The Boston Marathon Bombings occurred on Monday April 15, 2013, and were a major incident of terrorism and subsequent related shootings in the City of Boston, Massachusetts that killed three people and seriously affected hundreds more. This case study will detail the sequence of events on the day using the prevention, preparedness, response and recovery model (PPPR), focusing specifically on the multi- dimensional preparedness and response of emergency medical services (EMS), the systems and resources in place from the event organisers, Boston Athletics Association and the response of hospitals in dealing with a mass casualty event. Finally, there will be X of recommendations made for improvement based with the best practice model of PPPR. Background April 15th, 2013 marked the …show more content…
At 2.49pm EST, two improvised explosive devices (IED), consisting of pressure cookers concealed in backpacks containing nails, BB’s, shards of metal and shrapnel detonated within 12 seconds of each other. The IEDs were roughly 180 meters apart along Boylston Street behind metal barriers that separated spectators from runners at the finish line of the marathon. Three people died at the scene, and more than 260 were injured (History, 2014). The IED blasts blew out windows, but did not cause any structural damage to buildings adjacent to the blast sites. Despite the life-threatening injuries sustained by multiple victims, there was no subsequent mortality among those who survived transfer to a hospital. Factors that contributed to the high survival rate, include the location of the blasts, timing, preparation for this annual mass gathering event, previous domestic terrorist attacks and the actions of bystanders and emergency services (Goralnick et al., 2015). Both explosions occurred in the last 200 meters of the finish line, where a large number of spectators were gathered and where medical personnel had an established runners’ first aid
Forensic evidence identified PETN residue on Timothy McVeigh’s clothing. As a result from the bombing, 168 people were killed which included 19 children and infants. Timothy McVeigh was named the primary suspect in the case. McVeigh was found guilty and
The truck was parked in the building's parking area in the morning when people started arriving for work. At 9:02 a.m., the bomb exploded, completely destroying the building and killing 168 people. Over 800 additional people were injured. By then, McVeigh was already on the road in his 1977 Mercury Marquis. An hour and a half later, he was pulled over by an Oklahoma State Trooper on the I-35 75 miles away from the bomb site for speeding and driving a car without license plates.
The Timothy McVeigh bombing at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma on April 19th 1995 was one of the deadliest domestic terrorist acts in the history of the United States, killing 168 with 15 of them being children and injuring many more. The attack by McVeigh and his sole accomplice Terry Nichols proved to be an attack done because of anger with American Government and what they believed to be a noble cause. When analyzing Timothy McVeigh and searching for the motives behind the attack it becomes apparent that the decision to become a terrorist and follow through with the attack best fits the rational choice theory. It is clearly rational choice because the definition and necessities of rational choice clearly
On April 19, McVeigh watched on television with millions of other Americans as the FBI Stormed the compound resulting in a firestorm that killed dozens of Branch Davidians, including children (“Timothy”). McVeigh was known as a very friendly person before all of his anger built up. There must have been so much anger that his actions had killed 168 people. “Beginning in September, 1994, Timothy McVeigh began the plot to destroy the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. With accomplices Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, McVeigh acquired several tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and gallons of fuel oil to form a highly volatile explosive.
On a cold night of March 5, 1770 in Boston, Massachusetts, nine British soldiers fired shots into a crowd of one hundred Bostonians. Five were fatally injured or killed in the shooting, and some of the people killed were not even in the mob. This caused major corruption amongst the town, across the state, even across what was then America. Captain Preston, who ordered all to fire, was found innocent and two soldiers were convicted of manslaughter. This was named as the Boston Massacre, which had a lot to do with how America is today.
Was the Boston Massacre Really a Massacre? One of the most common things talked about in the history of the U.S.A. is the Boston Massacre, but was this historical event commonly looked at as a massacre really a massacre. I believe that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre at all instead it was just the act of self defense of a few british soldiers that were being attacked by upset colonists. One of the most said things about the Boston Massacre is that the british soldiers fired into a crowd of innocent people, but there is many pieces of proof that says otherwise.
According to the instinct approaches, the Boston Marathon bombers have an aggression that has an outcome of their inborn urges. Lorenz, an ethologist, said, “Aggressive energy constantly builds up in an individual until the person discharges it all in a process known as catharsis.” (pg.550) Basically, the bombers were continuously building up aggression towards people which lead them to the bombing to release all their aggression on everyone. Frustration-aggression approaches would say that the bombers were frustrated with a situation in the world with lead to anger, eventually leading to an extensive amount of aggression towards a subject. The observational learning approaches would suggest that the bombers learned their aggressions by watching
“At approximately 2:49 that afternoon, with more than 5,600 runners still in the race, two pressure-cooker bombs–packed with shrapnel and other materials and hidden in backpacks that were placed on the ground amidst crowds of marathon-watchers–exploded within seconds of each other near the finish line along Boylston Street. The blasts instantly turned the sun-filled afternoon into a gruesome scene of destruction and chaos” (“Boston Marathon Bombings”). Soon after the attack a manhunt set out in search for the two suspects. Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were the Boston Marathon Bombers who caused an unexpected event that led to the manhunt. The bombings, along with the manhunt caused much chaos and destruction to the city as well as to the
The final image was the bomb, a bomb is something very detrimental and it showed how violent they
Both the Boston Marathon Bombers and the Weatherman Underground have similarities and differences. One of the most obvious similarities is that they are both responsible for terrorist acts. Both the Boston Marathon Bombers and the Weatherman Underground have set off bombs in their attacks, and both have killed. While the Weather Underground have now attempted to brush off their bombings as never hurting or killing anyone, their bombings have been tied to the death of at least one police officer.
The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a “patriot”. They were throwing sticks, snowballs, and trash at a group of British troops. The loyalists got very annoyed with the patriots so they shot into the mob killing five. The riot began when around 50 colonists attacked a British sentinel. A British officer called in for additional troops
The Boston Massacre is an event most Americans and British students learn about over the course of their education. In America, we learn that British soldiers fired upon innocent civilians, although this may not have been the case. British historians have referred to the Boston Massacre as the "Incident on King Street". After looking over the "Captain Thomas Preston 's Account of the Boston Massacre", as well as "Boston Massacre Trial Depositions" I believe that American historians should refer to the "Boston Massacre" as the "Incident on King Street". The definition of a massacre refers to an unnecessary and random killing of a large number of individuals.
More recently developed nuclear weapons prove to not only be more violent than those used during the Dresden attack, but to also be more physically and psychologically destructive. Along with the initial effects of the weapon, which destroys both people and property, deadly radiation from the bomb causes lasting health issues for the survivors, such as leukemia and radiation poisoning (Schull). Furthermore, the evacuation and relocation of those who lost homes and jobs in the area of attack would not only be expensive, but would also have significant negative social repercussions - both of the loss of productivity of the workforce during this time, as well as on the mental health of those forced to abandon their homes and
So if a bomb went off in an urban area, it's going to be over hundred thousand dead in matter of a few hours. More than a few hundred thousand is a huge number compare to other injury/death caused by violence/weapons. The weapon, also destroys building within an area. It could destroy billions of dollar of property in a single blast. it’s not what you would expect normally from a weapon.
You watching me watching you. The bomb, it explodes. Smoke filled air chokes those who have not yet taken their last breath. Corner stores ripped apart by the rupture, cars parked on the side of the streets are no longer reflective of the perfect, pristine lifestyles these people live.