It was a gruesome scene in Boston on April 15. Three people were killed and hundreds injured when two bombs exploded near the crowded finish line of the Boston Marathon, one of the oldest and largest marathons in the world. With so many people left bloodied, fourteen requiring amputation, many eyewitnesses and Americans were left feeling vulnerable and angry, asking who could have done such a horrible thing.
After such a tragic event, it is natural for people to be on edge, to be scared, and to want justice. With reports coming in that the two bombers had been identified and engaged in firefights with police, throwing bombs out of a car and killing a police officer, one cannot help but feel fear. But these reports are not completely true and led to a willingness to give up certain liberties for a little more security. It did not seem irrational or wrong to leave oneself to the mercy of the state as it shut down one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country, enacting, in a sense, martial law. However, as Benjamin Franklin so eloquently put it, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
The FBI took over the investigation of the bombings and several days later, on April 18th, released two photos of the suspected perpetrators. Those suspects were soon identified as brothers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
That night, the two brothers allegedly shot and killed an MIT police officer, carjacked an SUV, and engaged in a shootout with the police in the Boston suburb of Watertown. In the shootout, the brothers reportedly shot at police officers with an “arsenal of guns” and threw explosives out of the stolen car, according to a USA Today article. Such reports painted these men to be extremely dangerous, homicidal maniacs.
It was later discovered, according to a story by the Huffington Post, only one 9mm pistol was recovered from the scene that was in possession of the brothers. One pistol is hardly an “arsenal of guns.” According to another story, one on Boston.com, the police officer who was injured in the firefight, Richard Donahue, was injured by friendly fire. The initial reports sound more like a sensationalized, nationalistic, fear mongering propaganda, as opposed to hard hitting, factual news. In no way were the actions of the Tsarnaev brothers justified, but they were exaggerated.
In the firefight, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed and Dzhokhar was injured, but able to escape.
The following morning, April 19th, a twenty block area of Watertown was locked down. Residents were told not to leave their homes or answer the door for anyone but a properly identified police officer.
SWAT teams rode through the streets in armoured vehicles, as two blackhawk helicopters circled the area. Police officers in tactical gear went door to door and searched people’s homes at gunpoint without a warrant, and often without the consent of the person.
Much of the Boston metropolitan area was also shut down. Civilians were asked not to leave their homes, schools and businesses were closed. All public transit was shut down. Taxi services were suspended, as was the Amtrak service to and from Boston. Boston and the surrounding areas were a ghost town.
After hours of fruitless searching, the shelter-in-place order was lifted at 6:10. Now free to leave his house, a Watertown resident went outside to check his property. He noticed that the cover to his boat was loose. He looked in and saw a bloodied man inside, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The resident quickly retreated to his house and called the police. Within minutes, officers had arrived, and many more were on the way.
Authorities surrounded the boat and, when Tsarnaev was seen poking at the tarp, unloaded bullets at the boat. It was initially reported that he was armed and shooting at officers. However, as an article by the Washington Post describes, Tsarnaev was later found to have been unarmed. He was then taken into custody in critical condition, suffering from multiple gunshot wounds.
After Tsarnaev was captured there was a collective sigh of relief around the country. Almost everyone had been following the story, anxiously awaiting new developments. There was an angst that was shared nationwide. Many only knew that an entire city was shut down as a deranged terrorist was on the loose. It was not clear what condition he was in, or if he was armed. Americans, for the most part, assumed the worst.
It has generally been an agreeable solution, cordoning off Boston. It makes strategic sense to vacate the streets and go door to door when in search of a killer. It would make it near impossible for him to move around and eventually the police would wander upon his hiding spot. But forcibly searching peoples’ homes at gunpoint and without a warrant is not only ethically wrong, it is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”
There were no warrants to search any person’s home. Reportedly, the police were conducting voluntary searches with consent from the party being searched, but numerous videos on YouTube show this to not be the case. Many people were ripped from their homes as they were searched without a warrant. It is hard to say no when ten men in full riot gear are shouting and pointing assault rifles in your face.
These actions created a greater sense of terror not only in Watertown and Boston, but across the nation.
Eyewitnesses to the bombing reported being unaware that the explosions were, in fact, bombs. Many believed the explosions to have been a transformer or something of the sort. One witness said it wasn’t for over 10 minutes that he heard the word “bomb”.
When the bombs exploded, terror was not on the forefront of everyone’s mind. Concern certainly was, but people did not immediately believe it to be a terrorist attack. ABC News did a piece describing citizens running towards the scene to help, not away in fear.
When Tsarnaev was found hiding under a boat, it was a civilian, after the lockdown had been lifted, who discovered him, not a police officer with an assault rifle going door to door.
If the police had asked civilians to be on the lookout, to report suspicious activity, and to search their property, rather than cower helplessly inside their homes, not only would the investigation have most likely ended sooner, it would have been legal, and it would have spared many from the terror attack enacted by the U.S. government in their lockdown of Boston.
