Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 1 votes

No Bags at Boston Marathon This Year


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1    thedutchiedutch

thedutchiedutch

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain.
    Bob Marley

Posted 27 February 2014 - 12:03 AM

This year's Boston Marathon will have a "no bags" policy as part of stepped-up security following last year's deadly bombing,
the Boston Athletic Association announced Wednesday.

Marathon runners typically are allowed to bring bags or backpacks to keep personal items.
Those bags are bused between the starting line in Hopkinton and the finish line in Boston.

But this year, runners will not be allowed to bring backpacks or bags, which will also not be allowed in certain areas near the start or finish line,
or along the 26.2-mile course.

Runners will be given a chance to check gear on Boston Common on the morning of the marathon
to allow them to have a change of clothing at the end of the race.
The athletic association said it will provide clear plastic bags for that purpose.

Link to full article : http://abcnews.go.co...y-plan-22690178

So do I have time for a last smoke and a pancake or what?

#2    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 February 2014 - 12:47 AM

I can understand why they would do this, however I do not agree with it.

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****

#3    thedutchiedutch

thedutchiedutch

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain.
    Bob Marley

Posted 27 February 2014 - 01:09 AM

View PostThanato, on 27 February 2014 - 12:47 AM, said:

I can understand why they would do this, however I do not agree with it.

Thanato, why don't you agree ? Would you have come up with another safety measure ?

So do I have time for a last smoke and a pancake or what?

#4    DecoNoir

DecoNoir

    The Entertainer

  • Member
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Imaginaerum

  • ... The Aristocrats.

Posted 27 February 2014 - 01:16 AM

I have to agree, I see no reason to really object, other than for the sake of objecting.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

#5    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,900 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 27 February 2014 - 01:49 AM

You are never-ever safe.  To give away your freedom and privacy in hopes of attaining perfect security is actually pretty insane.  A brick can fall from above, a gas line could explode...there is no perfect safety or security...only the loss of freedom.

That being said...I wouldn't go to a marathon run anyway...to me it equates to watching grass grow.  If people are that "into" watching a foot race or grass growing...by all means...do whatever flips your switch...but be prepared to be violated and searched..."it's for your own good" after all.

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#6    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 February 2014 - 01:51 AM

View Postthedutchiedutch, on 27 February 2014 - 01:09 AM, said:

Thanato, why don't you agree ? Would you have come up with another safety measure ?

Don't change don't give an inch. Just have the police be vigilant. This is what happens when you give into fear. You give up something as simple as a backpack at an all day event.

I was on an airplane 2 weeks after 9/11. I will not let those who wish to terrorize me and my way of life effect me or my way of life. Yes it was sad to hear what happened that day. But to bring in impractical solutions such as this? Ok so they can't bring in a back pack, there are many other ways to get large amounts of explosives into a crowded area to cause mass cas, or to hide a firearm.

What they need to do is properly train Police to identify people of interest, not do sweeping changes in the name of security.

I have a question, how would this make me more safe then I am today?

~Thanato

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****

#7    Awake2Chaos

Awake2Chaos

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2013

Posted 27 February 2014 - 01:58 AM

If someone wanted to get a bomb any where along the route, they could just go the way of the suicide bomber and strap it to themselves.

If someone really wanted to bomb Boston again, they aren't going to let not having a backpack get in their way.  

The article says they are banning baggy clothing...I guess we'll see what happens.


#8    Eldorado

Eldorado

    Unforgiven

  • Member
  • 10,219 posts
  • Joined:29 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

  • I reckon so.

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:23 AM

On the plus side, No Bags = No Mothers-in-Law.


#9    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 4,211 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I might have been born yesterday but, I've been up all night.

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:29 AM

Banning backpacks at this event will not stop a thing. How many marathons are there? Next thing you know they'll ban backpacks at the Iditarod.

I agree with Thanato. Don't give an inch or else the terrorists win.


#10    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:35 AM

View PostLikely Guy, on 27 February 2014 - 02:29 AM, said:

Banning backpacks at this event will not stop a thing. How many marathons are there? Next thing you know they'll ban backpacks at the Iditarod.

I agree with Thanato. Don't give an inch or else the terrorists win.

I would not say the Terrorists win. All they want is either a Political Message brought to our attention or to spread fear and carnage. Who really wins in these situations are those who would rather have security than freedom for their people.

~Thanato

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****

#11    thedutchiedutch

thedutchiedutch

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain.
    Bob Marley

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:36 AM

I understand what you guys are saying, if they want, they will find a way to do harm regardless of any safety measure.
But, I think that a big reason for no bags is not only a safety measure, it will also have a physiological effect.
Can you imagine if they would allow bags ? Most people would, willingly or not, automatically think what could be in that bag ?
Any person that would carry a bag or that would be putting a bag on the ground would become a suspect automatically.
Panic could strike, just by seeing a single abandoned bag sitting on the ground. So yes, I can see the reason why no bags and therefore I can only agree.
I think It's better to avoid if you can and eliminate changes of danger.

Edited by thedutchiedutch, 27 February 2014 - 02:37 AM.

So do I have time for a last smoke and a pancake or what?

#12    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:44 AM

View Postthedutchiedutch, on 27 February 2014 - 02:36 AM, said:

I understand what you guys are saying, if they want, they will find a way to do harm regardless of any safety measure.
But, I think that a big reason for no bags is not only a safety measure, it will also have a physiological effect.
Can you imagine if they would allow bags ? Most people would, willingly or not, automatically think what could be in that bag ?
Any person that would carry a bag or that would be putting a bag on the ground would become a suspect automatically.
Panic could strike, just by seeing a single abandoned bag sitting on the ground. So yes, I can see the reason why no bags and therefore I can only agree.
I think It's better to avoid if you can and eliminate changes of danger.

So? I can understand that this might happen but it is very unlikely that it would cause mass panic. Sure the Police should be hyper vigilant at these things for abandoned parcels and bags and oddly placed heaps of trash, but to ban back packs over possibly stirring bad memories? Wouldnt the event its self do that for the majority?

Most people in North America today already attribute abandoned back packs to potential terrorist activity simply due to the conditioning that we have been put through in the past 13 years. I know it crosses my mind, but also so does trash on the side of the road... but hey I'm still living life.

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****

#13    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 4,211 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I might have been born yesterday but, I've been up all night.

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:53 AM

View Postthedutchiedutch, on 27 February 2014 - 02:36 AM, said:

I understand what you guys are saying, if they want, they will find a way to do harm regardless of any safety measure.
But, I think that a big reason for no bags is not only a safety measure, it will also have a physiological effect.
Can you imagine if they would allow bags ? Most people would, willingly or not, automatically think what could be in that bag ?
Any person that would carry a bag or that would be putting a bag on the ground would become a suspect automatically.
Panic could strike, just by seeing a single abandoned bag sitting on the ground. So yes, I can see the reason why no bags and therefore I can only agree.
I think It's better to avoid if you can and eliminate changes of danger.

I see your point of view, that's why I'm not going to argue against it, but just 'No'.


#14    thedutchiedutch

thedutchiedutch

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain.
    Bob Marley

Posted 27 February 2014 - 03:40 AM

View PostThanato, on 27 February 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

So? I can understand that this might happen but it is very unlikely that it would cause mass panic. Sure the Police should be hyper vigilant at these things for abandoned parcels and bags and oddly placed heaps of trash, but to ban back packs over possibly stirring bad memories? Wouldnt the event its self do that for the majority?

Most people in North America today already attribute abandoned back packs to potential terrorist activity simply due to the conditioning that we have been put through in the past 13 years. I know it crosses my mind, but also so does trash on the side of the road... but hey I'm still living life.

View PostThanato, on 27 February 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

So? I can understand that this might happen but it is very unlikely that it would cause mass panic. Sure the Police should be hyper vigilant at these things for abandoned parcels and bags and oddly placed heaps of trash, but to ban back packs over possibly stirring bad memories? Wouldnt the event its self do that for the majority?

Most people in North America today already attribute abandoned back packs to potential terrorist activity simply due to the conditioning that we have been put through in the past 13 years. I know it crosses my mind, but also so does trash on the side of the road... but hey I'm still living life.

So why take the chance ? Even if it's very unlikely. Isn't it better to avoid ?  
I don't think it's banning back packs just to avoid stirring bad memories. Banning bags and/or back packs in this case would be besides a security measure,  a 'peace of mind' plus it would be something less to worry about so police / security can concentrate on other potential threats.

So do I have time for a last smoke and a pancake or what?

#15    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 February 2014 - 11:15 AM

View Postthedutchiedutch, on 27 February 2014 - 03:40 AM, said:




So why take the chance ? Even if it's very unlikely. Isn't it better to avoid ?  
I don't think it's banning back packs just to avoid stirring bad memories. Banning bags and/or back packs in this case would be besides a security measure,  a 'peace of mind' plus it would be something less to worry about so police / security can concentrate on other potential threats.

The only thing this measure would do is give a sense of false security.

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users