Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

Although police feared he was heavily armed, the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing had no firearms when he came under a barrage of police gunfire that struck the boat where he was hiding, according to multiple federal law enforcement officials.

Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place - The Washington Post

Wow, and the media made it sound like the punk had a Dillion Mini-gun.

 

[jeffC]

So then that "suicide" business of his shooting himself in the throat is BS too. Good. Some cop shot him in the jaw. Hope it hurt

 

[beaker]

All day Friday was "well armed with assault rifles". Effing inept media.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

So then that "suicide" business of his shooting himself in the throat is BS too.

Yup. The worst part is the fact they let 200 rounds fly in a residential neighborhood at a wounded, unarmed suspect.

I could care less about the punk, but what about the innocent civilians?

 

[jmcnh]

I wonder if there will ever be an accounting of all the rounds fired in both "shootouts"... both from LEO and from speedbump doesn't sound like flashbang ever had a gun.

 

[drgrant]

Yup. The worst part is the fact they let 200 rounds fly in a residential neighborhood at a wounded, unarmed suspect.

I could care less about the punk, but what about the innocent civilians?

Did anyone innocent get hit by bullets? Not saying it's not dangerous for them to do what they did, but at some point we have to draw a line on pant crapping.

-Mike

 

[cekim]

Did anyone innocent get hit by bullets? Not saying it's not dangerous for them to do what they did, but at some point we have to draw a line on pant crapping.

-Mike

None that I have seen, though people have posted pictures of holes in their walls, chairs, etc.... in their house. So bullets were clearly going places they should not have with friendlies down-range.

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

Did anyone innocent get hit by bullets? Not saying it's not dangerous for them to do what they did, but at some point we have to draw a line on pant crapping.

It's not "pant crapping" in my opinion. There was obviously not any return fire, so why the need for 200 rounds?

 

[joeendris]

Did anyone innocent get hit by bullets? Not saying it's not dangerous for them to do what they did, but at some point we have to draw a line on pant crapping.

-Mike

So, your logic is "who cares, nobody got hurt"?

 

[irishfan]

So what started all the shooting? They couldnt see him from the ground, he obvioulsy did not point a gun at them...so youre saying that one guy freaked, sent a round his way and everyone did the same? What caused the intial shot ? I am not criticizing, just curious. The whole thing is curious.

 

[Roland Deschain]

So what started all the shooting? They couldnt see him from the ground, he obvioulsy did not point a gun at them...so youre saying that one guy freaked, sent a round his way and everyone did the same? What caused the intial shot ? I am not criticizing, just curious. The whole thing is curious.

Too many cooks in kitchen.

 

[Prepper]

So, your logic is "who cares, nobody got hurt"?

I'm sure that is exactly how it would go down if I shot 200 rounds in the general area of an unarmed bad guy. I'd just tell the cops about the LTC and they would thank me for a job well done.

 

[drgrant]

Too many cooks in kitchen.

The part that I find amusing is they used a robot but they couldn't figure out with the robot that the guy didn't have a gun. What kind of a camera did it have on it, something from 1965?

-Mike

 

[Prepper]

The part that I find amusing is they used a robot but they couldn't figure out with the robot that the guy didn't have a gun. What kind of a camera did it have on it, something from 1965?

-Mike

They should have gone to brookstone and picked up an AR Parrott for $300, then flown it over the boat.

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

The part that I find amusing is they used a robot but they couldn't figure out with the robot that the guy didn't have a gun.

I believe the mag dumps happened prior to the robot deployment.

The media described it as a "running gun battle". Guess it was a bit one-sided...

 

[drgrant]

So, your logic is "who cares, nobody got hurt"?

Pretty much. If one of us gets into a firefight with a BG and nobody but the BG gets hurt, even though you might miss a few times, do you want to be held responsible for errant bullets that didn't hurt anyone? (other than say, perhaps, for property damage. )

Course the "happy fun ball" thing here is the guy didn't even have a gun, so the cops were really only having a "firefight with themselves" If any one of us engaged someone like that (who was unarmed) we'd be in jail in 10 seconds.

-Mike

- - - Updated - - -

I believe the mag dumps happened prior to the robot deployment.

Apparently they did it in the wrong order.

-Mike

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

Apparently they did it in the wrong order.

+1. Shoot first, ask questions later.

 

[jcr]

duplicate from early yesterday:

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...n/205029-marathon-bomber-had-no-gun-boat.html

 

[joeendris]

Pretty much. If one of us gets into a firefight with a BG and nobody but the BG gets hurt, even though you might miss a few times, do you want to be held responsible for errant bullets that didn't hurt anyone? (other than say, perhaps, for property damage. )

Course the "happy fun ball" thing here is the guy didn't even have a gun, so the cops were really only having a "firefight with themselves" If any one of us engaged someone like that (who was unarmed) we'd be in jail in 10 seconds.

-Mike

-1, Mike. Accountability is #1. This attitude of "meh, just shoot over that way <waves hand in a direction>" and saying it's ok for cops, is bullshit.


Makes me wonder if the cop that got shot got hit by friendly fire....

Also, who's going to be held responsible for shooting holes thru walls, into homes, etc? How many bedrooms with innocents have holes in them now?

Oh wait, what's that? They couldn't SEE the BG? The why the **** were they shooting???? Something about knowing your target and what lies beyond seems to keep rearing its head. Or does that not apply to the boys in blue when they're crapping themselves, only us when face-to-face with a BG?

 

[mattyw]

None that I have seen, though people have posted pictures of holes in their walls, chairs, etc.... in their house. So bullets were clearly going places they should not have with friendlies down-range.

one had one from the first shootout in his computer chair. I assume I place he is at least occasionally. scary to think about

 

[EC1]

It's not "pant crapping" in my opinion. There was obviously not any return fire, so why the need for 200 rounds?

Seems like the police were lucky that no one was hit with friendly fire.

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

200 rounds + unarmed suspect = hit squad

 

[Quiet]

That old police sergeant(?) fell on his sword immediately, saying that he saw movement, thought he saw a gun and fired, and that all the other cops heard his shots and thought that they were being fired upon.

How would he know that so quickly? Hundreds of shots and he knows the motivations of each one? A more suspicious person than I might wonder: "They haven't written any reports yet and they're all talking and comparing notes already, perhaps?"

But not me.

 

[TomH]

Pretty much. If one of us gets into a firefight with a BG and nobody but the BG gets hurt, even though you might miss a few times, do you want to be held responsible for errant bullets that didn't hurt anyone? (other than say, perhaps, for property damage. )

Sorry, but fail. For police, if they can't safely engage a target they shouldn't be doing it at all. The only exception should be if they can't retreat. Also: if you're aiming down the street at someone, and there are bullet holes in 2nd story apartments off the side of the street, you're doing it wrong. There was a thread (not sure which one) that showed a picture of a bullet hole in someone's desk chair, about chest level. I can't go shooting at someone's house randomly, I'd be in a cell.

 

[mattyw]

Sorry, but fail. For police, if they can't safely engage a target they shouldn't be doing it at all. The only exception should be if they can't retreat. Also: if you're aiming down the street at someone, and there are bullet holes in 2nd story apartments off the side of the street, you're doing it wrong. There was a thread (not sure which one) that showed a picture of a bullet hole in someone's desk chair, about chest level. I can't go shooting at someone's house randomly, I'd be in a cell.

and I believe that chair was on at least the second story

 

[wahsben]

So much for trying to take him alive.

 

[cekim]

So much for trying to take him alive.

Stop, bang, bang, resisting, bang, bang.

 

[slugworth]

I heard this morning that it was a cop on the third floor of the next doors house that fired at him first cause he thought he had an explosive devise. So when that happend the other cops thought he was firing at them and opened fire on the boat.

 

[joeendris]

Stop, bang, bang, resisting, bang, bang.

 

[rchap36]

Did anyone innocent get hit by bullets? Not saying it's not dangerous for them to do what they did, but at some point we have to draw a line on pant crapping.

-Mike

Mike: Look at it like this if some guy broke in you home with a gun and you pulled your gun and 1 of your rounds went out the window would you be in trouble?
there is a video of cars and homes hit with rounds if it was for the safty of the people in watertown why the hell would you open fire like that? let them leave and nail them in a parking lot just saying Look I was not there but I would hope that I would not send 200 rounds down the street someone said he was only hit afew time so there was 100+rounds that hit something right?