4 ms·

Random person with mental problems? Like all of the other shootings, stabbings, etc that have occurred in the last 10 years.

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
But it is so professional. Two explosions, within seconds of each other. And these were decently powerful too considering they had to be small enough to hide in the crowds. You might be right, but something about this just makes me thing /organised./
- smacktoward 14y ago
  Presumably if it was some organized group we'll find out when they take credit for it. At this point we don't even know for sure if there were bombs involved -- we know there were explosions, but an explosion can happen for reasons other than a bomb going off. Again, all speculating does at this point is ramp up fear and anxiety, which doesn't help anybody.
- kelnos 14y ago
  The precision doesn't rule out a lone perpetrator. Just because someone is "crazy" in the sense that they'd do something like this, it doesn't mean they lack the ability to make intricate plans.
  - zenogais 14y ago
    Agreed. Crazy is just a dismissive term. Perfectly sane people can do things like murder other people - we have tons of them walking around today but we call them Veterans. Crazy, in this sense, should probably be replaced by societally dysfunctional.
- corin_ 14y ago
  Casualty count seems low for something "professional" I would have thought - though certainly I'm no expert.
  - pekk 14y ago
    What sort of casualty counts did IRA bombings have in London?
    - corin_ 14y ago
      Quite a few had bigger casualty lists, and many were more specifically aimed at political targets rather than large numbers of public, but fair point that a bunch were very similar or worse-done. Two points I would make about the comparison though, firstly the IRA campaign was very much one of fear more than one of death - deaths were an added bonus. Of course maybe that's the case in Boston as well, but it's too early to know right now. Secondly, the word used was "professional" - were the IRA professional? I guess in the context of terrorist attacks, that's probably not really a relevant term.
      - peejaybee 14y ago
        Actually, the IRA typically issued warnings beforehand -- soon enough to evacuate, but too late to find the bomb. I've heard it described as a calculation to minimize civilian deaths that might stiffen British resolve. The best description I have seen is here: http://exiledonline.com/wn-38-ira-vs-al-qaeda-i-was-wrong/ http://exiledonline.com/wn-38-ira-vs-al-qaeda-i-was-wrong/
      - DanBC 14y ago
        The IRA had structure, with ranks. They had a political wing. They had funding and training and available weapons. They had PR and issued coded warnings and press releases. Compare that to the London Nail Bomber (who killed three, and maimed many more) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland) who operated alone and got no funding from others.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- tomkarlo 14y ago
  Not sure how it seems professional. Compare it to the London bus bombings or Madrid, and it seems much more haphazard. For one thing, had it happened about two hours before, there was a much larger national / international audience when the winners were finishing.
tomjen3 14y ago
No they tend to use guns or knifes (or in one case, bow and arrow) because they want to be up and close with the victims. Bombs fit either muslims or crazy homegrown terroists, but those tend to put their bombs in cars, (and you can't park a car there) so my guess is muslims.
- rdouble 14y ago
  There have only been 3 major terror bombings in US history where cars have been used. One was the original WTC bombing. The other two were OK City and Bath School, back in 1927. There were a couple minor car bombs. Most other domestic US bombers of all stripes used pipe bombs or suitcase bombs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago

But it is so professional. Two explosions, within seconds of each other. And these were decently powerful too considering they had to be small enough to hide in the crowds. You might be right, but something about this just makes me thing /organised./

smacktoward 14y ago
Presumably if it was some organized group we'll find out when they take credit for it. At this point we don't even know for sure if there were bombs involved -- we know there were explosions, but an explosion can happen for reasons other than a bomb going off. Again, all speculating does at this point is ramp up fear and anxiety, which doesn't help anybody.
kelnos 14y ago
The precision doesn't rule out a lone perpetrator. Just because someone is "crazy" in the sense that they'd do something like this, it doesn't mean they lack the ability to make intricate plans.
- zenogais 14y ago
  Agreed. Crazy is just a dismissive term. Perfectly sane people can do things like murder other people - we have tons of them walking around today but we call them Veterans. Crazy, in this sense, should probably be replaced by societally dysfunctional.
corin_ 14y ago
Casualty count seems low for something "professional" I would have thought - though certainly I'm no expert.
- pekk 14y ago
  What sort of casualty counts did IRA bombings have in London?
  - corin_ 14y ago
    Quite a few had bigger casualty lists, and many were more specifically aimed at political targets rather than large numbers of public, but fair point that a bunch were very similar or worse-done. Two points I would make about the comparison though, firstly the IRA campaign was very much one of fear more than one of death - deaths were an added bonus. Of course maybe that's the case in Boston as well, but it's too early to know right now. Secondly, the word used was "professional" - were the IRA professional? I guess in the context of terrorist attacks, that's probably not really a relevant term.
    - peejaybee 14y ago
      Actually, the IRA typically issued warnings beforehand -- soon enough to evacuate, but too late to find the bomb. I've heard it described as a calculation to minimize civilian deaths that might stiffen British resolve. The best description I have seen is here: http://exiledonline.com/wn-38-ira-vs-al-qaeda-i-was-wrong/ http://exiledonline.com/wn-38-ira-vs-al-qaeda-i-was-wrong/
    - DanBC 14y ago
      The IRA had structure, with ranks. They had a political wing. They had funding and training and available weapons. They had PR and issued coded warnings and press releases. Compare that to the London Nail Bomber (who killed three, and maimed many more) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland) who operated alone and got no funding from others.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tomkarlo 14y ago
Not sure how it seems professional. Compare it to the London bus bombings or Madrid, and it seems much more haphazard. For one thing, had it happened about two hours before, there was a much larger national / international audience when the winners were finishing.

tomjen3 14y ago

No they tend to use guns or knifes (or in one case, bow and arrow) because they want to be up and close with the victims. Bombs fit either muslims or crazy homegrown terroists, but those tend to put their bombs in cars, (and you can't park a car there) so my guess is muslims.

rdouble 14y ago
There have only been 3 major terror bombings in US history where cars have been used. One was the original WTC bombing. The other two were OK City and Bath School, back in 1927. There were a couple minor car bombs. Most other domestic US bombers of all stripes used pipe bombs or suitcase bombs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States