the munchkin wrangler.

Heh.

Boston continues it's tradition of assuming anything with a battery and an LED is a bomb.

Seems the hoodie was wired up so that it would display "Socket to me. / Course VI" when powered up.

That is pretty spectacularly stupid. If she'd successfully smuggled it onto a plane, THEN she might have made a point. As it is, it's just stupidity. Then again, people who do things "for art" these days commonly are in my opinion - I've eschewed the term "artist" and describe myself simply as an animator because I don't want to be in the same bucket as people who spend more on hairdos, piercings, tattoes and their wardrobe than they do on their creative materials.

Just another example of the current disconnect between education and intelligence.

Have any of you, other than justin, looked at a photo of the stupid thing?

Anyone who would think that is an explosive device needs some serious help.

Marko, PLEASE tell me that you do not support this type of over reaction.

OTOH if they were so concerned, why didn't someone politely talk to her? Where was the need to surround her at gunpoint?

No, I do not think it's acceptable. Yes, college students do stupid things. However, she is not responsible for the over reaction of the LEOs.

Oh, hell no, I don't support that type of over-reaction. Boston's Finest seem to be erring on the side of extreme paranoia ever since the 9/11 planes left from Logan.

That's not what I'm saying, though. What I'm saying is that anyone who followed the Lite-Brite debacle a while back should have known that the local cops go into frenzied Jihad Prevention Mode at the mere sight of anything that might be remotely construed as a bomb.

Going to the freaking Boston *airport* with circuit board, wires, and a battery taped to your shirt while clutching a block of Play-Doh is just asking for some face time with the asphalt.

There's a photo here.

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/09/21/star_simpson/

Look, it may be just due to the fact that I happen to know which end of a soldering iron to hold, but it's pretty clear to me that the item in question is not a bomb.

Watching this video,

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/bomb.hoax/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

..you can hear the spokesperson say that the police figured out it was an "innocuous device" within minutes.

The police want to be very clear that even though they are easily panicked by flashing LEDs, in fact this time they did not shut down the entire city as an appropriate level of a response.

Well, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. I, of course don't believe everything the police say in their press statement.

Granted, this is Boston so the likelihood of an armed citizen being present is about zero, but what if it were somewhere else? If an armed citizen was in the unsecured area of the airport waiting to meet someone, could he believe this idiot was wired with an explosive?

It's been over 20 years since my army demolitions class, but I think a 9-volt battery delivers sufficient juice to fire an electrical blasting cap. Could a reasonable person (think average Joe, not an electrical engineer) see this, realize that the jacket could be concealing explosives, and come to the conclusion that this person was a suicide bomber?

Then what?

Wasn't even a nice-looking chest...

Captain,
If the armed citizen shot the student, as you are implying, then the armed citizen would be guilty of murder or attempted murder.

Those of us who choose to arm ourselves with deadly force have a responsibility to utilise that force ONLY when truly necessary.

The phrase "he made a furtive movement" or any permutation is only allowed to be used by LEOs. Admittedly, I think that is wrong and contemptible.

If I, without Army demolition experience, can tell that the garment in question is not a threat, then someone with your experience ought to be able to recognize the same thing. However, you mentioned the 'average joe'. Could you perhaps elucidate on your meaning? Here in America we pride ourselves on being incredibly capable and multi-faceted. Are you suggesting that your friends and neighbors are somewhat lacking in intellectual capacity? Or are you merely asserting that ONLY the PROFESSIONALS are able to ascertain just what that childish device on her chest was?

Gregg,

That's my point. We use deadly force only when truly necessary. But the need to use force is based on the perceived threat.

So here's the question: Could a reasonable person see that circuit board and battery on an over-sized jacket and come to the conclusion that the idiot was a bomber, and that their life was in immediate danger? If so, the armed citizen would be legally justified in using deadly force.

By Joe Average, that's exactly what I mean - maybe a small business owner, housewife, waitress, plumber.

I can see someone coming to the conclusion I outlined above and even getting found not guilty in court, because his actions met the 'reasonable person' legal test. But what a tragedy, and how awful for the shooter to have to live with that.