Explosion at the Boston Marathon.

I'm wondering if this year's Boston Marathon had a higher attendance than normal due to the cancellation of the New York Marathon. That would have made it worse than it might have been in an ordinary year.



MSNBC reported that there were runners who had finished who ran to the hospital to donate blood after the explosions.
 
I can't help but wonder why the perpetrator(s) chose to detonate the bombs 4 hours after the race started. If they had done it at about 2 hours after the race started, there would have been thousands watching it live on TV and it would have been right as the elite runners were coming in to the finish.

It indicates something about their motives and sophistication, but I don't know exactly what. Makes me think they are less sophisticated than if they had set it off earlier.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
A proper antipersonnel bomb throws shrapnel. It does not need a huge charge.
Click to expand...

Scores of people were packed reeeaaally close! At first it looked like the blasts came from side streets, but now I see they occurred either right in front of buildings on that street, on the sidewalk basically, or inside the buildings, so many spectatirs must have been just feet away.
 
Denver said:
I am worried that the fear that some of the right wing has against Obama's government is being equalled on this thread with fears of the right wing's desire for violence. That is, I think both are unfounded, and this tragedy will have to do with neither.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not as if it would be the first time the extreme right had cooked something like this up. I think many have just grown to expect things like this from those people.
 
carlitos said:
You have to qualify for Boston, so there aren't many 4-hour runners in the field. In theory, the only 4 hour runners should be women over 50 and men over 60.
Click to expand...
The qualifying process no doubt makes the average Boston runner faster than what you see at other big races, but there are still thousands of non-qualified (charity, etc.) runners taking part.
The average finish time in 2012 (a slow year due to the heat) was 4:18:27.
 
EventHorizon said:
I'm wondering if this year's Boston Marathon had a higher attendance than normal due to the cancellation of the New York Marathon. That would have made it worse than it might have been in an ordinary year.
Click to expand...
No, Boston is sold out every year.
 
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/authorities_under_suspect_guard_y2m8cJO29uC2PDGIjYBalO?utm_source=SFnewyorkpost&utm_medium=SFnewyorkpost

Investigators have a suspect — a Saudi Arabian national — in the horrific Boston Marathon bombings, The Post has learned.

Law enforcement sources said the 20-year-old suspect was under guard at an undisclosed Boston hospital.

It was not immediately clear why the man was hospitalized and whether he was injured in the attack or in his apprehension.

The man was caught less than two hours after the 2:50 p.m. bombing on the finish line of the race, in the heart of Boston.

In addition, Boston police have has surveillance video of someone bringing multiple backpacks to blast site, according to CBS News.
Click to expand...

But, it is the NYPost.
 
Stellafane said:
You have to qualify to run with an official number. However, they do let unqualified runners run as "back of the pack" runners. ....
Click to expand...

mbp said:
The qualifying process no doubt makes the average Boston runner faster than what you see at other big races, but there are still thousands of non-qualified (charity, etc.) runners taking part.
The average finish time in 2012 (a slow year due to the heat) was 4:18:27.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I didn't know that.
 
Stellafane said:
You have to qualify to run with an official number. However, they do let unqualified runners run as "back of the pack" runners. That's what I did in the dozen or so times I ran. There are many thousands of runners who do this every year, most of which probably don't break four hours. I once ran with a friend of mine, a first-timer, and we ran 4:09 -- exactly the time that appears on the timer when the bomb went off. There were still many thousands of runners behind us when we finished. And they're reporting that something like 26K people ran in today's race, more than double when we ran that time.
Click to expand...

Also, if the clock was showing around 4:10, anyone crossing the line at that time is running faster than a 4 hour marathon, because it takes the back of the pack many, many minutes to even get to the starting line after the race clock starts ticking. If you finished in 4:09 one year, that probably meant the race clock was showing at least 4:30 by the time you crossed the finish line, right?
 
Mass General Hospital reports they are treating 19 injured people that were not part of the count from the marathon's medical tent. Brigham & Women's Hospital is also reporting that they are treating more injured people bringing the total to 46. :(

One of the two bombs that did not explode was under the viewing stands at the finish line.
 
I wouldn't be too quick to assign blame to a particular party just yet. This is an event known worldwide so the date may have nothing to do with it. Location, location, location as they say in the real estate biz. 9/11/2001 was also just a random date.

Remember that at first the OKC bombings were attributed to "Arab looking" people. The reality was far from that. The FBI, ATF and DHS are all on this like flies on ****. They will figure it out in due time.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
I wouldn't be too quick to assign blame to a particular party just yet. This is an event known worldwide so the date may have nothing to do with it. Location, location, location as they say in the real estate biz. 9/11/2001 was also just a random date.

Remember that at first the OKC bombings were attributed to "Arab looking" people. The reality was far from that. The FBI, ATF and DHS are all on this like flies on ****. They will figure it out in due time.
Click to expand...

All good points.
 
uke2se said:
Well, it's not as if it would be the first time the extreme right had cooked something like this up. I think many have just grown to expect things like this from those people.
Click to expand...

Really, have an example?
 
Somewhat graphic picture.

BH6kFLDCQAAcSDO.jpg
 
Many people with official numbers are running Boston to raise money for charities, and didn't earn their number by qualifying for time but with how much they've raised or because they're running in a recognized charity group. These folks raised $11 million this year.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
Also, if the clock was showing around 4:10, anyone crossing the line at that time is running faster than a 4 hour marathon, because it takes the back of the pack many, many minutes to even get to the starting line after the race clock starts ticking. If you finished in 4:09 one year, that probably meant the race clock was showing at least 4:30 by the time you crossed the finish line, right?
Click to expand...

It usually takes maybe 10 minutes to cross the starting line (at least it did back when I ran it). Then there's the first mile, which usually is stop-and-go due to congestion and can easily take 15 minutes or so. (Once to avoid this I ran most of the first mile on people's lawns, darting in and out between spectators. Still took me 8+ minutes.) So yeah, anyone running a four-hour marathon will be lucky to finish it by 4:15 or so -- just about the time showing on the timer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom