re: #63 celticdragon

I fucking hate myself for saying it, but Limbaugh has a valid point on this one, IMO.

Dorner was a bigger threat by an order of magnitude, but nobody suggested locking down Southern California to get him. Likewise, dangerous criminals who go on spree killings are an almost weekly fact of life in America, but we do not lock down major metropolitan areas to catch them and confine hundreds of thousands of citizens to their homes (forcing Boston PD to deliver milk to families…seen in a viral picture)

If they wanted to terrorize America and damage civil liberties, they succeeded beyond their wildest fucking hopes.

Of course, if this had happened under a Rmoney administration, Limbaugh would be calling the lockdown prudent and sensible.

I think it was unnecessary, damaging to public morale and utterly disproportionate to the threat these two idiots posed.

Considering what those two were pumping out during the chase — grenades included, last I heard — having the city on lockdown was incredibly prudent. There was a ton of potential for collateral damage during that, and the best way to avoid it was to make sure the citizenry was well out of the way. I’m as opposed to police-state-ism as the next left-leaning person, but sometimes the best course of action is to clear out the china shop before the bull gets loose inside it.