The bomber was eventually caught by traditional police methods. A citizen called in a report, the police responded and the suspect was arrested. Meanwhile, the civil rights of thousands were violated, a city was shut down, millions were lost and spent while lawful citizens were physically and emotionally abused by rogue police. There is never a good reason for government employees to ignore the law.
Actually, quite the contrary should be considered in regards to this tragedy. One could believe that the government is using this as an opportunity to “warm up” the general public to martial law.. It follows a trend of an overall desensitizing of Americans we see in every corner of our society. Today. I think it speaks of things to come.
As the first response said, I think this is a question with some mistakes. I'm not sure how it is related. I think we can say that everything worked out as it should and happened quickly. Whether martial law works or is justifiable is another matter that we would need to look at differently.
Martial law is where the military takes control of an extreme riot, or protests. I have no idea how the manhunt for the Boston bombers had anything to do with martial law. There were two bombers, or at least suspects. The police hunted them down, one was killed, the other is in the hospital. There was no riot or protest. The people did as told and stayed home behind locked doors. With the help of the public, the situation is over. So much faster than the snipers killing people in DC.
No, I do not think that the Boston bombing manhunt did any thing to disprove that martial law does not work. If it was not for martial law, I do not think that the only surviving suspect from the bombing would have been caught, and now with martial law he can be questioned.