View Full Version : Air Marshalls stop man
I'm glad we have air Marshalls, but this might not be a clean kill.
yahoo link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051207/ap_on_re_us/airplane_shooting;_ylt=AkS_QQ2Z9LPoOdyi2SzEBjkDW7o F;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)
Bipolar dude off meds claims to have a bomb, CNN said that he died (not in the yahoo article).
Still, glad we have them.
spinner26
12-07-05, 04:58 PM
Moral to the story; TAKE YOUR MEDICATION! :saywhat:
Read somewhere that the marshall tackled the guy on the jet way. Maybe the guy went for the cop's gun. Generally, the police prefer to subdue someone rather than shooting them. It's less paperwork.
Methanolandbrats
12-07-05, 05:14 PM
Read somewhere that the marshall tackled the guy on the jet way. Maybe the guy went for the cop's gun. Generally, the police prefer to subdue someone rather than shooting them. It's less paperwork.TRue. And if it did turn out to be "terror", they would rather torture him to death and extract information than kill him outright.
Gangrel
12-07-05, 05:26 PM
I'm glad we have air Marshalls, but this might not be a clean kill.
Guy ran down the aisle claiming to have a bomb. Air Marshalls pursued him onto causeway. Ordered him to get on the ground. Man reached into his bag. Marshalls shot him. Not sure how much cleaner it could get. :confused:
Guy ran down the aisle claiming to have a bomb. Air Marshalls pursued him onto causeway. Ordered him to get on the ground. Man reached into his bag. Marshalls shot him. Not sure how much cleaner it could get. :confused:You know, lawyers.
Wife was running behind him yelling that he was bipolar and off the meds. Add lawsuit = not a clean kill.
I stand firmly behind the Marshalls, given the info that is available to us now.
You know, lawyers.
Wife was running behind him yelling that he was bipolar and off the meds. Add lawsuit = not a clean kill.
I stand firmly behind the Marshalls, given the info that is available to us now.
Wife running behind saying he is off his meds. Hmm. Thats good enough reason to let the guy go. I'm sure a terrorist would never think to have 2 people involved in a bombing, one to bomb and one to say he was on medication, not to kill him.
Should have shot the wife too.
Wife running behind saying he is off his meds. Hmm. Thats good enough reason to let the guy go. I'm sure a terrorist would never think to have 2 people involved in a bombing, one to bomb and one to say he was on medication, not to kill him.
Should have shot the wife too.I stand firmly behind the Marshalls, given the info that is available to us now.
Does that help clarify my stance?
I was firmly behind the bobby that pumped eight rounds into the guy's skull in the London Underground, until I found out what happened. Bad shoot, there.
TRue. And if it did turn out to be "terror", they would rather torture him to death and extract information than kill him outright.
Please keep your politics out of this. Thanks. :rolleyes:
Methanolandbrats
12-07-05, 08:19 PM
Please keep your politics out of this. Thanks. :rolleyes: Bite me. What I said was true. Ever hear of advanced interrogation. Jeezus, wake up. :shakehead
I stand firmly behind the Marshalls, given the info that is available to us now.
Does that help clarify my stance?
I was firmly behind the bobby that pumped eight rounds into the guy's skull in the London Underground, until I found out what happened. Bad shoot, there.
Actually, I should clarify. You're right. Lawyers suck balls. I was giving the argument against lawyers, not against you.
Bite me. What I said was true. Ever hear of advanced interrogation. Jeezus, wake up. :shakehead
It would take some pretty advanced interrogation to get any information out of someone you've tortured to death.
Given the headlines I can see where someone might see your comment as political. Your support for "advanced interrogation" helps clear that up.
Bite me. What I said was true. Ever hear of advanced interrogation. Jeezus, wake up. :shakehead
M&B. I tried to PM you but your box is full. I want to apologize for being a dick in my response. I didn't realise that it was a joke. Sorry.
alright, so how does being pro-torture make you apolitical yet being anti-torture make you political? just curious, that's all :gomer:
alright, so how does being pro-torture make you apolitical yet being anti-torture make you political? just curious, that's all :gomer:
That's not what I said.
how freaked out would people be if that had really been a suicide bomber instead of some loony dude that made it all the way onto the plane, right before xmas travelling season?
you figure much airfare's already purchased, so the airlines wouldn't be losing out on all their holiday sales, but would people actually go ahead and use their purchased boarding passes?
racer2c
12-09-05, 10:31 AM
I just read that witnesses on the plane never heard the man say that he had a bomb.
Al Czervik
12-09-05, 10:49 AM
I just read that witnesses on the plane never heard the man say that he had a bomb.
Did the witness hear anything the man said?
There were probably 100+ people on the plane, or getting on the plane, that never heard the guy say a single word, bomb or otherwise.
racer2c
12-09-05, 01:17 PM
Did the witness hear anything the man said?
There were probably 100+ people on the plane, or getting on the plane, that never heard the guy say a single word, bomb or otherwise.
Who other then the guys with guns heard him say "I've got a bomb"? So far, no one.
Al Czervik
12-09-05, 02:14 PM
Who other then the guys with guns heard him say "I've got a bomb"? So far, no one.
You're missing the point.
What kind of car was in front of you when you were stopped at the light at 1st & Main on your way to work this morning?
Was there more than one person in the car?
What was the license plate number?
The witness claims the guy never said he had a bomb, that's fine. But did the witness tell what the other guy said? My guess is the witness doesn't know / can't remember. But that doesn't make a good headline.
racer2c
12-09-05, 03:14 PM
You're missing the point.
What kind of car was in front of you when you were stopped at the light at 1st & Main on your way to work this morning?
Was there more than one person in the car?
What was the license plate number?
The witness claims the guy never said he had a bomb, that's fine. But did the witness tell what the other guy said? My guess is the witness doesn't know / can't remember. But that doesn't make a good headline.
I well understand your point, it's not a dificult one to comprehend. My point, on the other hand, was that until this morning we only heard the side of the story from the guys who did the shooting.
I well understand your point, it's not a dificult one to comprehend. My point, on the other hand, was that until this morning we only heard the side of the story from the guys who did the shooting.
Ok so a lunatic is running up and down the plane and on the jetway. Air Marshalls tell him to get down on the ground. They pull out their guns. The guy disobeys and goes into his bag. No mention of a bomb.
What should the air marshalls do?
a. shoot him in the chest
b. shoot him in the head
c. shoot him in the legs
d. ask nicely for him to get on the ground again
the correct answer is a. you do not want to take any chances of missing so you aim directly for the chest. its the biggest target on the person with the least movement.
if you answered d. then i have a professor named Vernon that I feel you should meet.
Maybe he said that he had a balm.
The guy was clearly out of control. Is it so implausible that when they confronted him on the jetway he came up with a threat that he thought would get them to back off and leave him alone?
Bomb comment or no, if he was ordered by an armed officer to stop reaching into a backpack and he failed to comply he was going to get shot.
Gangrel
12-09-05, 05:03 PM
As far as I am concerned, the guy could have been saying "I want to order a pizza!" Based on everything else that happened (running down aisle, backpack on his chest, raising hell, running onto causeway, disobeying armed law officers, reaching into backpack in front of said officers as they tell him not to), they were absolutely justified in shooting him, and we should feel safer on our nations airways knowing that they did. I watched the media jump shamelessly through all kinds of hoops and over hurdles to try to make this guy look like a saint and the officers to look like trigger happy cowboys. It is disgusting.
RaceGrrl
12-09-05, 05:04 PM
Maybe he said that he had a balm.
"A balm? Quick! Throw it in the trough!"
racer2c
12-09-05, 05:12 PM
Maybe he said that he had a balm.
The guy was clearly out of control. Is it so implausible that when they confronted him on the jetway he came up with a threat that he thought would get them to back off and leave him alone?
Bomb comment or no, if he was ordered by an armed officer to stop reaching into a backpack and he failed to comply he was going to get shot.
I agree. That's the way it works. He didn't comply, he paid the consequence, but as a matter of follow up investigation if we took the word of every deputy, agent, trooper who said "he was going for a gun" or "he said he had a bomb" would be irresponsible citizenship. That is why there are follow up investigations. If the evidence concurs with the officers story, fine, but if not...there's a problem. And for those who think law enforcement agents don't "stretch the truth" or out right lie, spend a few hours in your local courtroom.
KaBoom21
12-09-05, 05:53 PM
Maybe he said that he had a balm.
"Who told you to put the balm on?" Do you know what a blam does?"
http://www.avoision.com/portnoy/images/2003/april/fools/jackie.jpg
Hard Driver
12-09-05, 06:58 PM
With a wife following behind him screaming he was bipolar and did not have his medicine. With all the passengers saying they heard nothing about a bomb. With the fact the plane had landed and he had already exited, which makes for a very poor bombing target.
Sounds to me a thorough investigation is needed. Because what I have read, which obviously is incomplete, it seems that you have air marshals that should have realized this guy was mental, but not a threat.
With a wife following behind him screaming he was bipolar and did not have his medicine. With all the passengers saying they heard nothing about a bomb. With the fact the plane had landed and he had already exited, which makes for a very poor bombing target.
Sounds to me a thorough investigation is needed. Because what I have read, which obviously is incomplete, it seems that you have air marshals that should have realized this guy was mental, but not a threat.
From what I have read, 2 passengers have said there was no bomb.
From a fox news article:
One passenger said he "absolutely never heard the word 'bomb' at all" during the uproar as the Orlando-bound flight prepared to leave Miami on Wednesday.
Federal officials say Rigoberto Alpizar made the threat in the jetway, after running up the plane's aisle from his seat at the back of the jetliner. They opened fire because the 44-year-old Home Depot employee ignored their orders to stop, reached into his backpack and said he had a bomb, according to authorities.
Shooting to maim or injure — rather than kill — is not an option for federal agents, said John Amat, national operations vice president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, which includes air marshals in its membership.
"The person was screaming, saying he would blow up the plane, reaching into his bag — they had to react," Amat said.
"The bottom line is, we're trained to shoot to stop the threat," said Amat, who is also a deputy with the U.S. Marshals Service in Miami. "Hollywood has this perception that we are such marksmen we can shoot an arm or leg with accuracy. We can't. These guys were in a very tense situation. In their minds they had to believe this person was an imminent threat to themselves or the people on the plane."
With the fact the plane had landed and he had already exited, which makes for a very poor bombing target.
The plane was boarding, not arriving.
Sounds to me a thorough investigation is needed. Because what I have read, which obviously is incomplete, it seems that you have air marshals that should have realized this guy was mental, but not a threat.
Are you saying that the fact that he was mentally ill makes it less likely that he would have a bomb?
The whole incident took about a minute. If this guy runs into the airport terminal and blows himself up the press is right now focusing on why nothing was done to stop him.
Sounds to me a thorough investigation is needed. Because what I have read, which obviously is incomplete, it seems that you have air marshals that should have realized this guy was mental, but not a threat.
Thank god you don't serve and protect.
concerned citizen: THAT GUY IS GOING NUTS AND PEOPLE THINK HE HAS A BOMB!!!
hard driver: oh, its ok, his wife says hes just off his meds
http://ecybers.com/webdesign/animgifs/Explose.gif
racer2c
12-09-05, 10:50 PM
I'm with HD. Lynch mobs with "hang first, ask questions later" were supposed to be a thing of the past. So did they find the bomb?
I'm with HD. Lynch mobs with "hang first, ask questions later" were supposed to be a thing of the past. So did they find the bomb?
so what would you rather they do? and then after you say what you want them to do, give me scenarios on how it plays out. one for when the guy doesnt have a bomb, and one for where the guy does.
racer2c
12-09-05, 11:53 PM
Where was his bomb? Ah, an airport "cop" said he "claimed" he had one but no one else heard that.
Let's see, how many dozens, if not hundreds of incidents have I seen on TV where regular ol' county police were able to restrain suspects without resorting to lethal means. But because this was in an airport and airport Johnny has an itchy finger and the Latino man looks like an Arab to Johnny, Johnny shoots first and discovers no bomb later. Johnny's on forced leave and under investigation. If I were Johnny, I'd be making up stories too.
Many say the marshals were simply doing their job. Making sure the skies are safe is no easy task. And while the incident is unfortunate, most agree it was bound to happen eventually.
"I guess I'm not surprised, you expect something like that's going to happen somewhere down the road, Carter said.
"I think that the airlines are safe and there's protection out there as well," said Brian Collard, who was flying to Denver from Sioux Falls.
And yesterday's incident is proof of that.
"So in this case, you know they were there and monitoring the passengers. So, I guess that is comforting," said Carter.
"I felt very comfortable that the Air Marshals were doing their job and it seemed like it worked well," Collard said.
Quote Source (http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail2817.cfm?Id=0,44490)
So in my 'Orwellian' frame of mind; beware of having a bad day in public or some trigger happy "law enforcer" will take your life and Joe Public will be thankful. At least at an airport. Now if this had been a Wal Mart...
do i need to post my question again?
Lizzerd
12-10-05, 03:42 AM
Okay, so let's say this guy just gets cuffed and hauled away because his wife is behind him and says he's koo-koo.
Then, if I were a wannabe plane bomber, I'd say to myself, "Lizzerd, find another suicidal maniac, must be female, and have her pretend she's my wife. Then I could maybe run fast enough to get to my killing zone and blow myself up! Yeah, that's the ticket!"
Did you know you can be arrested for joking with a flight attendant for the following? "Sir, is there anything I can get for you or do for you right now?" "Well yes ma'am/sir. Can we take this plane to Hawaii instead of Cleveland?"
Or, from a news report I recall very pre 9/11. A passenger asks the guy next to him about his PDA. He says "It's The Bomb" (meaning it is very cool). Arrested.
No tolerance for this crap, IMO. I'm not saying to shoot the two I mentioned above, nor am I saying that they should be arrested, but we live in a different world now. If there is a serious bomb or weapons threat, shoot now and ask questions later. I say that even if the perpetrator is a harmless idiot if he is stupid enough to do something like what this fool did.
racer2c
12-10-05, 10:01 AM
do i need to post my question again?
I already went to college, professor. I made my point.
I'll feel just as safe if my country/state/city doesn't routinely pull a Charles de Menezes w/ impugnity. But that's just me.
As for this person, sucks for him, but it's not like we know everything. Could be a Richard Reid, could be a de Menezes, we don't know.
I'll feel just as safe if my country/state/city doesn't routinely pull a Charles de Menezes w/ impugnity. But that's just me.
As for this person, sucks for him, but it's not like we know everything. Could be a Richard Reid, could be a de Menezes, we don't know.
de Menezes (http://rwor.org/a/012/london-street-execution-menezes.htm) First I'd heard of him.
I already went to college, professor. I made my point.
Oh ok. I was just hoping you could shed some light on my specific question. If you can't, that is fine.
de Menezes (http://rwor.org/a/012/london-street-execution-menezes.htm) First I'd heard of him.
I wish articles like that would specifically state the police officers involved. Its a minor nitpick, but just to say that the police did this evil thing and that evil thing gives all cops a bad name.
racer2c
12-10-05, 01:58 PM
Oh ok. I was just hoping you could shed some light on my specific question. If you can't, that is fine.
Nice try. You obviously already have your own answers prepared in response to mine, so skip the dramatics and spill it. :gomer:
Let's see, how many dozens, if not hundreds of incidents have I seen on TV where regular ol' county police were able to restrain suspects without resorting to lethal means. But because this was in an airport and airport Johnny has an itchy finger and the Latino man looks like an Arab to Johnny, Johnny shoots first and discovers no bomb later. Johnny's on forced leave and under investigation. If I were Johnny, I'd be making up stories too.
How many of those are cases where a suspect is detained without lethal force when they are threatening to use lethal force themselves and refuse to obey the officer?
This wasn't a lynching as you characterized it. It was a life or death, split second decision. The notion that "crazy" means harmless is laughable. These were not airport cops, they were trained federal air marshalls. Part of their training is observing behavior and assessing threats.
I think every officer involved shooting has to be reviewed carefully. But without assuming that the officers are lying about what happened on the jetway, I think these officers acted appropriately.
Nice try. You obviously already have your own answers prepared in response to mine, so skip the dramatics and spill it. :gomer:
i dont have answers to your response. cuz i cannot fathom a response to how the marshalls should handle a lunatic reaching into his bag after being told to get on the ground.
i guess the options are as follows:
cops do nothing, guy has nothing in his bag. guy lives.
cops do nothing, guy has a bomb in his bag. blows it up, kills everyone in the area.
is that what you were gonna come up with?
racer2c
12-10-05, 02:52 PM
i dont have answers to your response. cuz i cannot fathom a response to how the marshalls should handle a lunatic reaching into his bag after being told to get on the ground.
i guess the options are as follows:
cops do nothing, guy has nothing in his bag. guy lives.
cops do nothing, guy has a bomb in his bag. blows it up, kills everyone in the area.
is that what you were gonna come up with?
I don't need to "come up" with anything. The police have their policy and did what they feel they needed to. Sad how some cops are able to defuse a single man without gunfire, while others can't/won't. The guy didn't have to die; he could have saved himself by listening to the cops and not putting his hand in his backback. So I'm not altogether on a different page as you. The reason I posted in this thread was because it is starting to come out that witness stories differ from the cops and the witnesses don't have any reason to lie...the cops do.
i dont have answers to your response. cuz i cannot fathom a response to how the marshalls should handle a lunatic reaching into his bag after being told to get on the ground.
i guess the options are as follows:
cops do nothing, guy has nothing in his bag. guy lives.
cops do nothing, guy has a bomb in his bag. blows it up, kills everyone in the area.
is that what you were gonna come up with?
or man has dead-man's switch, gets shot, blows everyone up.
or man has remote detonator, doesn't approach marshalls, drops the bag, gets on his knees, then blows everyone up
if the man has an armed bomb with a means to detonate it, it wouldn't matter if he was 4 feet or 20 feet from those marshalls in the jet bridge assuming the device is sufficiently powerful
so at that point, waiting for him to turn around and approach them could've meant their death, as could've shooting him, and well, if you're planning to blow ppl up, why would you get OFF the plane?
but like I said, we know next to nothing, so it's meaningless, there's just many possibilities no one can think of
I don't need to "come up" with anything. The police have their policy and did what they feel they needed to. Sad how some cops are able to defuse a single man without gunfire, while others can't/won't. The guy didn't have to die; he could have saved himself by listening to the cops and not putting his hand in his backback. So I'm not altogether on a different page as you. The reason I posted in this thread was because it is starting to come out that witness stories differ from the cops and the witnesses don't have any reason to lie...the cops do.
oh my bad. It didnt sound that way when you were comparing air marshalls shooting a guy who was a potential threat and not cooperating with a lynch mob. :rolleyes:
racer2c
12-10-05, 04:43 PM
oh my bad. It didnt sound that way when you were comparing air marshalls shooting a guy who was a potential threat and not cooperating with a lynch mob. :rolleyes:
Pontificated blogging. I don't enough about the details of the case to be put in the position you are trying to place me, unsuccessfully, in defending the dead guy.
How isolated did they have him from people, planes and buildings?
How much did the authorities know about the situation prior to triggers being pulled? How experienced was the air marshal that pulled the trigger?
Were commands given only in English?
How much time had passed from the time he left the plane to the time he was shot?
How many witnesses were there and what are their version of the incident?
Too many questions to just say "guy stuck hand in bag when cop said to hit the floor, guy dead, cop did good". That's why they have internal investigations. I could pull article after article of bad cop, lying cop, cheating cop, thus necessitating an Internal Affairs dept but that isn't what this thread is about. When the bag offered up no bomb, I'm sure there weren't many high fives and backs being patted.
Pontificated blogging. I don't enough about the details of the case to be put in the position you are trying to place me, unsuccessfully, in defending the dead guy.
How isolated did they have him from people, planes and buildings?
How much did the authorities know about the situation prior to triggers being pulled? How experienced was the air marshal that pulled the trigger?
Were commands given only in English?
How much time had passed from the time he left the plane to the time he was shot?
How many witnesses were there and what are their version of the incident?
Too many questions to just say "guy stuck hand in bag when cop said to hit the floor, guy dead, cop did good". That's why they have internal investigations. I could pull article after article of bad cop, lying cop, cheating cop, thus necessitating an Internal Affairs dept but that isn't what this thread is about. When the bag offered up no bomb, I'm sure there weren't many high fives and backs being patted.
Which makes the air marshalls lynchers. Ok I get your point.
TrueBrit
12-10-05, 05:53 PM
Cake or Death? ;)
"We don't have any more cake!" "So may choice is '..or death'"?
TrueBrit
12-10-05, 06:04 PM
No-one that was un-armed heard the word bomb. Plenty of people heard the wife saying he was bi-polar and was off his meds. He was already off the plane, a little difficult to blow the plane up if you aren't actually, you know, on it.
How would he have got the non-existent bomb on the plane in the first place? Anyone gone through airport security recently? Getting a bomb on board is about as likely as me having it off with Salma Hayek and Tyra Banks on the rear deck of my luxury yacht in Monaco harbour during the Sunday morning warm-ups....
Bad deal all around.
Shoot first and ask questions later is a BAD policy. Period.
No-one that was un-armed heard the word bomb. Plenty of people heard the wife saying he was bi-polar and was off his meds. He was already off the plane, a little difficult to blow the plane up if you aren't actually, you know, on it.
How would he have got the non-existent bomb on the plane in the first place? Anyone gone through airport security recently? Getting a bomb on board is about as likely as me having it off with Salma Hayek and Tyra Banks on the rear deck of my luxury yacht in Monaco harbour during the Sunday morning warm-ups....
Bad deal all around.
Shoot first and ask questions later is a BAD policy. Period.
First off. The guy is off the plane. Ok fine. He has a detonator in his bag and the bomb is still on the plane. Hows that for a situation.
Second, whether there is a bomb or not, the guy was still acting frantic and disobeyed orders.
Third, a lot of studies show the airport security lets a lot of things slide. Yes I have been through security, and there will always be loopholes.
TrueBrit
12-11-05, 01:22 AM
First off. The guy is off the plane. Ok fine. He has a detonator in his bag and the bomb is still on the plane. Hows that for a situation.
The guy is off the plane. They shot him because he supposedly reached in the bag. If he's OFF the plane and he has a detonator why didn't the x-ray machines pick up EITHER peice of equipment? How's THAT for a situation?
Second, whether there is a bomb or not, the guy was still acting frantic and disobeyed orders.
The guy was bi-polar and off his meds. He's going to act frantic and is not likely to follow orders from armed, gung-ho, unknown strangers. It's called T-R-A-I-N-I-N-G. Next completely effing stupid question please. :gomer:
Third, a lot of studies show the airport security lets a lot of things slide. Yes I have been through security, and there will always be loopholes.
Yup, airport security is in the habit of letting bombs and remote detonators "slide"..... :shakehead
Should have shot the wife too.
Yup, airport security is in the habit of letting bombs and remote detonators "slide".....
A detonator could be as simple as a laptop or a pda. They let those slide all the time. The bomb could have been in his checked luggage which isn't as deeply screened.
These articles all rip on airport security:
http://www.slate.com/id/2113157/fr/rss/
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/25/airport.security/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/26/airport_security_failures/
Not to mention that the flight had arrived from COLUMBIA. Not the US. Are you willing to trust Columbians as much as a flight from LAX or another US airport?
The guy was Bipolar? Oh ok. So terrorists now know just to act bipolar and have someone yell he's off his meds when they are trying to create a diversion.
TrueBrit
12-11-05, 12:08 PM
Or he might not have said it at all.....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10412438/
If this guy was "screaming" as they say, how come nobody else heard him say he had a bomb?
And the wife really should have talked to someone before getting on the plane, explaining his state of mind in case he became disruptive.
Who are these air marshalls anyway? What kind of background do you need to be one?
A license to kill....
David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, said he thinks the shooting may prove more “reassuring than disturbing” to the traveling public his organization represents.
So, someone who is afraid to fly and gets panic attacks gets on a plane for the first time. They start to get nervous and have an attack.
They say "I've got to get off this plane" and maybe they think it's going to crash or in the recent environment, they think a bomb somehow could be on board. Now this is just a panic attack making this person think that way.
So they try to get off the plane while they are telling the person they are travelling with these irrational fears they have.
A martial chases them as they are trying to get off the plane and shoots them to death.
And this should make us all feel good?
I need to adjust myself to driving long distances and get familiar with reading road maps.
I reserve judgement until all the facts are in.
That said, in the post 9/11 world, people simply can not do anything weird in an airport or on an airplane. Simple as that.
Hard Driver
12-11-05, 05:50 PM
The plane was boarding, not arriving.
Are you saying that the fact that he was mentally ill makes it less likely that he would have a bomb?
The whole incident took about a minute. If this guy runs into the airport terminal and blows himself up the press is right now focusing on why nothing was done to stop him.
Well yes, if the guy has a wife running after him saying he is bi-polar and off his medication, that would make it less likely the guy is a terrorist. When was the last terrorist bombing that you heard of with the terrorist running OFF the plane with his wife chasing him?
Well yes, if the guy has a wife running after him saying he is bi-polar and off his medication, that would make it less likely the guy is a terrorist. When was the last terrorist bombing that you heard of with the terrorist running OFF the plane with his wife chasing him?
Not all terrorists are suicide bombers. And as I and many others have pointed out, the wife could have been in on it to buy some time for the guy if he were a terrorist. Are you sure you want to take that chance?
I reserve judgement until all the facts are in.
And thats all we can do. But me personally, am gonna side with the air marshalls first until they are proven guilty of wrongdoing. That may be the case in this instance, but wait til the facts before we start saying they overreacted.
Not all terrorists are suicide bombers.
the ones who aren't generally try to remain unidentified, sorta helps with the whole "terrorism" bit
but wait til the facts before we start saying they overreacted.
from the guy that said they should've taken down the wife... sure.
from the guy that said they should've taken down the wife... sure.
that was a joke. some got it. some didn't. maybe not a good joke. but still a joke.
the previous statement preceeded by
I'm sure a terrorist would never think to have 2 people involved in a bombing, one to bomb and one to say he was on medication, not to kill him.
doesn't exactly sound like a joke
Well yes, if the guy has a wife running after him saying he is bi-polar and off his medication, that would make it less likely the guy is a terrorist. When was the last terrorist bombing that you heard of with the terrorist running OFF the plane with his wife chasing him?
Ultimately none of that matters if the guy said that he had a bomb when he was confronted and he refused to obey the marshall's order. If it the investigation shows that he was shot in the back as he ran down the jetway then that's different.
Prior to 9/11 the entire airport security scheme was based around a poor understanding of what a group of determined, ruthless hijackers would do to achiever their ends. At this point if you spot a potential threat it would be foolish not to treat it as one until you can clearly assess the situation. The danger here is that this man is a hijacker who has paniced and that the woman is part of the plot.
Sophisticated terrorists understand the profiles we look for. They tried to step outside them on 9/11 with simple things like shaving and dressing nicely. In the future they'll use women and married men.
You can't do a detailed analysis of a situation like this as it occurs. You have to do a split second determination of the where the threats are, get them under control and then sort it all out.
Ultimately it comes down to whether the guy really said that he had a bomb and refused to stop reaching in his bag. Unless you think that the Marshalls are lying about that then I think you're asking them to take an unreasonable risk not to immediately subdue the man by whatever means necessary.
This report adds a couple of interesting points.
http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/nation/13363948.htm
The most intersting is the fact that the man was reportedly approaching the officers when shot. According to this report the officers had retreated back to the entrance of the aircraft at the time of the shooting.
If this is true, is it the position of those who tend to think that this was unjustified that the Marshalls should have continued to retreat and allow man back on the plane?
the previous statement preceeded by
doesn't exactly sound like a joke
The first part of my statement was not a joke. The 2nd part was.
Maybe it didnt come through to well being in text on a message board.
What good comes from shooting the wife in my situation that I described. Outside of creating a diversion, this hypothetical wife did nothing that required being shot. The man did.
The first part of my statement was not a joke. The 2nd part was.
Maybe it didnt come through to well being in text on a message board.
What good comes from shooting the wife in my situation that I described. Outside of creating a diversion, this hypothetical wife did nothing that required being shot. The man did.
Maybe she was the one with the bomb. The husband was the diversion.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 11:51 AM
Well yes, if the guy has a wife running after him saying he is bi-polar and off his medication, that would make it less likely the guy is a terrorist. When was the last terrorist bombing that you heard of with the terrorist running OFF the plane with his wife chasing him?
Yes. You're right. No two people could ever work as a team to create a diversion, one by acting erratically, the other by yelling that the first is bipolar. Since everyone who gets on to the plane is administered a dose of sodium pentathol, it is clearly not possible that the "wife" claiming the other one is bipolar could possibly be lying about it... :shakehead
Yes. You're right. No two people could ever work as a team to create a diversion, one by acting erratically, the other by yelling that the first is bipolar. Since everyone who gets on to the plane is administered a dose of sodium pentathol, it is clearly not possible that the "wife" claiming the other one is bipolar could possibly be lying about it... :shakehead
omg i agree with a white sox fan. :saywhat:
racer2c
12-12-05, 12:12 PM
Here's a guy in Australia who came at the police during a race riot with a beer bottle. He wasn't shot, just arrested. But then, of course the immnent danger of being hit by a beer bottle (which in the US would be considered a deadly weapon if used to assult) isn't as great as a guy putting his hand in a bag. :shakehead
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/12/12/australia.racial.unrest.ap/story.beachriot.ap.jpg
No wonder the world looks at the US as cowboys with six shooters on all of our hips.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 01:26 PM
Here's a guy in Australia who came at the police during a race riot with a beer bottle. He wasn't shot, just arrested. But then, of course the immnent danger of being hit by a beer bottle (which in the US would be considered a deadly weapon if used to assult) isn't as great as a guy putting his hand in a bag. :shakehead
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/12/12/australia.racial.unrest.ap/story.beachriot.ap.jpg
No wonder the world looks at the US as cowboys with six shooters on all of our hips.
Ok...forget about bombs and detonators and all that other fun stuff. Walk up to a cop on the street acting erratically for no apparent reason, making threats and screaming like a lunatic...then reach into a bag you have strapped to your chest, and when the cop draws his weapons and orders you to keep your hands where he can see them, continue to reach into the bag, then start to pull it out quickly like you have something in your hand. Then report back here with what happened...at least, if you're not on a slab in the basement of the local community hospital on a date with the medical examiner...
These protocals are in place for a reason. Talk to any cop out there about how many cops have been shot in just such incidents. About how many bystanders have been hit when someone pulled that gun and the cops didn't act quickly enough.
Now amplify that by considering that the guy has a remote control in the bag with a button, or a hardwired button right to the device that is attached to his person. If those Air Marshalls hesitate, they run incredible risk of many people getting dead. They did their job. Period.
TKGAngel
12-12-05, 01:41 PM
A detonator could be as simple as a laptop or a pda. They let those slide all the time. The bomb could have been in his checked luggage which isn't as deeply screened.
These articles all rip on airport security:
http://www.slate.com/id/2113157/fr/rss/
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/25/airport.security/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/26/airport_security_failures/
Not to mention that the flight had arrived from COLUMBIA. Not the US. Are you willing to trust Columbians as much as a flight from LAX or another US airport?
The guy was Bipolar? Oh ok. So terrorists now know just to act bipolar and have someone yell he's off his meds when they are trying to create a diversion.
There is more that can be done to make airport security better, while still providing less of an inconvenience to the customer. (Full disclosure: father's a TSA screener) Is checked luggage screened less? Yup. Its only hand searched if it alarms. Not sure what the percentage of bags that alarm are. The running joke in the TKGAngel family is that the screeners are too busy looking for the cuticle scissors that they miss the big stuff.
racer2c
12-12-05, 01:57 PM
Ok...forget about bombs and detonators and all that other fun stuff. Walk up to a cop on the street acting erratically for no apparent reason, making threats and screaming like a lunatic...then reach into a bag you have strapped to your chest, and when the cop draws his weapons and orders you to keep your hands where he can see them, continue to reach into the bag, then start to pull it out quickly like you have something in your hand. Then report back here with what happened...at least, if you're not on a slab in the basement of the local community hospital on a date with the medical examiner...
These protocals are in place for a reason. Talk to any cop out there about how many cops have been shot in just such incidents. About how many bystanders have been hit when someone pulled that gun and the cops didn't act quickly enough.
Now amplify that by considering that the guy has a remote control in the bag with a button, or a hardwired button right to the device that is attached to his person. If those Air Marshalls hesitate, they run incredible risk of many people getting dead. They did their job. Period.
Ever see the show Cops? You should.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 02:58 PM
Ever see the show Cops? You should.
How many officers are you related to? How many of your friends are on the force? Hmmm....
Here's a guy in Australia who came at the police during a race riot with a beer bottle.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
No. Sorry, I just don't get how on earth those are comparable situations. In one circumstance the consequences of failing to immediately subdue the person is very likely death for the officers and anyone nearby, in the other the officer feels they have some self defense the possibility of death or severe injury is remote.
I wish I could live on Planet Fluffy Bunnies where beer bottles, bombs and cuddley stuffed woobies are all equally deadly. But in my world, if someone is threatening me with almost certain deadly force and I believe they mean it, I want them shot.
I might even throw in a "Yippee-ki-yay, mother****er."
Gangrel
12-12-05, 03:22 PM
I hate it when you guys make me quote Will Smith movies...
"Welcome to Earth!"
racer2c
12-12-05, 03:43 PM
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
No. Sorry, I just don't get how on earth those are comparable situations. In one circumstance the consequences of failing to immediately subdue the person is very likely death for the officers and anyone nearby, in the other the officer feels they have some self defense the possibility of death or severe injury is remote.
I wish I could live on Planet Fluffy Bunnies where beer bottles, bombs and cuddley stuffed woobies are all equally deadly. But in my world, if someone is threatening me with almost certain deadly force and I believe they mean it, I want them shot.
I might even throw in a "Yippee-ki-yay, mother****er."
So he was threatening them with a bomb? Again, anyone other than a cop witness that? Or do we just blindly believe every cop who shoots someone?
racer2c
12-12-05, 03:46 PM
How many officers are you related to? How many of your friends are on the force? Hmmm....
What difference does that make? I have a couple of cousins that are cops. Does that count?
I have an uncle who's a DC attorney and a nephew who paints cars, does that me an authority on their jobs?
:gomer:
racer2c
12-12-05, 03:48 PM
As I write this I'm watching a live highway chase in CA. they guy is a suspect in a shooting. So they already know the guy is potentially dangerous. He isn't stopping per their commands...^^&* chasing him, bomb his ass. Right?
racer2c
12-12-05, 03:58 PM
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
Beer bottle. Bomb.
No. Sorry, I just don't get how on earth those are comparable situations. In one circumstance the consequences of failing to immediately subdue the person is very likely death for the officers and anyone nearby, in the other the officer feels they have some self defense the possibility of death or severe injury is remote.
I wish I could live on Planet Fluffy Bunnies where beer bottles, bombs and cuddley stuffed woobies are all equally deadly. But in my world, if someone is threatening me with almost certain deadly force and I believe they mean it, I want them shot.
I might even throw in a "Yippee-ki-yay, mother****er."
Like I said, in the eyes of the law (because my uncle is a lawyer) a bottle used as a weapon in an assult is considered a deadly weapon. The same classification as a small bomb would be. Any threat to an officer is a threat whether it's a hookers highheeled shoe or a AK47. Apples to orages? Of course, but I don't make the law. (even though my uncle is a lawyer).
So he was threatening them with a bomb? Again, anyone other than a cop witness that? Or do we just blindly believe every cop who shoots someone?
How about the pilot? Do you assume he is lieing as well?
Chief Marshall would not reveal the specifics of his agency's interviews with people who were on the aircraft, including whether any had said they heard Mr. Alpizar threaten that he had a bomb. But Mark Raynor, an American Airlines pilot and local union official in Miami, said an account he heard from the plane's captain had supported law enforcement accounts of the shooting.
Mr. Raynor said the captain had been outside the cockpit at the time of the shooting and witnessed it, but the first officer had been inside the cockpit and had seen nothing.
story link (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051209/ZNYT02/512090763)
not that I'm blaming the marshalls for the shooting, but who the hell gets OFF an airplane with a bomb?
who the hell creates a diversion to get OFF an airplane, the prime target of choice, to detonate an explosive?
if the dude wanted to nuke the jetbridge he would've done it while they were boarding, if he wanted to nuke the gate area, he would've done it while the area was packed with travellers waiting to board...
but he said bomb, and approached the officers, and that's what happens when they've got probable cause
Like I said, in the eyes of the law (because my uncle is a lawyer) a bottle used as a weapon in an assult is considered a deadly weapon. The same classification as a small bomb would be. Any threat to an officer is a threat whether it's a hookers highheeled shoe or a AK47. Apples to orages? Of course, but I don't make the law. (even though my uncle is a lawyer).
If you swing a beer bottle you may be charged with aggravated assault or assualt with a deadly weapon. If you detonate a bomb next to someone you almost certainly will be charged with attempted murder. Clearly there is a difference the level of threat involved for both the officer and everyone around them.
So he was threatening them with a bomb? Again, anyone other than a cop witness that? Or do we just blindly believe every cop who shoots someone?
Nope, think that every officer involved shooting should be investigated, this one included. But if their version of events is correct I think their actions were justified. You seem to be arguing that even if their version of events is correct, their actions weren't justified because they were under no more threat than an officer facing a drunk with a beer bottle or an angry hooker with a spiked heel.
not that I'm blaming the marshalls for the shooting, but who the hell gets OFF an airplane with a bomb?
This has been answered in the thread already. There have been plenty of cases where would-be bombers have paniced and bolted.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 05:47 PM
What difference does that make? I have a couple of cousins that are cops. Does that count?
I have an uncle who's a DC attorney and a nephew who paints cars, does that me an authority on their jobs?
:gomer:
Talking to the cousins who are cops is going to give you a hell of a lot more info about what a being a cop is like than wathcing "Cops." That was my point, in response to your previous comment.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 05:53 PM
Like I said, in the eyes of the law (because my uncle is a lawyer) a bottle used as a weapon in an assult is considered a deadly weapon. The same classification as a small bomb would be. Any threat to an officer is a threat whether it's a hookers highheeled shoe or a AK47. Apples to orages? Of course, but I don't make the law. (even though my uncle is a lawyer).
Great. Now we have to worry about people detonating beer bottles and high heel shoes when they are on planes. :rolleyes:
BB Guns can kill people, too. So would you feel safer if I told you I had a BB gun trained on your head, or if I told you I am standing next to you and have a bunch of C-4 strapped to my chest. Reality please, folks... :saywhat:
racer2c
12-12-05, 08:49 PM
As I write this I'm watching a live highway chase in CA. they guy is a suspect in a shooting. So they already know the guy is potentially dangerous. He isn't stopping per their commands...^^&* chasing him, bomb his ass. Right?
Hey, looky there, even after the shooting suspect swung his car into the oncoming path of the perusing officers in what could have been perceived as a potential assault against an officer, they managed to arrest the perp without killing him.
Maybe we should put the C.H.P. on airplanes. :gomer:
BTW, I did call my cousin who is a county patrol cop in KS. He coincidentally applied for one of the many air marshal jobs post 9/11 but ended up not taking it because his wife convinced him not to. He said definitely, if it’s me or him, he’s going down, but that they are trained to do every thing they can to diffuse and ascertain the element of potential danger without taking lives. Was this done in the case at point? I guess the investigation will tell us.
racer2c
12-12-05, 08:50 PM
Great. Now we have to worry about people detonating beer bottles and high heel shoes when they are on planes. :rolleyes:
BB Guns can kill people, too. So would you feel safer if I told you I had a BB gun trained on your head, or if I told you I am standing next to you and have a bunch of C-4 strapped to my chest. Reality please, folks... :saywhat:
So the guy on the plane told cops he had C4 strapped on him? Reality indeed.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 09:00 PM
So the guy on the plane told cops he had C4 strapped on him? Reality indeed.
I would say C4 is a lot closer to what he said he had than a beer bottle, according to the marshalls and the pilot...
This has been answered in the thread already.
not to be a smartass, but where? I didn't see any rational explanation that rose above aggy logic when I scrolled back
There have been plenty of cases where would-be bombers have paniced and bolted.
honestly, if you're trying to ditch, do you tell ppl you have an explosive device? that sort of hinders the whole "escape" aspect of the emergency plan.
racer2c
12-12-05, 09:40 PM
I would say C4 is a lot closer to what he said he had than a beer bottle, according to the marshalls and the pilot...
I'll just go ahead and consider my point being over your head. :)
Gangrel
12-12-05, 10:59 PM
not to be a smartass, but where? I didn't see any rational explanation that rose above aggy logic when I scrolled back
honestly, if you're trying to ditch, do you tell ppl you have an explosive device? that sort of hinders the whole "escape" aspect of the emergency plan.
You want to look up the definition of "panic" in the dictionary and get back to us? Rational thought don't really fit into the definition.
Gangrel
12-12-05, 11:03 PM
I'll just go ahead and consider my point being over your head. :)
If your point has something to do with drawing a parallel between comming after cops with a beer bottle in a drunken rage and running around on an airplane with a bag strapped to your chest and claiming you have a bomb, then reaching into said bag when armed air marshalls are telling you to get on the ground and keep your hands visible, then I guess your point is a little too influenced by crack for me to want to get it. :rolleyes:
racer2c
12-13-05, 12:03 AM
If your point has something to do with drawing a parallel between comming after cops with a beer bottle in a drunken rage and running around on an airplane with a bag strapped to your chest and claiming you have a bomb, then reaching into said bag when armed air marshalls are telling you to get on the ground and keep your hands visible, then I guess your point is a little too influenced by crack for me to want to get it. :rolleyes:
yeah, that's it, I'm on crack! :gomer:
I'm the bad guy because a mentally disturbed man with no bomb was killed. Hell, kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out, right? that's the crack speaking!
Yippe Kia Ai &^%^&*()*&. ;)
You want to look up the definition of "panic" in the dictionary and get back to us? Rational thought don't really fit into the definition.
like i said, the marshalls did what they had to and seem to have had probable cause, i'm just disputing the "logic" behind the crazy hypotheticals that others such as yourself are trying to interject.
how many people who were about to attempt murder give themselves up right there on the spot? "I HAVE BOMB!!!! I PANIC!!!! I CAN'T DO THIS!!!"
not to be a smartass, but where? I didn't see any rational explanation that rose above aggy logic when I scrolled back
My mistake. I was sure I posted that. Must have been deleted by the moderator.
honestly, if you're trying to ditch, do you tell ppl you have an explosive device? that sort of hinders the whole "escape" aspect of the emergency plan.
Nobody has said that he claimed to have a bomb at any point before he was confronted.
My mistake. I was sure I posted that. Must have been deleted by the moderator.
har har
Nobody has said that he claimed to have a bomb at any point before he was confronted.
wasn't the original story he told the stewardess "i have a bomb" so that she would let him off the plane?
Gangrel
12-13-05, 11:38 AM
yeah, that's it, I'm on crack! :gomer:
I'm the bad guy because a mentally disturbed man with no bomb was killed. Hell, kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out, right? that's the crack speaking!
Yippe Kia Ai &^%^&*()*&. ;)
If I am on a plane and some guy acting erratically starts claiming he has a bomb, then reaches into a knapsack strapped to his chest? You bet your ***, kill em' all, let got sort 'em out! That is a nightmare scenereo. It's a shame recent events have lead us to where this is necessary, but they have.
Let me give you another example out of the news this week, somewhat less violent in the end...2 kids were suspended from a Chicago school because they had entries in their blogs about doing some pretty horrific things to a specific teacher, then killing her. After the suspensions were handed down, there was all kinds of outcry about first ammendment rights. That may have held water...before Columbine! Now, recent events have forced us to change our views on a lot of tolerance issues.
What you need to consider here is not how likely it is that the guy has a bomb, or whether or not he is mentally ill, but rather how much time you have between when his hand reaches into that bag and when his finger hits that button, whether it is there or not. What is inside that bag is not a given value, and it needs to be treated as a variable. Screeners have been proven ineffective at finding a lot of stuff. Shoe bombers have gotten through (one on the same day as the shooting, BTW...), box cutters (!!!) have been found on planes more than a year after 9/11 and when all passengers have been screened. These officers saw the scenereo in front of them. They attempted to diffuse the situation. When that became impossible, they neutralized the target using deadly force. Whether you like it or not, this guy didn't die of being shot by air marshalls. He died of a mental illness which caused leathally poor judgement.
racer2c
12-13-05, 11:43 AM
... Whether you like it or not, this guy didn't die of being shot by air marshalls. He died of a mental illness which caused leathally poor judgement.
I agree.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.