Boston was the ideal scenario to prove Hi capacity Mags are necessary.

[gym]

I hope that someone in the NRA, is smart enough to show, that even when cornered and outnumbered a perp, can still survive a barrage of gunfire from the "good guys". Thus showing that in "real life situations" , sometimes more than a few shots are required to stop someone. This time it was reversed, but if it had been a one on one with these two kids, police may have lost another LEO. As one lost, is more than not acceptable, and the average guy is not trained for sustained gunfire from a Bad guy or guys.
It's a good explanation of why civilians need the same firepower as police.
A 7 round mag would have caused a defender to run out of ammo perhaps way too soon, and be over run by someone with bad intentions.
I am sure those folks didn't expect a guy who just killed over a hundred people to end up in their boat. It could have just as easy been someone's house, "like it is everyday someplace in our Country.
Once you are forced to engage someone the last thing you want on your mind is wondering if you have enough ammo to see it through to it's finality.
It will be interesting to see what type of guns, or rifles, they were carrying, and if they were bought legally or stolen. I think if they had AR's or AK's we already would have heard about it, due to the President's war on guns.
But here an AR would have been the perfect weapon to defend, and repel, against these kind of killers while help had time to arrive.

 

[gym]

Seems like Dean and I were thinking about the same thing, as his post is similar in nature to mine. I defer to him.

 

[Dframe]

Did anyone see all the cops carrying around all those "Evil Black Rifles"? Why it's enough to create a total PANIC by the ecucation establishment

 

[joeschmoe]

200 rounds / 7 round limit = 29 reloads

 

[saltydog452]

OK. I disagree.

In a match, all shots count.

On the street, even more-so. If there is a 'barage' of bullets, every dang one in that barage carries an obligation of accountability.

'Heat Of The Moment' isn't a defense against reckless action.

salty.

Comments appreciated via PM.

sd.

 

[nathan]

I wonder what type of firearms the two were using.

 

[Steve CT]

The response will always be "Law Enforcement personnel certainly need that capability , the average citizen does not"

Most Americans are still willing to abandon their safety and security to an incredibly small number of LEO's. Enlightened citizens know that they are ultimately responsible for their own safety.

 

[beatledog7]

Law enforcement fired 200 rounds and in theory managed to kill #1 (or did being run over by #2 actually kill him?). Then they spent roughly 10,000 man hours looking for #2 with greater Boston's civilian population in lockdown, but failed to locate him. Once released from their protective "shelter in place" order, one of those civilians located him within about 45 minutes and without really trying.

I take nothing away from the stalwart police in this matter. I simply point out that if should have been obvious that the local civilians were ideally suited to assist in the manhunt rather than be "protected" from it. They had and will always have a much better chance of discovering "things amiss" in their own backyard, quite literally in this case, than the best trained police personnel.

It's about situational awareness and knowing the territory, just as we always say WRT carrying a firearm and taking responsibility for its use.

I'm glad the police had hi-cap mags and a lot of rounds to deploy, and I'm glad they had a lot of trained people on the case. But I'm not sure it mattered on Friday. It was the decision to restore the residents' freedom that led to the capture, not the number of rounds in anyone's magazine.

I hope we learn from that.

 

[jbrown50]

It seems strange to me that the police spent a lot of time going from house to house and checking out each house internally but they didn't think to look into that boat. The boat could be seen from the street.

 

[dsm]

What I don't understand what they were shooting at when they located the second suspect? They fired how many rounds and managed to hit him one time? Where did all the other rounds end up straying off to? These were trained LEO's? Sounds like a spray and pray situation instead of calculated precision.

 

[M-Cameron]

What I don't understand what they were shooting at when they located the second suspect? They fired how many rounds and managed to hit him one time? Where did all the other rounds end up straying off to? These were trained LEO's? Sounds like a spray and pray situation instead of calculated precision.

the kid was in the boat shooting at the police......

its kind of hard to hit something when its shooting back at you....especially when you cant see him because hes hiding inside a boat and its dark out.

 

[barnbwt]

Was the kid even shooting back? Every article I read says he'd pretty much bled out already, and had enough energy to shoot himself in the mouth--which is probably what prompted the barrage. Obviously those rounds were loosed blindly at a man behind cover, which is why he wasn't hamburger afterward. Much like the two women in Cali during the last Epic Man Hunt whose vehicle was absolutely perforated, yet both survived. Just like how you can get wild drive-by's with hundreds exchanged, and no injuries (that they know of).

The real questions are; if I go to jail or get sued for shooting a stranger through cover without identifying him first, why don't... If I go to jail or get sued for my through-and-throughs hitting bystanders because I unloaded at an attacker on a crowded street, why don't...If I shoot a person/vehicle because I thought they looked like something scary (i.e. matched a description) and wound innocents, I'd surely go to jail, so why don't...

Seems most people expect police (naiively or not) to be better trained, skilled, and disciplined than the average Joe; so why do we tolerate amateurish behavior? Why are they empowered to terrify innocent citizens (and themselves, btw) with draconian tactics like these that have been shown to be more harm than good? Police rightly have some legal lattitude they need to perform their jobs, but their training is supposed to ensure it is applied sparingly, and appropriately. The badge isn't a permission slip for reckless behavior.

Bostonians should've simply been told to keep an eye out, a phone with 911 on speed dial, and a gun handy for defense. They'd have found the guy in six hours. Lock down only makes sense in a confined area (like a building) with few hiding places, and when applied to larger areas, simply obscures the movements of the person being sought.

TCB

 

[gym]

All I can say is if you don't have a clear target, where do you get off firing a couple hundred rounds into a wooden boat. The sheer number of rounds into that small and area should have ended up with a dead body.
It sounds like a fish in a barrel situation and they missed the fish for the most part. If a citizen had fired off that amount of bullets and not hit the perp, they would probably be in some sort of trouble, like endangerment. Especially with infrared and night vision.
I am curious , as everyone should be, as to what the order was, who gave it, and what they were trying to accomplish If it was the death of the bad guy, then they surely messed that up, and can each of those rounds be accounted for where they ended up?
Why not just go in with an armored car and take him down, they knew he didn't have a bomb to the same certainty as they did when they made the collar.
Crush the boat, or hook it an roll it over, protected in the armored truck and take him after there was no explosion, instead of shooting into a wooden box.
This sounds like an audible from whoever was at the scene. Also heavy gas and non lethal "bean bag" rounds, rubber bullets, from behind armor would have ended this faster, and assured a healthier suspect to question. They could have easily ignited the boat, and lost all hope of using him to find out any more intelligence.

 

[dsm]

Yeah, I don't think he even had a weapon or explosives on him while hiding in the boat. Tough situation with lots of question, which may never be known nor answered, especially directly to the pubic without being hashed by the media.

Wonder how many in the area are firearms owners? Isn't the AR-15 banned and getting a carry license hard to get? I'd be evacuating if I wasn't armed!

 

[radiotom]

Did anyone see all the cops carrying around all those "Evil Black Rifles"? Why it's enough to create a total PANIC by the ecucation establishment

Their AR-15's were so well behaved! They must have been malfunctioning or something...whenever I pull mine out of the safe I have to wrestle it to the ground before it goes off and begins slaughtering every living thing in the area.

 

[M-Cameron]

Yes, the suspect did have a gun in the boat and yes, he did shoot at police, which provoked the firefight.....

Despite what you all want to believe, the police did not all just line up and unload into a boat on an unarmed suspect.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/22/second-boston-bombing-suspect-under-heavy-guard/

Wonder how many in the area are firearms owners? Isn't the AR-15 banned and getting a carry license hard to get? I'd be evacuating if I wasn't armed!

Ar15s are not banned in MA..... We currently have the same AWB as the '94 Clinton AWB....ar15 are legal so Long as they don't have too many "evil feature"...

And licensing is left up to each individual town.... Some towns are really easy to get a license in, others are more difficult.

 

[zbird]

Anyone notice, when the news was describing the black rifles the police were carrying, they said M4 rifles. Why is it when we have the same weapon, they call them assault rifles.