gut;1430844 wrote:Forget all the other bull**** you're trying to debate - ID to Capture in less than 1 day. That's actually pretty damn tough to criticize.

OSH;1430841 wrote: But, what perimeter will be set by 6 police officers (2 off-duty)?

OSH;1430841 wrote:GOOD! Because you sound ridiculous. Your claims and criticisms are too much. At least, I hope I did the job of shutting you up because many people are probably tired of your know-it-all attitude of law enforcement. I hope this thread can go back to positive contributions of information surrounding this whole tragedy.

Start up your own Law Enforcement 101 thread so you, Mulva, and Ender can inform the rest of the ignorant society (and law enforcement agencies) of proper protocol.



It does suck he got away from the initial shootout. I agree with you there.

But, what perimeter will be set by 6 police officers (2 off-duty)? The MIT campus officer was shot 5+ miles away. How big of a perimeter should there be? When police come up on the suspects, how much time should the suspects give the [6] officers to set up a perimeter?

Time of events there: MIT campus officer was shot around April 18 10:30pm; police locate SUV around 1:30am on April 19 in Watertown; sometime around 2:00am Suspect 1 dies in the shootout; 4:30am has a statement that all Watertown residents remain indoors; 5:50am states that Suspect 2 is the surviving suspect from the shootout; and 8:45pm Suspect 2 is captured.

gut;1430846 wrote:Are you repeating what I said, or saw the same news report? Because I've not been able to confirm that, and some witnesses (which are often mistaken) reported as many as a dozen cars in pursuit before the shootout started.

Based on what I've been able to piece together, that Watertown Police Chief may have actually been referring to his guys joining the chase. Although it sounded like his guy spotted the two cars (at that time they were just looking for the stolen SUV) and started the pursuit.

gut;1430844 wrote:No, you're criticizing the job they did in capturing him. And you're hung up on this civilian - like I said, it's highly unlikely he was going anywhere, or getting far on foot even if he's not injured. He would have been spotted. It's not so much they lost him as he was pinned down, and suffering from life threatening injuries. You're whole "without the civilian..." argument is a strawman.

I'm saying from getting an initial tip on a stolen car, they had these guys within 24 hours. Forget all the other bullshit you're trying to debate - ID to Capture in less than 1 day. That's actually pretty damn tough to criticize.

Mulva;1430850 wrote:That's a fair point. He almost definitely wasn't getting out of the boat. But I don't think it negates the point that the perimeter established was too small. If he wasn't injured so severely he likely would have been well outside of the perimeter. And I don't think it negates that he shouldn't have been able to escape the initial shootout.

Terrorist or not, I kind of feel like its the cops jobs to make sure that doesn't happen. If a suspect engages a firefight with police, they shouldn't escape the scene. If it was a random gangbanger who eluded police I would be saying the same thing. There's just a lot more focus on this situation.

reclegend22;1430847 wrote:OSH - You didn't shut **** up. You added nothing and were wrong about pretty much everything you said with regard to my posts. I stopped responding because I DGAF.

Mulva;1430848 wrote:Please stop putting me in Ender's category. It's making me depressed. I'm completely aware that I don't know it all and I'm not pretending I do.

They had 10,000 officers from numerous departments in the city by early afternoon. I'm pretty sure they could have had at least a couple dozen in the area of a shootout within 10 minutes. It should have taken maybe 5 cop cars to track a suspect who was fleeing on foot 3 blocks later.

I'm happy everything worked out. But if the suspect wasn't seriously wounded the person who went out to check his/her boat could have easily been killed. To act like the situation couldn't have been handled better is crazy in my opinion. And again, its just my opinion. I don't mean to be disrespectful, which I think I have been in a couple of previous posts so I'm sorry for that.

I'm sure we both have our reasons for believing what we do, and it doesn't seem like we're going to agree on this one.

OSH;1430849 wrote:No, I cited a source (for reclegend22) that said there were 6 officers, 2 of which may have been off-duty, involved in the shootout. Maybe the pursuit before had more, I don't know.
.

gut;1430854 wrote:No, I heard that from the Watertown Chief. But what wasn't clear to me, and what I couldn't confirm, is if it was only his guys in the shootout (initially or otherwise).

But I did see in the Washington Post one of the officers said they did not have enough resources in the chase of Suspect 2 to establish a proper perimeter. And following it all live they were moving the perimeter out through the night in what seemed to be a reactionary manner.

Mulva;1430850 wrote:That's a fair point. He almost definitely wasn't getting out of the boat. But I don't think it negates the point that the perimeter established was too small. If he wasn't injured so severely he likely would have been well outside of the perimeter. And I don't think it negates that he shouldn't have been able to escape the initial shootout.

OSH;1430855 wrote:I especially think this since the whole IDing of the suspects wasn't done until Thursday and it was all over on Friday night.

OSH;1430852 wrote:I simply do not think criticizing a scenario that we have no idea about is the best way to go about this thread. Like gut said, and I have been, from IDing the suspects to apprehension/death, it took a day. That's pretty good. And, at the same time, NO ONE was killed (depending on if you count the MIT campus officer who may/not have known the suspects' ID yet). The only injuries were to police officer(s) involved in a shootout.

We don't know how it could've been handled better. I am sure the authorities will iron out some mistakes they may have figured out. They are much more qualified than anyone on here to do such. Being an armchair police expert isn't the best way to do it, in my opinion.

Mulva;1430784 wrote:Right. Because every local and federal law enforcement resource available can't reasonably be expected to hold 1 (yes, 1) 19 year old terrorist suspect in check within a known area after a firefight with other cops. That's a strategy that could only be made after the fact.

What are you saying about the situation? "Kudos to law enforcement for following up on call from civilian outside of their perimeter saying 'Hey! terrorist is in my boat!'"

Glory Days;1430860 wrote:yeah, they did their job. they restricted the kid's freedom of movement. at that point it was just a matter of time. textbook.

Mulva;1430863 wrote:They limited it to everywhere outside of their perimeter. Which is where he was. Luckily he was wounded.

Mulva;1430850 wrote:
Terrorist or not, I kind of feel like its the cops jobs to make sure that doesn't happen. If a suspect engages a firefight with police, they shouldn't escape the scene. If it was a random gangbanger who eluded police I would be saying the same thing. There's just a lot more focus on this situation.

Mulva;1430863 wrote:They limited it to everywhere outside of their perimeter. Which is where he was. Luckily he was wounded.

gut;1430864 wrote:What's he going to do? Walk to Canada, unseen?

Glory Days;1430865 wrote:you ever been in a shoot out?

Glory Days;1430866 wrote:you do know that a perimeters take more than a few seconds to establish correctly...especially within a large neighborhood area right?

Mulva;1430867 wrote:Would have still been caught. Could have taken out more civilians before that point.

gut;1430870 wrote:Then he could have taken out more civilians at any point. But if civilians taken out is your measure, then why are you criticizing?

Mulva;1430867 wrote:

No. Relevancy?

Glory Days;1430872 wrote:of course its relevant. how can you say what the cops should have been doing if you dont know what its like to be in one? your perception of how a shoot out should end has been skewed by Michael Bay and Call of Duty.

Mulva;1430868 wrote:You do know what a perimeter is supposed to be, right?