Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

pastebin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 266 posts

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#61

Post by Spooky23 »

ck2 wrote: post #4

It took hundreds of police and probably millions of dollars to catch a teenager who didn't even bother to leave the area or go into hiding - and even TWEETED after the event. If we were attacked by real, organized terrorists, we are screwed. I really do not get all the celebration and back-patting, it's disturbing. Oh and while this huge distraction was going on - no background checks for guns, the most basic bill fa…

I guess that it is easy to opine from afar when you have no skin in the game. The government has an obligation to protect public safety, and madmen on the loose shooting policemen and tossing bombs out car windows certainly qualifies as a public safety event.

I suppose if Mr. Stallman's home or office were to catch fire, we shouldn't paralyze the immediate area with noisy fire trucks.

The background check issue is a completely separate, legislative one. Democracy is a messy thing -- the democrats killed the bills so they could come back and fight another day.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#62

Post by grinich »

ck2 wrote: post #4

It took hundreds of police and probably millions of dollars to catch a teenager who didn't even bother to leave the area or go into hiding - and even TWEETED after the event. If we were attacked by real, organized terrorists, we are screwed. I really do not get all the celebration and back-patting, it's disturbing. Oh and while this huge distraction was going on - no background checks for guns, the most basic bill fa…

> I really do not get all the celebration and back-patting, it's disturbing.

This is way less about a real accomplishment, and more about what people need to feel. After the bombings, people felt vulnerable and scared. And for the police, I'm sure also embarrassed and angry. Catching this kid is the vindication they all needed emotionally. I'm just glad they didn't get overzealous and kill him, as most manhunts end.

Cops were sending around a photo of the first suspect after he died, saying that seeing it was "cathartic." Apparently another is circulating of the second captured suspect, with the caption "WE GOT HIM." It's like a locker room after winning a football game.

It's true there was danger and violence here, and the death of innocent good people. But the response today was largely about ego and fear of vulnerability. There were literally thousands of SWAT units in Watertown today, going from door to door, publicly demonstrating America's reaction to terrorist attacks. It was about sending a message to the citizens and police of Boston, as well as the rest of the country.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#63

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

CurtMonash wrote: post #30
subsystem wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were actually about to abort the "bruteforce" operation before they got a call that someone had found the suspect in their boat, outside the perimeter. I really hope they evalute the operation properly. A good outcome doesn't necessarily validate the process.

If they had a helicopter that could detect infrared, which indeed sufficed to find him under the boat, why wasn't that already deployed to look into shed, boats, etc. around the neighborhood? (Including outside the main perimeter.) I doubt the reason was 4th Amendment scruples.

I think you'd need to equip the helicopter with precision grid-flying software/hardware such as is in SAR aircraft and Crop Dusters. FLIR can indeed see "through" some things, but the successful FLIR uses that you see on youtube and TV are usually cases where the pilot has a very small area to search. A comprehensive search of more than a few blocks would need multiple craft and lots of fuel. I agree that the authorities seem to lack awareness of the Bill of Rights.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#64

Post by emily37 »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #22
sergiotapia wrote: post #3

>4 people killed in a week is not a lot compared with the background level of deaths in the US. It's not as many as in the Texas explosion. Car accidents in the US kill around 100 people a day, and surely grievously injure hundreds more. ============================ Difference being of course, one was a deliberate attack on human life, and the other a very _very_ unfortunate accident. Stupid comparison to make for th…

I hate to say it, but Stallman has a good point. Plant safety cuts into profits, left to itself management will not encourage safe working practice - there must be meaningful oversight by an outside agency. Thanks to regulatory capture oversight is weak, and this is not an accident but an intended outcome of the political system.

I really don't see what this has to do with the Boston bombing or people's reactions to the events of today. I took a different argument to the Holocaust extreme in another comment and it applies just as well here: why should we be "bent out of shape" today about plant safety when genocide kills millions times more people?

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#65

Post by marknutter »

tkahn6 wrote: post #35

> 4 people killed in a week is not a lot compared with the background level of deaths in the US It's not every day that people have their legs blown off while enjoying a public social event. There's an expectation of danger while driving a car. There is no expectation of danger while spectating at the Boston Marathon. It's not complicated.

> There is no expectation of danger while spectating at the Boston Marathon.

There also is no expectation of getting struck by lightning while spectating at the Boston Marathon, yet that is much more likely to happen than getting hit by a terrorist's bomb.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#67

Post by anon808 »

platz wrote: post #42
acabal wrote: post #29

As unfeeling as his statement might sound, he's entirely correct. I told a family member today that the saddest thing about this whole Boston incident isn't the (still very sad and senseless) loss of life and limb, but that it's undoubtedly going to be used as an excuse to further degrade civil rights nationwide in the coming years, to continue to justify state-sponsored human suffering like Guantanamo, and to furthe…

You're wrong. The saddest thing is the loss of life and limb.

The whole point of those rights is to avoid massive loss of life and limb in the long run.

I think there's a reason the us has been relatively stable over a long period of time, and it has everything to do with civil rights that serve as another check to the power of the government. As the balance is tipped in the favor of government power over civil power, the chances for large scale loss of life and limb (civil wars, internal power grabs etc.) increases.

History provides good examples of ever powerful governments, spectacularly collapsing, and crushing way more people than are killed from individuals abusing 'lax' civil rights.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#68

Post by mpyne »

[deleted] wrote: post #41

[deleted]

Yes, I can definitely see absolutely no possible way that a bunch of people leaving their houses to go to work or run errands in the morning could possibly have made it any more difficult for the police to find Tsarnaev. And there definitely would have been no additional risk of police getting antsy and shooting the wrong person, nosiree.

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#69

Post by tkahn6 »

marknutter wrote: post #65
tkahn6 wrote: post #35

> 4 people killed in a week is not a lot compared with the background level of deaths in the US It's not every day that people have their legs blown off while enjoying a public social event. There's an expectation of danger while driving a car. There is no expectation of danger while spectating at the Boston Marathon. It's not complicated.

> There is no expectation of danger while spectating at the Boston Marathon. There also is no expectation of getting struck by lightning while spectating at the Boston Marathon, yet that is much more likely to happen than getting hit by a terrorist's bomb.

That is a true statement, but what is your point?

Re: Richard Stallman response to Boston Police efforts

#70

Post by rdouble »

ck2 wrote: post #58
mindcrime wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh and while this huge distraction was going on - no background checks or database for guns. Background checks are already required for almost all gun sales, including ones at gun-shows. This whole discussion is a red-herring. And what the f%!# good do you think a "database for guns" is going to do? You think the terrorists buy their guns over the counter, with legit IDs and happily register them with the authorities…

Why do we bother to have laws at all if people are going to break them? I mean look at all the silencers people have to get away with murder - oh wait, they don't - because they are illegal and highly regulated.

Suppressors are legal in all but 11 states if you fill out the paperwork.
Post reply on HN