4 ms·

We weren't forced to stay at home, nobody was arrested for being on the street, it was entirely voluntary. I think most people here were pretty happy with the o

by pivo 14y ago

We weren't forced to stay at home, nobody was arrested for being on the street, it was entirely voluntary. I think most people here were pretty happy with the outcome too. I simply don't have anything to complain about with regard to how the city handled the situation. In fact, that both suspects were accounted for by the end of the day was for me almost too good to be true.

kevincennis 14y ago
Agreed. This seems to be the general attitude of most people who were actually here. I was about a mile south of all of this in Brighton, and I can tell you that nobody I spoke with felt particularly scared. It was more like "let's stay inside and let them find this guy".
thoughtsimple 14y ago
Exactly. Very expertly handled by all involved. Including apprehending the suspect without killing him. This guy killed an 8 year old and two young women and a fellow officer yet he is still alive. Remarkable restraint in my opinion.
- manys 14y ago
  Due Process should not be remarkable.
  - Evbn 14y ago
    Post that again after you come home one day to a partially burned home and bits of debris with labeled1,2, and 4.
csixty4 14y ago
Yeah. People were still walking their dogs. My wife & I went out for a calzone at 12:30 and the place was packed. I don't think a single person I talked to online or off was "afraid". We were just staying out of the way, and with the T shut down there wasn't much to go out & do anyway.
kvb 14y ago
I felt that locking down Watertown, Newton, and Cambridge was unobjectionable, but my only quibble would be that I'm not sure it made sense to shut down so much of Boston itself.
larrys 14y ago
"We weren't forced to stay at home" People who weren't able to go to work and aren't salary most likely won't be paid. Or, employers will have to pay to employees who performed no work. The money has to come from somewhere, right? Unless of course the government wants to spread the cost over all the citizens and cover all expenses. And everything that comes as a result of the lockdown or whatever you want to call it. Ficticiously I can tell you that if I had servers located in that area and something happened where they couldn't be fixed remotely and were down (for an unrelated reason) I'd be pretty upset if the tech people or remote hands weren't at their job. Or the new motherboard couldn't be installed because the repairman wouldn't go to the colo. Why? Because my customers that are all over the world aren't going to give me a pass on this nor do I want to make excuses as to why things aren't working. Further, this was not an "act of god" in the sense of a disaster that there was no control over (a person made the decision to "suggest" nobody go outside and that will have consequences). It's easy for people who have only minor things as a result of a lockdown (cancelled classes or you work for a big corporation or you are unemployed) but not everybody falls into the same category. We all aren't government employees who get paid regardless, right? The point is simply that a cost benefit calculation needs to be done. (Like they do when they try to justify hosting the Olympics or Superbowl). The comparison (if correct I haven't checked) to Detroit is valid somewhat. Obviously in any case we can assume that if there was 1 or 2 of these bombings per month any city wouldn't be shutting down they would realize that it simply can't be handled that way. Fwiw - I'm not in the Boston area and had no consequences as a result of the decision.
- thoughtsimple 14y ago
  FWIW I work in Boston and only get paid for the hours I work. I had no problem losing part of an 8 hour day for this.
  - larrys 14y ago
    That's fine of course but you have to understand that different people have different circumstances. I have money and I don't live hand to mouth in any way. So I might feel the same way (but can't say for sure in all honesty). But many people do (live hand to mouth) and sometimes for circumstances that are beyond their control and sometimes of course simply because they make the wrong choices. My point is simply while it is great that you in particular had no issue losing pay (or I might have possibly feel the same way) not everyone would - I'm sure you will agree with that. Not to mention that the crowd effect many people would simply make decisions based on what others are doing or social pressure.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

by pivo 14y ago

kevincennis 14y ago

Agreed. This seems to be the general attitude of most people who were actually here. I was about a mile south of all of this in Brighton, and I can tell you that nobody I spoke with felt particularly scared. It was more like "let's stay inside and let them find this guy".

thoughtsimple 14y ago

Exactly. Very expertly handled by all involved. Including apprehending the suspect without killing him. This guy killed an 8 year old and two young women and a fellow officer yet he is still alive. Remarkable restraint in my opinion.

manys 14y ago
Due Process should not be remarkable.
- Evbn 14y ago
  Post that again after you come home one day to a partially burned home and bits of debris with labeled1,2, and 4.

csixty4 14y ago

Yeah. People were still walking their dogs. My wife & I went out for a calzone at 12:30 and the place was packed. I don't think a single person I talked to online or off was "afraid". We were just staying out of the way, and with the T shut down there wasn't much to go out & do anyway.

kvb 14y ago

I felt that locking down Watertown, Newton, and Cambridge was unobjectionable, but my only quibble would be that I'm not sure it made sense to shut down so much of Boston itself.

larrys 14y ago

"We weren't forced to stay at home" People who weren't able to go to work and aren't salary most likely won't be paid. Or, employers will have to pay to employees who performed no work. The money has to come from somewhere, right? Unless of course the government wants to spread the cost over all the citizens and cover all expenses. And everything that comes as a result of the lockdown or whatever you want to call it. Ficticiously I can tell you that if I had servers located in that area and something happened where they couldn't be fixed remotely and were down (for an unrelated reason) I'd be pretty upset if the tech people or remote hands weren't at their job. Or the new motherboard couldn't be installed because the repairman wouldn't go to the colo. Why? Because my customers that are all over the world aren't going to give me a pass on this nor do I want to make excuses as to why things aren't working. Further, this was not an "act of god" in the sense of a disaster that there was no control over (a person made the decision to "suggest" nobody go outside and that will have consequences). It's easy for people who have only minor things as a result of a lockdown (cancelled classes or you work for a big corporation or you are unemployed) but not everybody falls into the same category. We all aren't government employees who get paid regardless, right? The point is simply that a cost benefit calculation needs to be done. (Like they do when they try to justify hosting the Olympics or Superbowl). The comparison (if correct I haven't checked) to Detroit is valid somewhat. Obviously in any case we can assume that if there was 1 or 2 of these bombings per month any city wouldn't be shutting down they would realize that it simply can't be handled that way. Fwiw - I'm not in the Boston area and had no consequences as a result of the decision.

thoughtsimple 14y ago
FWIW I work in Boston and only get paid for the hours I work. I had no problem losing part of an 8 hour day for this.
- larrys 14y ago
  That's fine of course but you have to understand that different people have different circumstances. I have money and I don't live hand to mouth in any way. So I might feel the same way (but can't say for sure in all honesty). But many people do (live hand to mouth) and sometimes for circumstances that are beyond their control and sometimes of course simply because they make the wrong choices. My point is simply while it is great that you in particular had no issue losing pay (or I might have possibly feel the same way) not everyone would - I'm sure you will agree with that. Not to mention that the crowd effect many people would simply make decisions based on what others are doing or social pressure.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]