away. would be slim at best even at night. At very least there would have been a much smaller area to concentrate the search on and the homes BG entered if any would have been known.



I wasnt there, and things go haywire fast in situations like that but just personally I think someone in command not the LEOs themselves per se dropped the ball on keeping visual contact from the air using choppers. Once that chance at keeping contact from the air was lost the perp was lost for all practical purposes until he was accidently discovered by someone LE or Civilian in this case civilian.

Edited to add this. LEO on the ground in that fast moving situation are going to do as ordered by their command posts and dispatch. Who in turn will pass on lock down the city if issued from higher up. They arent going to second guess those orders in real time during something like that.
If bad orders are coming down bad actions is what you will get because the officer in the line of fire does not have time to constitutionally argue what hes being told.

If there is blame to be laid it ultimately rests at the top of the chain of command not with the officers in the field. Yep an individual LEO can be a butt head during something like that but those are few and far between. Most are just trying to get it over and stay alive doing it.

This is a case of if theres crap then it rises to the top not sinks to the bottom.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
I'm not going to go into great detail...

Since the identity of the suspect was already known and he wasn't an NRA member or a Tea Party member, I know that Obama would not be ordering any drone strikes on this muslim terrorist from his situation room so everything would depend on me and all the LEOs you put me in charge of.

The use of deadly force is authorized but I would like to apprehend the suspect alive.

"Bardo" claimed there was an order given to retreat.

I would not have given an order to retreat. I would have given an order to keep a safe distance and maintain visual contact. Called in air support to the location to maintain visual contact. Moved personnel towards his location. Establish road blocks and a perimeter. I'm not familiar with the area but if such a place existed, I'd attempt to block all routes and try to steer him towards a less populated area. Attempt to disable the vehicle he was using/block all vehicular escape routes from the less populated area. Establish a perimeter and move personnel in who are armed with "flash bangs" and attempt to apprehend the suspect.

That is about as specific as I'll get.

Fireproof suit on...ready to be flamed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
FYI, he ran over his own brother. He was not "killed before his eyes...." He killed him, himself.
It would appear that his brother did not run him over, but rather a police officer. Not to say it isn't warranted perhaps, but I think the facts are important either way.

Apparently there is an eyewitness account that contradicts that:

Maybe the police video will surface and lay this to rest, but I am not holding my breath.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,567 Posts
I'm not going to go into great detail...

Since the identity of the suspect was already known and he wasn't an NRA member or a Tea Party member, I know that Obama would not be ordering any drone strikes on this muslim terrorist from his situation room so everything would depend on me and all the LEOs you put me in charge of.

The use of deadly force is authorized but I would like to apprehend the suspect alive.

"Bardo" claimed there was an order given to retreat.

I would not have given an order to retreat. I would have given an order to keep a safe distance and maintain visual contact. Called in air support to the location to maintain visual contact. Moved personnel towards his location. Establish road blocks and a perimeter. I'm not familiar with the area but if such a place existed, I'd attempt to block all routes and try to steer him towards a less populated area. Attempt to disable the vehicle he was using/block all vehicular escape routes from the less populated area. Establish a perimeter and move personnel in who are armed with "flash bangs" and attempt to apprehend the suspect.

That is about as specific as I'll get.

Fireproof suit on...ready to be flamed.
I had to read this twice to make sure that you had everything in there without going into detail. It all sounds good to me.

I vote that they put you in charge of the next manhunt. :smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
And I quote... (from memory):

Officer: They have explosives! Retreat!
Dispatcher: All units retreat! All units retreat! Explosives!

Why lose visual contact?

Why not, keep a safe distance but do not break visual contact?
Because they were taking cover. The bad guys were lobbing bombs at them. I usually try not to say this to people, but: Duh! The police were terrified. I could hear it in their voices on the scanner, and I don't blame them.

Why didn't they track him from the air?
This is a valid question I asked myself.

The initial fight took place SO quickly that I think they didn't have time to get the helicopter into the air. Literally it was so fast that they tracked them to Watertown that I almost missed them saying they had found them there.

That said, after the initial fight, the badguy was hid out JUST outside the perimeter they set up. Why couldn't they use their heat cameras to scan the outer area better? And the answer is: They could have, but they didn't. Yeah, it was a small mistake... crap happens.

Here's the key though: You can play armchair quarterback all day, but the fact will always remain that you were not there. Snap decisions were made in the heat of a very stressful situation. Why question every little thing they did? They tried the best they could.

The bigger points to consider as relevant to this forum are:

If you lived in that neighborhood, would you have wanted a firearm in your house? I know I was thinking the whole time, I sure as heck would have.

and

Once the lockdown was lifted, it was a citizen who reported the badguy. Perhaps the lockdown hurt efforts to find him? A case of underestimating how helpful the average citizen can be in bringing the bad guy to justice. That's a tough balancing act. More civilians out and about could get in the way and get injured. No one but the bad guys were injured. That is a HUGE HUGE HUGE win. Was it a perfect arrest? No... but it was about as close to a perfect arrest as it could have been. IMO.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,088 Posts
Since you seem to want to condone violating people's rights to achieve an end,
what happens when the bad guy(s) walk out of court b/c of said violations?
what happens when the public at large no longer trusts LEO's b/c of past violations as witnessed repeatedly on youtube and other social media?

Social media has received a lot of credit b/c of people coming together online and providing/compiling personal camera footage. The thing is, this works both ways. As LEO's go busting into people's homes, they are also being recorded and those recordings get publicized whether they know it or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
"Bardo" claimed there was an order given to retreat.
Not gonna flame you... despite the tone of your response. I'll just say the following:

When you make a statement like "'Bardo' claimed..." clearly, you're trying to infer something there to discredit the statement.

1. Again, I was listening to the scanner myself at the time of the event... I heard the order to retreat myself.

2. At the time, I looked here on the forums, just to see reaction from others, and saw another person mention the order of retreat, that forum post is here: http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/news-good-bad-ugly/165997-title-change-manhunt-boston-bomber-mit-cop-killer.html#post2709213

3. The initial order actually came from an officer on the ground. He was running after them and the perps were lobbing what he described as "grenades" at him. They turned out later to be home made grenades. The dispatcher repeated the order to all units.

I would not have given an order to retreat. I would have given an order to keep a safe distance and maintain visual contact.
You, probably, would have needlessly endangered officer's lives.

Recognize that at the time, no one knew what additional bombs the perps might have had. For all they knew, the vehicle they were driving might have been loaded with a fertilizer bomb or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Since you seem to want to condone violating people's rights to achieve an end,
what happens when the bad guy(s) walk out of court b/c of said violations?
Not sure who you're addressing this to, but, I'll bite just for the sake of addressing one point:

I assume you're referring to the lack of miranda for the suspect?

I am not a lawyer, but... according to Wikipedia:

"... if law enforcement officials decline to offer a Miranda warning to an individual in their custody, they may interrogate that person and act upon the knowledge gained, but may not use that person's statements to incriminate him or her in a criminal trial."

Just because someone doesn't receive a miranda warning doesn't mean they automatically get off "scott free". It means statements they make during that interrogation cannot be used against them. I suspect they have MORE than enough evidence to prosecute him for everything he has done. At this point, it's a question of getting additional information about other suspects that matters to them.

If you are instead referring to the idea of treating him as an enemy combatant... I agree, he should not be treated as an enemy combatant. That'll be an interesting point to watch.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
Not gonna flame you... despite the tone of your response. I'll just say the following:

When you make a statement like "'Bardo' claimed..." clearly, you're trying to infer something there to discredit the statement.

1. Again, I was listening to the scanner myself at the time of the event... I heard the order to retreat myself.

2. At the time, I looked here on the forums, just to see reaction from others, and saw another person mention the order of retreat, that forum post is here: http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/news-good-bad-ugly/165997-title-change-manhunt-boston-bomber-mit-cop-killer.html#post2709213

3. The initial order actually came from an officer on the ground. He was running after them and the perps were lobbing what he described as "grenades" at him. They turned out later to be home made grenades. The dispatcher repeated the order to all units.



You, probably, would have needlessly endangered officer's lives.

Recognize that at the time, no one knew what additional bombs the perps might have had. For all they knew, the vehicle they were driving might have been loaded with a fertilizer bomb or something.
I only said you "claimed" to point out to the OP that you stated it in an earlier post and this is the point in time I was writing about so there would be no confusion. I was not in anyway trying to infer something nor was I trying to discredit the statement. Since I did not hear the order to retreat myself, an appropriate phrase for me to use is you claimed it not me...it is not my information I was using.

Regarding "needlessly endangered officer's lives": Maintaining visual contact from a distance that is further away than one can throw a homemade grenade is not needlessly endangering their lives. If you maintain visual contact from a distance, you virtually eliminate the possibility of the BG ambushing one or more of your officers which could result in the loss of life and/or limb and you significantly reduce the possibility of the BG escaping and being able to commit more violent acts.

Regarding the vehicle being "loaded with a fertilizer bomb or something": That is also why I said maintain visual contact from a distance.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top