• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

someone with a gun in the Burlington Mall

Call it morbid curiousity, but I really want to see all these cowboys with their fancy gear in action. I would like to see them put forth their best efforts in stopping a Columbine/Mumbai style attack on a large complex. Just a force-on-force exercise. Can these varied departments just switch gears from a patrol cop to a full on coordinated assault force against a well-armed, disciplined, and highly motivated aggressor, or do they just like playing dress-up with their DHS grant money?

I'd like to see if the taxpayer is getting their monies worth with this circus.
Is that why you called it in?
 
Wasn't me. They hung up on me when I said there was a red-haired Santa with machine gun running around MA.

now-i-have-a-machine-gun-die-hard.jpg
 
Call it morbid curiousity, but I really want to see all these cowboys with their fancy gear in action. I would like to see them put forth their best efforts in stopping a Columbine/Mumbai style attack on a large complex. Just a force-on-force exercise. Can these varied departments just switch gears from a patrol cop to a full on coordinated assault force against a well-armed, disciplined, and highly motivated aggressor, or do they just like playing dress-up with their DHS grant money?

I'd like to see if the taxpayer is getting their monies worth with this circus.

Columbine and Mumbai were two different things. Columbine was a couple of emo twits that needed their parents to take belts to them more often, and coddle them a little less. Mumbai was a force that would probably mop the floor with our "professionals". I'd buy it on pay per view though, I can see it now... the "DHS Vs..." series.
 
Columbine and Mumbai were two different things. Columbine was a couple of emo twits that needed their parents to take belts to them more often, and coddle them a little less. Mumbai was a force that would probably mop the floor with our "professionals". I'd buy it on pay per view though, I can see it now... the "DHS Vs..." series.

Are you trying to tell me Mumbai isn't in Colorado?

You get the point though. If they had to gather what, 50-70 guys with guns and four helicopters for an umbrella, how many would they need for 4 guys with belt-feds pulling a MW2 airport mission? I'm guessing they're gonna try to park an aircraft carrier in the Charles soon, just in case.
 
Are you trying to tell me Mumbai isn't in Colorado?

You get the point though. If they had to gather what, 50-70 guys with guns and four helicopters for an umbrella, how many would they need for 4 guys with belt-feds pulling a MW2 airport mission? I'm guessing they're gonna try to park an aircraft carrier in the Charles soon, just in case.
Lock-down - fixes everything, silly...
 
Are you trying to tell me Mumbai isn't in Colorado?

You get the point though. If they had to gather what, 50-70 guys with guns and four helicopters for an umbrella, how many would they need for 4 guys with belt-feds pulling a MW2 airport mission? I'm guessing they're gonna try to park an aircraft carrier in the Charles soon, just in case.
Mumbai was worse than that. There were 10 attackers who split into several teams and committed simultaneous attacks. While I suspect our police agencies are better trained and equipped than those in Mumbai (some armed with Enfield bolt-action rifles), I still think it would be a disaster with hundreds dead and injured.

I'm surprised that we haven't seen a Mumbai-style attack in the US.
 
Mumbai was worse than that. There were 10 attackers who split into several teams and committed simultaneous attacks. While I suspect our police agencies are better trained and equipped than those in Mumbai (some armed with Enfield bolt-action rifles), I still think it would be a disaster with hundreds dead and injured.

I'm surprised that we haven't seen a Mumbai-style attack in the US.

Because they have youtube, and they're aware that the US is loaded with people like this:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Intent. If someone yells fire in a movie theater, knowing that there is no fire, their intent is to create panic. In this case, someone thought they saw a gun. They were mistaken, but their intent was not to create panic.

It was a sarcastic/rhetorical comment - understood...

Though the intent here was to spread the irrational/fear panic the caller was experiencing... [thinking]

And we all know what is paved with "good intentions".
 
There is a differece between intentionally calling in a false alarm and calling in a situation that you incorrectly thought was a real threat.

I would contend that in the second category we should further distinguish beween case where the caller "should have known better" and where the caller in all good faith thought there was a real problem.

On the other hand that sort of implies the .gov should have the "right" to determine if the caller was a good caller or bad caller and their fate. This would be a bad thing. I guess all we can do is gripe about how the Nordbats "should" have handled it...



I'm beginning to think with the Internet, instantaneous communications and knowledge of events everywhere, ready access to knowledge on anything from how to make lye soap to how to build a nuke device, maybe we (modern technological society) snacked on that damned apple somewhere along the line. Thats ALL we need, a bunch of nekkid NES'rs.

God said:
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
 
Back
Top Bottom