What I'm seeing here is sensationalist hype in order to slander something that didn't exactly happen and fearmonger for personal political views.

• People were allowed to leave their homes at any time of the day, yet chose not to.

• It was not the entire city, it was only a section of the city that they've pinned the suspect hiding in.

• The police did not come barging into homes without permission. They've asked and were allowed in by the homeowners to do a quick search for the suspect. Why did they search people's homes? In case the bomber decided to take a family hostage or was hiding, which he was doing when they caught him hiding under a tarp in someone's backyard. No, the homeowner was not arrested for that.

• Once they've captured the suspect, all of the forces quickly packed up and headed off, leaving the homeowners further free to do what they so wish.

• As for being over-the-top armed SWAT teams and police in bulletproof vests scouring the area? ...Why not? Do you want a repeat of the 1995 North Hollywood bank robbery where the LAPD couldn't even handle taking down two heavily armed men because of being under-equipped? ..Especially so given the fact that during the first shootout with the brothers in Boston by NORMAL police officers, they were using grenades along with firearms against the officers that resulted in multiple wounded men. I'll clarify that for you: They were using MILITARY-GRADE WEAPONS against officers and you're claiming the Police were over-reacting with their gear and equipment? Redditor, please!

Final statement: Everything I've said here is backed up by other comments in this thread. So no, I do not agree with OP here but stated why and I'm allowed to share my opposing viewpoint as given by the moderators of this subreddit.

Oh god, logic. Thank you. Thank you so much. How refreshing.

Amusing the amount of downvotes you received for stating the facts of this issue. I wonder why.

Also, everyone outside of Boston do not seem to realize that there wouldn't be anything to do even if they wanted to leave their house. Tons of stores were closed, events were cancelled, people may as well relaxed at home until it was all over.

Slow clap -

Do you realize that you called the suspect "the bomber" what evidence do you have to support this claim?

will you marry me?

Sorry. No Xenos for me.

This is r/conspiracy. Chill out and let everyone have their fun. Why are you so intent on debunking theories? Using words like "fearmonger" and "slander"? Theorizing on conspiracies is what we do here. You need to calm down.

Because the original post was worded in such a way as to continue the rhetoric that the entire city was under some sort of Orwellian oppression. This is exactly the kind of thing fearmongers like Alex Jones profit from.

backed up by other comments in this thread? haha you obviously werent listening to the event live

OBVIOUSLY.

edit: HAHA

and yet it's also backed up by other redditors in other subreddits who provided personal accounts and pictures and we've yet to hear about one incident with a family.

I don't think there is a conspiracy. I don't believe this was planned or conducted by government actors. But, the government taking advantage of these events is not too much of a stretch.

I think that would be a compliment to government getting its shit together quickly. So, I think it was planned.

Okay, that is called a compromise. And it is style 3. And it is not ideal.

most bombings are planned even if its very little

Stand alone complex

Who is this everyone you are talking about?

[deleted]

Regardless, he has a point.

Everyone is saying stuff is going to go down late April/May.

Who is saying this?

What information do they have to suggest this?

Where did this information come from? Is it a credible source?

Does anyone else corroborate this information? Are they a credible source?

What further details can you provide?

Where will this "stuff" take place?

Who will be doing this stuff?

Why do they want to do this stuff?

These are all questions a 1st year journalist would ask. Instead we are treated to the FOX News style of rhetoric of "Some people say..."

[deleted]

I dont have time to sit and wait for information to float by me. Tell me who is saying that "stuff is going to go down in late April/May"

Sorry I don't have any links but I have seen people form theories that something bigger is being planned soon. You are correct, him saying "everyone" is poor word choice, obviously not everyone is saying it. But for the people that follow the theory that all these tragic events are a way to strip us of our rights, they claim there is a coming event that will set all this "police state/stripping of rights" stuff in to full gear. Again, sorry I don't have the links of people saying this but I'm sure you can agree that there would at least be SOME people thinking this will happen.

[deleted]

It's like you're retarded, you can't answer the man's question so you put up a smug front. Fuck yourself.

Welcome to Reddit. Go fuck yourself.

[deleted]

Disarm the citizens, heavily arm the government, How could this go wrong?

There was no disarming of the populace going on during this entire situation.

I guess you forgot the gun control votes that happened during this situation and have been happening in very recent memory. No, no attempts to disarm the people here.

You mean the controls that didn't pass, meaning no new controls were put in place?

Yes, that is what he means. Unfortunately he clearly can't think through the chain of logic he offered

It's been going on in America for the last 50 years.

Oh really? When did they come to take your gun?

September 13, 1994

Care to give me some more detail? What kind of gun was it? Did you buy it, or was it issued to you as part of a contract with a military or law enforcement agency?

That is the date of the US assault weapons ban.

The US has slowly been passing gun regulation legislation at the federal and statewide levels for years. Even now they want to ban how many bullets you can have in your magazine. How many bullets can be fired per/trigger pull, and what accessories you can have.

They are taxing bullets, and making it harder for people to purchase firearms.

This isn't anything new, I'm surprised you haven't heard of this.

That is the date of the US assault weapons ban.

Oh, you mean the one that expired on September 13, 2004? Yeah, That was neat.

I purchased a S&W 915 shortly before the ban was passed. For a brief period of time I couldn't buy a 30 round magazine for my pistol. It was a nightmare.

Please explain Chicago's firearm policy to me?

So the fact that the federal government banned weapons for 11 years is not relevant to our discussion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

So the fact that the federal government banned weapons for 11 years is not relevant to our discussion?

The federal government prohibited the manufacture certain semi-automatic firearms for civilian use. The ban only applied to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment.

I know you are simply trying to push me into defining my arguments better, I know you are not a troll. But don't you have better places to be?

LOL. Nope. :-)

This thread was started when you challenged the statement "There was no disarming of the populace going on during this entire situation."

You have yet to explain to me how the government came to take your gun away on Sept 13, 1994.

penis

We are talking about tanks driving down US streets, and bills in the house that limit how many bullets your gun can have. If you don't understand that, fuck off, you have literally been like a fly on my shoulder for the last few hours, I made a comment and you honestly haven't given up on debunking be. But what I said is true, the government is bigger, they have more weapons, and they are trying to remove firepower from us (citizens) how is that not clear to you?

Either you are a troll, a shill, or just an ass. But anyway you shake it you don't really want to have a real conversation and you are useless to this conversation. GOOD DAY!

This is R/Conspiracy,

"Hey, penis, I just want to have a real conversation with you! If you don't understand that, fuck off!"

Yes, this is r/Conspiracy, isn't it?

I love it when I see arguments backed into a corner, then they respond with. "penis"

I loled

Fuck off shill,

"There was no disarming of the populace going on during this entire situation."

We are talking about tanks driving down US streets, and bills in the house that limit how many bullets your gun can have. If you don't understand that, fuck off, you have literally been like a fly on my shoulder for the last few hours, I made a comment and you honestly haven't given up on debunking be. But what I said is true, the government is bigger, they have more weapons, and they are trying to remove firepower from us (citizens) how is that not clear to you?

Either you are a troll, a shill, or just an ass. But anyway you shake it you don't really want to have a real conversation and you are useless to this conversation. GOOD DAY!

first of all, those were not tanks, 2nd of all you should read the constitution, there is something called Exigent circumstance . I know its inconvenient to read the constitution and all of its amendments, but it is essential that we do not lose sight of what its meaning and purpose is, no matter how inconvenient it is for you.

and as for guns being taken away, I refer to the earlier guys comments. They will never go door to door to take away guns from people because guns became illegal, and if/when that bill passes I will be on your side, but until that law is even being discussed (which it is not) then stop giving into fear mongers such as Alex Jones. He and others like him, are profiting from fear, and it is unhealthy to the American conscience.

Lastly, having opposing views and having conversations discussed does not make it a useless conversation, maybe a frustrating one for you, but it is not useless, when you start shutting out other peoples ideals and only listening to your own then you are no better than the "men you fear"

Have a nice day

The fact that you have seen that before says more about you than me,

Banning a type of weapon with certain features isn't the same thing as banning weapons in general.

The fact that you can't make your point without ridiculous exaggeration is all the evidence anyone ever needed to realize how nonsensical it is.

Are you referring to the policy that was ruled unconstitutional?

Yes, they banned a type of weapon for a time. That ban has been lifted. Also, during the ban, if you owned an assault weapon you kept that weapon.

By the terms used: no citizen was disarmed. THey were merely relegated to purchasing a different type of firearm.

You mad that you cannot buy an RPG too?

Here's a better idea. Immediate execution (by police officers) of those found in possession of a gun.

Oh? So you mean it started when the NRA was trying to help the Government keep weapons out of the hands of The Black Panthers who then started the modern-day gun-rights movement as a result?

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/14/the_nra_once_supported_gun_control/

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/the-secret-history-of-guns/308608/

http://www.theroot.com/views/fear-black-gun-owner

Yes I believe he's referring to CISPA not a direct removal.

Have an upvote from me, someone needs to remind these people of the truth now and then.

It sure looks like we now have a Federal Police Force ready to take on any uprising against the banksters.

It sure looks like we now have a Federal Police Force ready to take on any uprising against the banksters.

Or any other number of reasons. Confiscation of our guns?

What you've just stated has near-zero relevance to the topic at hand. Unless you mean people setting off bombs in bank lobbies and end up killing innocent people to get at the "banksters".

In that case, yea I'm pretty sure the police has no choice but to respond to that, especially if this person or persons are armed like the Boston bombers.

Where do they get all of the paramilitary hardware, I wonder?

They've been preparing to turn the US into a military state for years now... just search for recent police urban warfare exercises (like the one in miami) and you'll see.

taxpayer money and third-party funding/donations.

There are an awful lot of federally mandated equipment purchases as well. Those mandates come with certain strings attached.

You may disagree with his point that the Feds are running the police or whatever he was implying, but to say that there's no federal influence is a mistake.

Maybe, maybe not. But to claim that the Government is going to use an entire police force to just protect and only just protect a certain group of people here in America is ludicrous.

Also if someone violently attacks a bank in any form for whatever reason, what does one expect the police to do? Nothing?

There's nothing "para" about the military hardware I saw on TV.

Those were legit blackhawk helicopters and armored humvees with gun turrets on top.

Were they really armed? Let's see the footage.

[deleted]

all those abused and tormented bostonians partying their asses off over his capture. :(

The question is when are you going to be the terrorist?

There is no difference between a terrorist and freedom fighter.

So when the government becomes ever steady fascist and you decide enough is enough what are you going to be?

Terrorist.

There is no difference between a terrorist and freedom fighter.

I don't know, freedom fighters don't generally bomb random people enjoying a state holiday.

Tyranny progresses in small steps, the accepting of those small steps is easy and ussually justifiable. But before you know it you are standing in the slaugtherhouse.

do you have an actual historical proof to back this claim?

Everything's OK. They got upvotes on their helmets. How can that be bad?

people were allowed to leave their homes, many didnt cause there was so many officers and army personal out and they didnt want to be arrested accidentally

Yup, or you know, didn't want to get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time and be in the middle of another shoot out? I'm pretty sure I would sure as hell have stayed in my home if I was in the area.

Wow first sentence in your post and already you are 100% wrong. Think before you post this sort of garbage, idiot.

no doubt

you might want to read up on what martial law actually entails before you say it was without a doubt martial law.

perhaps you can show me any instance in all this where civilians were forced to do anything. they had every right to decline a search of their house, but my guess is a perfectly reasonable use of hot pursuit would have been used. but luckily it appears most bostonians weren't wearing their tin foil hats, so it wasn't necessary. they weren't forced to stay in their homes, it was just suggested, and my guess is most of them wanted to stay in their homes seeing as these guys were tossing bombs out their car window and killing cops. but watching all the footage, there were plenty of people who ignored the warning and were out and about, and even driving. but maybe you can show where military took over the role of government. oh wait...you can't, because it didn't happen.

9 years later edit: roll/role :(

well said

[deleted]

and you know for a fact they would do this how? many people from boston posted, on reddit even, that nothing you guys think happened with the home searching, actually happened. but please, keep speculating in the exact same way the media you hate speculates.

oh and please elaborate what this has to do with our federal government. i look forward to it. :)

[deleted]

what about anything i said leads you to believe that i don't think the government lies and doesn't ever do anything shady behind the scenes? i just don't happen to think that EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS EVER is some kind of government conspiracy. there is absolutely nothing that has taken place over the last 2 days that indicates that the federal government was doing something shady.

also you have no clue where i get my information. regardless, i guess a better way to receive information is from the paranoia inside me. i'm sure that information is based in reality.

[deleted]

Do you think it's also possible they shot him because he shot a police officer and threw stove pots filled with nails and explosives at others?

They shot a terrorist who was shooting at them and possibly had an IED on him! You act like this guy was a peaceful protester. Maybe instead of your crazy idea of why they killed him, they actually killed him BECAUSE HE WAS TRYING TO KILL THEM AND OTHER CITIZENS. Get your head out of your ass.

[deleted]

Police are authorized to respond in force if a suspect they are trying to apprehend fires at them. These guys threw grenades and shot at police in the pursuit of a car jacking and officer involved shooting resulting in the death of the MIT cop. I think they can shoot back...

They cant give him a trial and determine guilt if they dont have him.

Ok they shot at the police because the police came after them...

Edit: You act like the suspect was chasing the police, when it was the other way around.

And the police need to arrest them to bring them to trial. They had to go after them.

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

From what I read, xenopants merely provided an opposing view with an argument. When he used the term "tin foil hats" he was talking about bostonians, not any posters in this thread. This subreddit should be a place for healthy debate. Not conspiracy circle-jerking.

[deleted]

Find me one person who denied police access to their house and you may have an argument. But to me, I think bostonians had the common sense to remain cooperative in a dangerous situation.

I find it hypocritical that posters here have such negative reactions to counter-arguments in a subreddit that claims to be so open-minded and respectful.

[deleted]

Perhaps the term irks you in particular, but the rest of his comment provides his argument and I don't think he was being dismissive.

People by and large were not resisting any of this because they identified the situation as a legitimate danger. If there were accounts of people refusing police entrance to their homes, that would have suggested varying opinions on the situation. But since there haven't been any reports of this, I don't think it's an awful thing to say that bostonians thought it crazy to be uncooperative with police when their established priority was declared to be public safety.

thank you. also i know it's not important, but i am a she.

i actually have a degree in circlejerk judgement. and i have ruled that this thing you guys have with boston is a circle jerk. i am required by law to break this shit up.

Honestly, This is like a catholic preaching in /r/atheism ....

oh, i'm sorry. i didn't realize this a was a private forum. you don't want to hear dissenting opinions? perhaps you guys should make it private so you can circle-jerk about how the government is ALWAYS coming after you ALWAYS without interruption.

[deleted]

"Don't bother reverting to emotional arguments about your nonexistent persecution"

[deleted]

sorry you're focusing on "tinfoil hat" out of all the other things i said. you're being obtuse. plus nothing else you said really makes any sense. if it helps with your future arguments, i don't actually feel persecuted. like, at all. so i don't know where you're getting that.

[deleted]

well, if "tinfoil hat" is some kind of banned term in this subreddit, i'll take it back. but obviously my point is that bostonians didn't assume that this was some complex government conspiracy to enact martial law. they assumed law enforcement was trying to find an armed and dangerous person, who already bombed the shit out of a large group of people in their city, and killed a police officer, and opened fire on other boston police officers, so they let them look. but that's a mouthful, so i went with "they weren't wearing tinfoil hats."

begrudging edit: but i do thank you for redacting calling me a loser and a moron.

good job quoting a very small portion of what it is.

In my opinion I dont think it was martiall law by definition. However it was riding the lines of it. You gotta admit that the whole situation was rather militarized and extreme. And this is first time I personally have ever seen something like that its just crazy.

it was militarized and extreme, BECAUSE THEY SET OFF BOMBS IN A PUBLIC PLACE KILLING AND INJURING PEOPLE, AND THEN KILLED A COP, AND THEN THREW BOMBS AT COPS WHILE THEY WERE BEING CHASED, AND THEN SHOT AT MORE COPS, AND THEN ONE GOT AWAY AND NO ONE KNEW WHERE HE WAS IN NEIGHBORHOODS HEAVILY POPULATED WITH CIVILIANS. that's kind of how that shit works.

plus i think maybe some of you guys are mistaking "military" for swat and special forces.

allegedly.

of course, allegedly. so no action should be taken by the police to find the guy who allegedly bombed the boston marathon and allegedly killed a police officer, and allegedly stole a car, and allegedly engaged in a firefight with cops(which was witnessed and documented with photos and video by various bostonians), and allegedly threw pipe bombs at cops, and who one of which allegedly didn't get caught and was allegedly running loose in a suburb of boston. they probably shouldn't have done anything to try to find him. i mean, they pay for those streets with our tax dollars! did they ask their permission to even search their streets?

I wasn't asked.

you weren't asked what?

i mean, they pay for those streets with our tax dollars! did they ask their permission to even search their streets?

so law enforcement must go around and get the permission of every person living on a street before they search it for a criminal? that seems super efficient.

edit: or do they need to just ask you?

good god.

ok. but do you have anything else to offer to the discussion?

No.

*martial law

It's just what Martial law would look like if it were to happen. That's all OP means, I think.

actual martial law would look very different from what happened. plus, no. OP said it was martial law without a doubt.

How would it look 'very' different? I just watched videos of Martial Law in Myanmar and it looks pretty similar (Except the region itself looks different, as in buildings and scenery of course)

yeah it was horrible people were cowering in terror in their homes as the military trotted their way in and ransacked everything and raped all the women

If they never leave, THEN its a problem.

I know.. Belmont only has like 10 cabs. I bet that guy missed a whole days work today. Poor bastard. This is terrible.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/yes-america-is-still-in-an-official-state-of-emergency/17545

"We don't stop for terrorism"

That quote during the news conference could only make me laugh. Whether people were forced or chose to stay inside/on lock down, Boston fucking stopped for terrorism. $200 million in lost revenue, people afraid to go outside. It is the complete opposite of what the American people are supposedly about, "not stopping for terrorism"

Just another example of a show of force to intimidate the innocent citizens into compliance, just like the DHS "immigration" checkpoints set up all over the highways in the southwest. Welcome to the Police State of America.

I don't think anyone here on /r/conspiracy realizes that Martial Law requires the replacement of civilian authorities with that of military personnel.

Not civilian authorities who are dressed all in SWAT gear so they look almost like military personnel.

Military personnel.

Also, this isn't meant to be patronizing or anything of the sort, but how could you truly believe that Obama is trying to turn our military against us and turn us into a fascist and totalitarian state?

But it does, because then it's simply not Martial Law... You can't just bend definitions to your liking.

If there was a bomber on the loose in your town who was just previously seen attempting to setup MORE BOMBS, you wouldn't want police handling the situation like that?

If they hadn't done that and he had successfully bombed another part of town, /r/conspiracy would be outraged at their inability to protect us.

Except in 1930s Nazi Germany they were looking for innocent Jews to ruthlessly murder and now they're looking for an alleged bombing suspect at large?

You guys draw the most fucked up parallels to things that are only similar with no context. Not to mention that none of the people I've spoken to in or near Watertown have mentioned any sort of inappropriate behavior on the part of the police.

It's always easier to chime in thoughts when you're in another state far far away. If you were not in the town the day of, then no one should be saying Martial Law was active. Thank you for being reasonable.

This is why everyone in society should be a peace officer forget about paid police forces!

horrifying.. terrifying

No it wasn't. You don't even know what martial law is.

I think you're reading too much into the situation, conspiracies are beliefs based on fact recreation. The government doesn't just go around killing people, it's just the media manipulation, abusing our interest in evil.

Testing of the waters, before they do something full scale they try it out first, we failed to show any resistance aside from internet posts.

So much force for one injured 19 year old....

I think the police actually did a pretty nice job. Sure they evacuated people out of their homes but they were looking for the suspect and they didn't shoot any civilians in the process. They found the man relatively quickly. They didn't disarm anyone and the people seemed to be cooperative. The thing we have to worry about are the laws being passed after this tragedy.

I always wonder if the people in this subreddit had their loved ones killed because of this guys actions, would you want him alive? Would you give him shelter and hide him from the police? Would you give him more time to plant more bombs and maybe kill more people that you love? Would you give him a meal, and pat his back and say good job? Would you tell the police to stand down and not gear and let him roam the streets because you know he's a good guy? It's always easier to say what we would do if it was us in this situation, but the truth is we wouldn't know what to do, and it wasn't us in the situation. Everyone says they would have done this, and that but if shit was to happen, and they were presented with it right in front of their face, they'd run. I'd highly doubt anyone in here would take a bullet for me, nor would they have confronted this guy, in realty they would run and then complain that things weren't done right.

Was the military in direct controlcof the area? NO not martial law. This was an event to prep for the police state. But if the police have been militarized, what's the difference really?

Could homeowners have refused police to enter their homes? If not, then it was martial law, and all their citizen rights were immediately revoked.

I completely agree. The same way this country doesn't declare wars anymore, why would they declare martial law.

Are you people for real? We have a very dangerous terrorist on the loose in a section of a highly populated American city and you think we shouldn't use all of our resources to capture him? I'm sure the people who's homes were searched were just so inconvenienced by the officers. I mean, way more than the terrorism happening in their neighborhood right? Fucking idiots

Why is anybody upvoting this thread when op clearly has no idea what he/she is talking about?

Oh Im sorry did cops just raid normal citizens houses? How did I miss that? You all are ignorant, they were creating a permitter to block him from leaving and they were successful in that. They asked permission for people to leave the house especially the one where the guy was hiding, HE HAD EXPLOSIVES.

The city of Boston lost $333mil for the city shutdown, oh yes the government would LOVE to lose that money... for what? No one can work, nothing gets done, crap piles up. Idiots. People who are worried about Martial Law can just calm the hell down. How many times do we see this?

it really wasn't. do you have any video of police "barging" into homes?

I saw a vine video earlier and a picture. They would knock, if you didnt answer they would barge in

wait so they barged in and then the people sat there and took a picture? that is far far far from proof. thats a pic of police in a house. it gives no context of them FORCING their way in

So the police walking down the street looking for a terrorist in the neighborhood where they have him surrounded. This offends you.

Yeah it was overkill. Remember those military and police "drills" in Miami and other cities with helicopters shooting blanks etc a few months ago? Wake up people.

This wasn't some burglar or crack dealer they were closing in on. It was a terrorist who had already killed one cop and was assumed to be heavily armed with explosives. How exactly would you suggest they go about apprehending him?

Innocent until proven guilty in the courts, yes. But first you need to arrest the guy. What you said made no sense. The cops do not presume innocence. If they feel there is sufficient cause, they pursue and arrest people.

Consider what would happen if, in any given criminal case, all or some of the evidence was shown on the news or online before the trial even started.

How, then, could you even pretend to find an impartial jury, since any person you picked to be on that jury would likely have already seen the evidence--or at least some of it, and without context or explanation, never mind a chance for the defense to make their case--and already made up their mind?

Because there is no need to.

Why do you feel so entitled to see it? That video is going to eventually be evidence in a trial. Why show it now and taint millions of potential jurors?

I'm not sure if it's possible for you to get more stupid. Yep, the cops should've went looking for him with no guns, no protection, no backup. Just strolled the street yelling "oh terrorist, please come out but definitely dont shoot us!". Or maybe they should've just let him go. I mean everything is a plot by THE GOVERNMENT to take over, man!

http://i.imgur.com/fLXTgAy.gif

No thanks, subreddit commander. I'd rather stay and discuss stuff. I invite you to downvote me and move on if you don't wish to engage me.

[deleted]

So now it's wrong to apprehend terrorists. Ok.

[deleted]

what exactly should the gobmint have done in this situation then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

It was a dangerous person. Even if its not 100% proven they bombed the marathon, they still threw explosives and killed a cop. Also planted pressure cooker bombs Who knows what they would be capable of. I think a terrorist roaming about is a lot worse than all the cops. It was for a valid reason.

Some Bostonians on the update thread said that they knocked and asked if they could come in (if you said no they'd just wait for legal OK's) and if noone answered they'd break the door and clear the building.

It's a little on the over-reaching side and should be looked at with a little mistrust but putting this photo up as "proof" they were barging into peoples homes without consent is really misleading and weakens your argument.

Whelp, I guess we need to enjoy our privacy while we still have it. This looks nightmarish.

The Obama regime will not relinquish power peacefully.

Honestly, This is like a catholic preaching in /r/atheism ....

oh, i'm sorry. i didn't realize this a was a private forum. you don't want to hear dissenting opinions? perhaps you guys should make it private so you can circle-jerk about how the government is ALWAYS coming after you ALWAYS without interruption.

What you've just stated has near-zero relevance to the topic at hand. Unless you mean people setting off bombs in bank lobbies and end up killing innocent people to get at the "banksters".

In that case, yea I'm pretty sure the police has no choice but to respond to that, especially if this person or persons are armed like the Boston bombers.

taxpayer money and third-party funding/donations.

They've been preparing to turn the US into a military state for years now... just search for recent police urban warfare exercises (like the one in miami) and you'll see.

Sorry. No Xenos for me.

thank you. also i know it's not important, but i am a she.

It sure looks like we now have a Federal Police Force ready to take on any uprising against the banksters.

Or any other number of reasons. Confiscation of our guns?

There's nothing "para" about the military hardware I saw on TV.

Those were legit blackhawk helicopters and armored humvees with gun turrets on top.

actual martial law would look very different from what happened. plus, no. OP said it was martial law without a doubt.