BP in the news...Bipolar man shot on plane

[wifezilla]

No...not OUR Air Marshall, but an air marshall on a plane.

Some commentators were discussing this on Fox and mention the liability implications to the wife since she knew he was off his meds. Lets have coffee and talk...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177996,00.html

[Danica]

Given the situation at the time...I think the Marshall response was appropriate. It's unfortunate that the man was off his medication and that (probably) his MI affected what he did...but...what else could have been done?

[yo123]

Just heard the news on MSNBC.  Something about he was off his meds, claimed he had a bomb, was shot dead.  His wife had to watch the whole thing...  So sad.

[chinacat]

I agreee, it was appropriate, but Jeeze, it sure ain't good press for us BP weirdos, is it??

[Lisa_K]

Just heard the news on MSNBC.

[yo123]

When I've been off my meds, I've been delusional enough that I could have been in his situation.

[Sk8Punk49]

this is awful. i can understand the marshals' position - they pretty much had to shoot him, but the whole situation is just too sad to comprehend. it certainly makes me want to remember to take my crazy pills.

[freesoul]

I don't see why he had to be shot. If this would have happened before the 9/11 bs he probably wouldn't have been; efforts would have been made to restrain him or something. I mean, his wife was rigth there and saying he was MI.

[Greenyflower]

That is so sad, especially knowing how it could happen.

I mean, his wife was rigth there and saying he was MI.

Somehow, I don't think that his wife saying that he was mentally ill and off his meds would be a calming thing to say, when a man is holding a carry-on bag and claiming it's a bomb.

Keep taking those crazy meds.

[resonance]

Jeez, I was worried about AirMarshall.

His poor wife.  I don't think she *ought to* have any liability, unless she was somehow obstructing him from taking his meds.  She can take on the responsibility to make him take them, and any decent person would at least encourage their spouse to take meds, but that doesn't mean the responsibility was hers to begin with.  I have no idea what liability she actually has, though.

[december_brigette]

Hi All,

So far, from everything that has been reported, you guys have mentioned here.

This past summer I was in a situation because I did not take my meds and luckily the airplane had not taken off...we were still taxing. They didnt shoot me because I was refusing to leave the bathroom and shaking and saying i was too anxious to fly. and oh yeah, here's my bag with all my meds in it.

but i wasnt claiming to have any weapons or destroy anything either.

which equalled out to a nice trip to the ER. (the story is even longer but i'll spare everyone - most of it is down in my springer thread sometime during july)

BUT us MI kids need to be careful when traveling and make sure we take our meds. its too easy to forget during stressful times to be med compliant, and then someone ends up *probably hallucinating* that he's got a bomb in his bag.

december

[celestia]

Just heard the news on MSNBC.

[Stasis]

Crap.

Here in Oregon,

the cops shoot everybody,

Like a poor naked guy,crashed,got badly burned,

was nuts,running around burned,naked,growling,

cops tazed him,then shot him,

Lots.

I take my meds.

Stasis

[yo123]

given the high incidence of people off their meds and the high stress of a long distance high security air flight, it's a wonder more of the 2% of people who are crazy don't get shot. it just seems like a terrible side effect that is built into the system...

"There is no room for weird behavior" said my newscaster.

But what about people who are weird by biological determinism? Should they no longer be able to fly? Or do we accept that they run a high risk of getting shot though innocent and mentally incompetent?

[Loon-A-TiK]

Terrible!

Yes, "mentally ill" plastered in the news again, coupled with "did not take his medication". One weirdo can make us all look, well, like weirdos!

For the record, most of us do stay on drugs!

And China, just let on in your 'hood that you're mental, and they should be so afraid of you that they do not mess with you! At least, I grew up in a low-income, very dangerous area and no one would dare come near me! SPAZZZZZ

Sometimes, if you don't know if they're just in need of some medication or are really a threat, you've got to assume the worst. Still, poor crazy guy.

[PsychoBabbler]

At least the NYTimes mentioned the fact that MI are 4 times more likely to be killed by the police than others.

From what I read, I don't think it was appropriate at all.  They could have shot to wound, not kill.

This reminds me of the man killed on the subway by police in London--another hysterical overreaction to the stressful  times we all live in 

[Guest PinkToo2grrl]

um, why did they have to shoot him six times?  couldn't they just have shot him in the leg?

this is very disturbing to me.  many years ago i was travelling with my then bf, and he had what i can only describe now as a panic attack.  we were in flight.  in the air!  i was terrified he was going to try and open the door to get out of the plane.  this was way before 9/11, and basically it all boiled down to me being embarrassed and scared, and the stewardess (they weren't flight attendants yet) having her hands full.

now, its license to kill?  i dont think deadly force was neccessary.  this has really frightening ramifications for us with MI.  yes, take our meds, but shit happens, and wow, to think i could get shot over a panic attack?

just one more reason to support my ever growing agoraphobia.

[Lily]

PB, that's what I thought too. Why not shoot in the legs or something? I read that a lot of shots were fired in succession.

I dunno; I guess it's hard to say since we weren't there. But yeah, shoot to wound would make more sense to me.

[null0trooper]

um, why did they have to shoot him six times?

[aimees]

I agree with null0trooper here. 

It's a terribly sad situation and I feel very sad for this man and his family.  It's just the times we are living in.  Our country has HAD to change because of 9-11.  I hate the hassle everytime I board an airplane, but I know that all of the hassle, and extra time it takes to finally get on that airplane is to keep me and my family safe. 

What if the man did have a bomb or any other weapon that DID take a life, or many lives, and the air marshall's didn't stop him?  Then everyone would be saying the air marshalls didn't protect the innocent passengers.  How is an air marshall to know who is a real threat and who is just mentally ill and off their medications?  It's easy to see now that it was an innocent man with a troubled mind, but in that situation, at that time, they did what they were trained to do.  And that was to protect all the people that were in or around that airplane.

I hate that this is another black eye for the MI community, but it is what it is.  It's another reminder to those that are MI to be responsible for their illness and always take their meds.  I am doing my part to keep as sane as I possibly can for myself, my family and the community and I wish/hope that all MI people take responsiblity for their illness.

Just my .02...

aimee

[celestia]

um, why did they have to shoot him six times?

[wifezilla]

"If the wife knew her husband was bipolar and that he was off his meds,

why the hell did she take him on that plane unmedicated?"

Speaking as the wife of a BP here...every try to reason with someone who is manic? And a person off their meds can be fine one minute and then wacko the next.

Personally, I would have refused to travel with him if he was off his meds.

They were supposed to be on a church mission in South America. She should have told the pastor.

[Guest PinkToo2grrl]

i get what youre saying null, and god knows there are so many details none of us will ever know about the situation not having been there, but it still is scary as hell to me, and still sounds like *overkill*  ...

k.

i'm out.

[null0trooper]

"If the wife knew her husband was bipolar and that he was off his meds,

why the hell did she take him on that plane unmedicated?"

Speaking as the wife of a BP here...every try to reason with someone who is manic? And a person off their meds can be fine one minute and then wacko the next.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I haven't.

[lei]

none of us were there, but unless startling facts emerge, as sad as this story is, i'm inclined to agree that the marshall was probably doing his job.

if the man actually had a bomb, but the marshall took enough time to diagnose him or search him, or tried to injure him while running but couldn't stop him, and a whole plane full of people (MI and otherwise) were bombed into oblivion, it would have been much worse. if i were on that plane and heard someone say "i have a bomb" i would just want them stopped. i'm sorry. bombs go off fast. it's self-defense. sometimes life sucks.

[Thomas]

I'm not sure how many air marshalls there were or how many fired at once, but my understanding of current training is a double-shot to center body mass if a stop is what you're after (and you don't shoot unless you intend to stop).

It is worst for the wife, I think.  Our newscasters here said she was running along behind him then went back to get her luggage while he's yelling about having a bomb!  Don't know if that's true either, but it makes the whole sorry mess easier to understand.

Tommy

[yo123]

about the wife liability issue...  and a pause here to imagine her grief...

what about those of us who fly solo both literally and figuratively when we're manic?

are our companions really now liable for us?  when then aren't they?

[Thomas]

I is unbelievable that they are even suggesting liability for the wife.  She just tried to explain the situation.  It was her husband's decision not to take his meds.  Damned good reason for me to always take mine.  I'm a fairly recently diagnosed BP2 so this does freak me out a little (OK, a lot), even though I think the air marshalls probably did the best thing in the given situation.

Tommy

[Naeblis]

Also, I guess that when they ordered him to stop, he turned and reached inot his bag.  That sealed the deal there.  No choice.

[wifezilla]

"as sad as this story is, i'm inclined to agree that the marshall was probably doing his job"

Exactly.

[scream_phoenix]

granted i didn't hear the interview for the context, but i was flipping through the channels and on 'your world with neil cavuto' on fox news, he was interviewing some guy, and the caption below him read: AIR MARSHALL SHOOTING: A BOOST TO THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY?

glad to see someone can sort through the complicated emotional wreckage, and social implications, and find how a man's death can contribute to the bottom line.  goddamnit, we need to hire people to 'put out' everyone at fox news.  does that make me crazy?  go ahead american society, shoot me.  i beg of thee.  protect rich peoples money, and continue to inconvience every american citizen at an airport to defend against an event that happened four years ago, and will probably never happen again.  brilliant.  somebody explain to me why they shoot to kill every time?  wouldn't wounding someone and neutralizing them make just as much sense? what if this (non existent) bomb was on a timer and would explode anyway?  what good would killing the person do?  wouldn't it be wiser to keep them alive and get information out of them.  nah fuck it.  dead men don't do cable news interviews. 

[chinacat]

Just one last(??) word--I am goin to fly out of Orlando in about 2 weeks, to Atlanta, and--

1)  I will have taken my meds

2) anyone knows its highly dangerous and illegal to even say the word "Bomb" in an airport--and that was true when I worked for Delta in 1967!!

3)  I want those Air Marshalls on my flight. 

I am sorry an apparently gentle and kind soul who happened to have the same MI as me was killed--but I support the actions of the marshalls 100%.  There is no time in a situation involving this kind of thing to "discuss" it. The man, even after he was on the ground, was reaching for the bag, and the marshals did what they are trained and paid to do--shoot to kill.

You either want security when you fly, or you don't--you can't have it both ways.

I grieve for his family, who, by all accounts, are peaceful, loving people, and cared deeply for this man, and knew he was ill.  But this is all hindsite--and there may be some deterence here for some "sane" person who thinks it might be fun to either have a real explosive, or to "pretend" to have one.

Love, china who has been flying forever, loves it, and wants to keep it that way--and promises to take her meds, always--

[Mack]

Given the situation at the time...I think the Marshall response was appropriate. It's unfortunate that the man was off his medication and that (probably) his MI affected what he did...but...what else could have been done?

I'm going to have to disagree vehemently on this point. I do not believe the response was appropriate in any manner.

First, when reading an article on this it seems that no one heard the word "bomb," during the entire scuffle. Secondly, so the guy was causing problems by running up and down the plane wanting to get off of the plane? Ask yourself, does that really warrant a death sentence? Justifiable homicide? I think not. And yes I sound sanctimonious, but I'll tell you why in a minute. Furthermore, there are many reasons for behavior like that. He didn't have to be Bipolar, he could have had an overwhelming anxiety or panic attack. He could have had an extremely high grade fever (known to cause such behavior). He may have been claustrophobic and not realized it would manifest itself on an airplane. I have no idea - and that is the point - neither did they!!

I'm sorry but there was nothing there that required a death sentence. It was not appropriate behavior. Then I read this:

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. "This is a reminder they are there and are protecting the passengers and that it is a seriously deadly business," he said.

This is the attitude that scares me. This the attitude we get from Katrina and the White House. So what if one man gets killed, how will it effect business?

No. A man died for no good reason and I'm supposed to feel safer on a damn airplane?

[Mack]

You either want security when you fly, or you don't--you can't have it both ways.

I'm sorry, when was I allowed to have a say in the matter? I don't recall a plebiscite or referendum asking me for my input.

I have named the destroyers of nations: comfort, plenty, and security - out of which grow a bored and slothful cynicism, in which rebellion against the world as it is, and myself as I am, are submerged in listless self-satisfaction.

- John Steinbeck

[Breeze]

Wonder if the gentleman was a member here? Hmmm. Wonder if you guys in chat ever talked to him?

[yo123]

bottom line: the marshals' training, their protocol, their flowchart just does not allow for the inability to follow orders or speak coherently that comes with being MI, which is at least 1% of us

the lethality of being MI has just shot up

[Breeze]

the lethality of being MI has just shot up

sad but good point.

[lei]

i cry for all the killing and other tragedy of the world. pretty much every day.

i have friends, MI and otherwise, who were killed by terrorists. a case could probably be made that the terrorists were MI.

the guy who raped me was probably MI. he was, though, considered a "nice family man" by everyone who knew him.

the guy who threw a metal file drawer, which landed a foot away from me, was MI. his sudden crystal-meth-induced rage and strength directed at my co-worker are hard weapons to screen for.

some terroristic threateners are really nice people with really nice families. some live a double life, and some just suddenly lose it. some "only" threaten, and some carry out their threats and kill hundreds or thousands of people. sometimes there's no time to determine what they'll do.

terroristic threatening is not okay, no matter who does it. in fact probably anyone who does it is MI in some way or another.    one can't wear a placard that says, "i may threaten but won't actually harm" because who would determine who gets that? that screening process would be a lot less accurate, and way more invasive and stigmatic, than removing one's shoes.

it can be scary to be MI or otherwise, and it can be scary to be around people who are MI or otherwise. in my ptsd opinion it is scary to have someone nearby say they have a bomb, and (probably to most) scariest of all to wait a second too long and have a bomb explode.

this is all based on the assumption that the FAA report is accurate.    if the guy didn't say he had a bomb and didn't stop when asked and didn't reach into his bag it's another story all together.

but i don't think this is, for example, like police officers in certain areas targeting people of color. i think this is the very first air marshal to have to make this horrible decision to err on the safe side in order to protect a large number of people, MI and otherwise.

[Velvet Elvis]

They only have to kill one terrorist intent on bringing a plane down for every 90-100 MI people killed by mistake to come out ahead in the life saving department. 

"Potential harm" is a hard thing to judge and I'm glad it's not my job to spot it and act accordingly.

Also, there is another side to this that we don't like to to talk about.  Some MI individuals are more likely to cause harm to others than their neurotypical counterparts.  Yes, they are exceptions to the norm.  If they were not exceptions, we'd all be locked up right now.  I'd think they would (rightly) be more inclined to shoot upon hearing that they guy yelling "bomb" is unmedicated bi-polar.

Why not just shoot him in the leg?  Hitting a running target in the leg isn't as easy as it is on TV.  They go for the central body mass.  Why six shots?  I'm assuming that's 2 shots each from 3 air marshals.

There is also the problem of them sometimes not letting people fly if they appear to be under the influence though, and it can be hard to tell in few moment if it's Zyprexa or booze.

[yo123]

and maybe he didnt say bomb but was just acting funny?

i'm not saying i know what happened of course, but i gather that's still on the table

i don't trust the air marshals' word on what happened frankly. this is probably their first big stressful event. they were custom inspectors two years ago and now they are super cops?

[Jemini]

I claim no allegiance to any mentally ill community. I would never do what this guy did.

This doesn't mean you could get shot for having a panic attack. It means you can get shot for waving what you are claiming is a bomb in front of an armed Air Marshall on an airplane. The fact that you are only doing this because there's something seriously wrong with you is not a fact that's going to be taken into account until you are dead. If someone does have a bomb, it is very likely they have a quick, easy way to detonate it, even if you shoot them in the leg. This is a far cry from shooting someone because they're making a big racket and saying they can't fly because they're having a panic attack.

[chinacat]

Perhaps I am a bit harsh, but my history suppports this--my ex was nearly killed, and our family destroyed by a MI guy, taking PCP with his BP drugs, who attacked my now-ex for NO reason(that he could remember or report) causing severe head injuries which changed my husband's life, and in turn all of ours.

I am sorry that the assailant was sick, and I recognized, even then, that he was ill--but he also was supported both monitarily and emotionally by a very MI father who taught him violence since childhood.

[Breeze]

So.....

1) we are all getting different stories from different media sources

2) Everyone who is reacting strongly in favor of what happened has a personal experience to back it up - therefore it's "ok".

3) It still doesn't feel right to me - at all.

And I have PTSD too.

Breeze

[Jemini]

OK can I just make the hopefully obvious point that THIS WAS NOT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST BP. They had no idea why this guy was claiming to be waving a bomb around. They didn't stop to consider how it might look to the mentally ill if this guy had a diagnosed mental illness. They only saw a guy claiming to have a bomb, and his wife was screaming that he was mentally unstable and off his meds. It's not like if she'd  been screaming that he was totally sane that they would not have shot him. This is about what happens when you claim to have a bomb on a plane. Not discrimination.

Am I wrong on this point?

[Velvet Elvis]

Breeze: It never feels right when an innocent person is killed by an agent of the state, regardless of if they were right or wrong in doing so.  It's part of the price we pay for living in a civil society.  It's the function of the state to keep us safe, but agents of the state are only people.  They aren't perfect.  They do the best they can and sometimes shit happens.

I've yet to read anything from a reliable news source that says he never said "bomb."

If anyone has, please post the url.

[lei]

i just want to go on record that i am never "strongly in favor" of killing, nor does it ever feel "ok" to me. i also don't see those feelings in others' posts, though they can speak for themselves.

to me it just may be the only less horrible option than sitting helplessly while someone threatens to destroy or actually destroys me, my loved ones, other innocents.

again, i've been basing this on the theoretical assumption that that is what happened. i don't intake much news because it sucks.

[Mack]

I've yet to read anything from a reliable news source that says he never said "bomb."

If anyone has, please post the url.

http://www.local10.com/news/5500621/detail...ss=mia&psp=news

Ask yourselves this:

If you were intent on committing a major act of terrorism, are you likely to be running up and down the aisle of a plane - with your wife - announcing that you have a bomb? From everything I've read about 9/11 and other terrorist acts this has not been the case. Some of them might have been nervous, but none of them showed any signs of panic/anxiety attack or anything of the sort that this man displayed.

Those of you supporting the action of the air marshall. Consider this: if you were on that plane and you and some children witnessed the killing, how would you explain it when they asked you about it? How do you tell them that it was OK for the man to take that other man's life?

Chinacat, I'm sorry you had a terrible run-in with someone using PCP and mixing it with other medications, but I cannot see how that makes this killing acceptable. Self-defence is one thing, defence of others is one thing, murder is quite another.

So they are trained killers? How is that an excuse? Screw that, all the more reason for better training.

[Guest Guest_lilie_*]

The passengers on the plane are repeatedly saying that this man said nothing about a bomb.The only thing he said was that he wanted off the plane. And why the hell are air marshalls given sharp shooter training when all they're going to do is shoot to kill? Is there no such thing as disabling a suspect anymore by shooting them in a less than fatal manner? Maybe in the leg or arm? Fear is turning those in authority into senseless killers.

From the S.F. Chronicle

Passengers: Alpizar Didn't Say 'Bomb'

By CURT ANDERSON, Associated Press Writer

...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.

"...I can't conceive that the marshals wouldn't be able to overpower an unarmed, single man, especially knowing he had already cleared every security check," Carlos Alpizar told The Orlando Sentinel.

...McAlhany said he "absolutely never heard the word 'bomb' at all."

...Added another passenger, Mary Gardner: "I did not hear him say that he had a bomb."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file.../a071112S62.DTL

From CNN

Passengers say man was agitated

Alpizar's wife, Anne Buechner, tried to help her husband.

"She was just saying her husband was sick, her husband was sick," said passenger Alan Tirpak. When the woman returned, "she just kept saying the same thing over and over, and that's when we heard the shots."

Tirpak said he didn't hear Alpizar say anything.

Another passenger, Mary Gardner of Orlando, said she also overheard Buechner. "I heard her say, 'He's bipolar. He doesn't have his medicine,'" Gardner recalled. (Watch passenger's account: 'Something going on wasn't right' -- 3:21)

Gardner said that the couple had quarreled before the shooting.

Ellen Sutliff, who said she sat near Alpizar on the flight into Miami from Quito, Ecuador, described him as agitated even then. His wife kept coaxing him, saying, " 'We just have to get through customs. Please, please help me get through this,' " according to Sutliff. (Watch video surveillance tape of the man in the Ecuador airport -- 1:34)

" 'We're going to be home soon, and everything will be all right,' " Sutliff quoted the wife as saying.

Passenger Mike Beshears recalled Alpizar running off the plane clutching a bag, chased by a man in a Hawaiian shirt.

That man turned out to be one of the two air marshals.

Like Tirpak, Beshears said he did not hear Alpizar say anything. "He just was in a hurry and exited the plane," he said.

After Alpizar ran off the plane, his wife pursued him part of the way down the aisle, then returned to her seat saying her husband was sick and she needed to get his bags, Beshears said.

"After she passed back toward her seat ... a number of shots rang out -- at least five, up to six, shots rang out," Beshears recalled.

Alpizar's mother-in-law told CNN affiliate WKMG that he suffered from bipolar disorder.

Symptoms for the manic-depressive illness, during its manic stage, can include increased energy, activity and restlessness; extreme irritability; poor judgment; and provocative, intrusive, or aggressive behavior, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.

There are often periods of normal behavior between the manic and depressive stages, and the disorder can be stabilized with medication, the NIMH said.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/08/airplane.gunshot/index.html

[revlow]

Pretty much the same AP story; think this may be the full version: Passengers Didn't Hear Alpizar Say 'Bomb'

A couple of items from this story I haven't seen posted here yet:

"The National Alliance on Mental Illness called on the Air Marshal Service and other law enforcement agencies to train officers if they don't already in responding to people with severe mental illness."

and regarding Rigoberto Alpizar's wife Anne Buechner...

"Buechner works for the Council on Quality and Leadership based in Towson, Md., a nonprofit organization focused on improving life for people with disabilities and mental illness, the organization said in a statement."

I heard the latter within the first couple hours after it happened, but the source seemed pretty shaky then. I believe it was CNN's "Intenet researcher" who gave this tidbit, and she cited that she'd found Buechner's bio at the Council on Quality and Leadership website when she searched for the name "Anne Buechner" -- so I didn't trust it at that point, as it seemed flakey. Here's the wife's bio: http://www.thecouncil.org/contact/102/anne-buechner

All very sad.

[Jemini]

Well those reports change things.

All I'm saying is, it is a federal offense to claim to have a bomb on an airplane. Was well before 9/11, except now, because of 9/11, flights have armed Air Marshalls. And when you wave a bomb around or say threatening things, you are asking to be taken out. I don't care what illness you have. How would you explain to your kids that their grandma got blown up along with 200 other people because a man had a bomb and no one stopped him from using it?

If this man didn't do what other reports are saying, then a crime has been committed and the Air Marshalls are lying to cover their asses.

[yo123]

to be fair, the other side:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/09/national/09marshals.html

[Velvet Elvis]

As I heard it, the story was always that the guy didn't mention a bomb until he was off the plane.  That passengers didn't hear him say anything about a bomb isn't contradictory to the original story.

[Breeze]

"...I can't conceive that the marshals wouldn't be able to overpower an unarmed, single man, especially knowing he had already cleared every security check,"

This is an excellent point.

[Jemini]

Air marshals don't automatically know how good the security is in the airports they're traveling to, and many airports, including Logan in Boston where many of the 9/11 planes flew out of, have repeatedly failed secret inspections. Undercover agents have been able to board planes carrying knives, guns, and plastique. If I were an air marshal I would know this fact.

This is from 2003, but things haven't changed much:

http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg25416.html

[lei]

thanks everyone for the info. yo123 i especially appreciate both sides. there's a nice quote from the times article:

"In fact, said Mr. Adams, the marshal service spokesman, concluding that a person is mentally ill is not the same as concluding that he is harmless.

"A mentally disturbed person could still have a bomb," he said. "Look at the individual who shot President Reagan."

i'm not a reagan fan (at all!) but was thinking about this analogy deeply re: john lennon, who was murdered by an obviously MI person 25 years ago yesterday.

re: technicalities, as the "bomb" statements allegedly happened in the jetway, it's unlikely that any passengers would hear it, much less the one who was quoted. i'd like to have faith that both marshals did hear it in the jetway, but i wasn't there.

but back to the point about him being MI (which i think is the main reason we're discussing this here) i think the quote above echo's Jemini's well-made point earlier, that this was not discrimination.

how much and what type of policing/protecting/shooting should be done is a much broader matter.

peace.

[yo123]

1.

[Jemini]

So... you're saying how many people are shot for being mentally ill or having the flu every year?

I can't wait for thieves to start using the defense in court that sudden criminal activity was a symptom of their mania. Oh, OK then. You're free to go. Take your pills!

[AbbyNormal]

Well,

As the 'facts' are playing out at this time, I feel terrible for that man that was shot and and his family. 

But the situation is what it is.

In this day and age, when you are in an airport anywhere near a security sensitive area, you have to behave yourself, no matter what your affliction.  I understand this, and I am lucky enough to have family that look after me in such situations (and believe me, I have nearly freaked out on planes before).

Because of the current security measures in place worldwide, many of us suffering from MI are at risk of injury or death in airports worldwide.  But there are certain things now that you cannot do or say without being targeted by a security force whose immediate agenda is simply the safety of the innocent people in the vicinity.

I imagine that the air marshalls involved are not thrilled that they were compelled to kill a mentally ill missionary who in the end posed no real threat -- and if you think that they will not be thinking of this man on (their respective holidays) I personally think that you are mistaken.

-- Abby

[Pastafarian]

I disagree with the idea of air marshalls,  I agree that people ought not to be shot willy nilly.

All the facts are not in and i reserve judgment.

I think enough facts are there to assume that the air marshalls were deeply concerned.  Regardless of my opinion of these fuckwits, i do feel bad for them.  It's not their fault they receive no training.

And by the way, NOBODY shoots to wound.  As many have pointed out, all weapons training focuses on centre mass.

That shit in london was homicide.  I think this sounds like a tragedy.

[Breeze]

I can not believe most of you on this thread.  We are talking about one of our own, and most of you think it was justified. Why? Because you think you are safer flying? Are you kidding yourselves?

Why not some positive suggestions? I have heard none.  What about a wrist band that lets security know "I have anxiety"? What about a separate check in for severely MI's? What about a lot of things that are inherently wrong with this system?

It could have been you or me. Needing to get off that plane. And dare I say he had dark skin?

This is WRONG people and we can't just lie down and say "bummer, he should have taken his meds." 

WTF???

Breeze (who will probably stop now, don't want to get ambushed at my computer)

[Mack]

"A mentally disturbed person could still have a bomb," he said. "Look at the individual who shot President Reagan."

This analogy is not even close to the same thing.

I can't wait for thieves to start using the defense in court that sudden criminal activity was a symptom of their mania. Oh, OK then. You're free to go. Take your pills!

A straw man argument. No one should be excused for criminal activity, BUT whenb did this man comit a crime??? From what I've read he never did, except perhaps causing a disturbance of some kind. A little compassion and level-headed thinking could have diffused (no pun intended) the entire situation and let both he and his wife off of the plane and into detention at the Miami airport if necessary.

In this day and age, when you are in an airport anywhere near a security sensitive area, you have to behave yourself, no matter what your affliction.

Apparently!! otherwise the American public feels justified in having you summarily executed.

and if you think that they will not be thinking of this man on (their respective holidays) I personally think that you are mistaken

That is for them and their conscience. They may not give a damn less, or it may eat them up inside. I'm sure the man's wife will be thinking about it. I'm sure his family will be thinking about it.

This is WRONG people and we can't just lie down and say "bummer, he should have taken his meds."

I'm with Breeze on this one. We can't just start justifying these incidents with ease and saying "well, it is for our security, our safety." Please don't sign my name to anyone's death warrant. I'm not out to kill anyone in the name of my safety and security.

[Jemini]

In this day and age, when you are in an airport anywhere near a security sensitive area, you have to behave yourself, no matter what your affliction.

Apparently!! otherwise the American public feels justified in having you summarily executed.

Yes, yes I do.

Have any of you genuises thought about the fact that anyone waving an *actual* bomb around is probably mentally ill? That this fact, if fully understood, would not put officers trained to deal with terrorists at ease? The only thing this guy could have done to save his own life was calm the fuck down and realize, manic or not, I'm pretending to be a fucking terrorist and these guys are trained to shoot terrorists.

I don't get this banding together. It's absurd. I'm not saying this guy deserved to die, but anyone who does start threatening the lives of the public is asking to get shot. You can't do this. Period. Many bipolar people take their own lives; this guy did a suicide by cop, if unintentionally. Tragic, yes, but don't blame the cops for doing their jobs. If you're afraid this could happen to you, my advice is to take your meds or do whatever you need to do so that you don't threaten my life on an airplane. If you do, I'm not going whip out my ACLU card and start arguing with the armed guards about unfair descrimination against mentally unstable people. I'm going to hope they put you down before I get hurt.

[null0trooper]

It could have been you or me. Needing to get off that plane. And dare I say he had dark skin?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Breeze,

It's not a matter of black or white skin. It's a matter of how fast a situation can be assessed and

terminated, when the worst-case scenario has been proven both achievable and horrific.

As to "it could be you or me".  No.  It couldn't. 

[chinacat]

He did NOT have "dark skin", he WAS of Hispanic descent, but a US citizen, and his wife was blonde--not that that matters. 

What many of us are saying, I think is that crazy people often do crazy, irrational things.  Often, those things are just that--irrational statements, acting out.  But sometimes--think of Regan, think of John Lennon, etc.--crazy people try to kill other people.  In a split second, could YOU make that decision--"he's harmless, just nuts" or "he's a nut, but maybe not so harmelss"  Especially if your job was to protect the other 199 people on the airplane with this person?

I have heard, locally, that the man was "afraid there was a bomb" on board. Whatever the case, once he left the airplane onto the jet port, he did in fact begin yelling about a bomb.  He refused to follow marshalls' instructions and was killed.  They simply could not and did not take the time to "discuss" is--"Is he just crazy"?  "Acting out"  "Not taken his meds"?  Their mission is to protect the people they are flying with.  Plastic weapons can be passed thru security--that has been proved--and who knows what he might have had planned, or what accomplicises he might have had?  We know now, none, and that he had no weapon.  But when you do not follow police instructions and they think you have a weapon, and are endangering hundreds of lives, they are trained to shoot to kill.

Its is unspeakably sad, but it is a fact., and we all better learn to live with it.

I saw a bumper sticker today-- simply said "I  miss Sept. 10"

love, china, who is not a"killing freak" but understands that society has rules, whether we like them or not,. and till we can change them, legally, if we choose to ignore them, we endanger ourselves.  It is our right to take that risk--but it is a very large risk--

[Mack]

Have any of you genuises thought about the fact that anyone waving an *actual* bomb around is probably mentally ill?

Interestingly, I don't think any of the 9/11 terrorists showed any sign of having a mental disorder.

I'm not saying this guy deserved to die, but anyone who does start threatening the lives of the public is asking to get shot.

So, yes you are in fact saying this guy deserved to die, you did so in the first sentence of your paragraph. And no one heard him threaten the passengers with a bomb. All anyone heard him say was that he wanted off the damn plane.

What I don't get is how easily you all can forfeit someone's life. It frankly amazes me. I've truly underestimated the power of the words "safety and security."

Here's a thought: you are much more likely to be killed by an awful driver than by a terrorist attack. Yet, where are all the calls for tougher driving laws? Why not have mandatory training classes for driving at night, in foul weather, in snow, in rain?

I'll tell you why? Who gets more votes on election day? The guy who wants to federalise driver's training, or the guy who promises to shoot terrorists first and ask questions later? I think just from reading this thread there is a clear answer. Yet, statistics don't lie about which one is the bigger threat to your life on a daily basis.

So this man gets shot and it is justified to you.

I'm going to hope they put you down before I get hurt.

God Bless America, the home of the...what was that again?

As to "it could be you or me".  No.  It couldn't.

So if someone here has a panic attack on an airplane and never says the word "bomb", yet you don't think they could get put down? It sure as hell seems possible to me. And it seems like a line of people will be there to applaud as well.

What many of us are saying, I think is that crazy people often do crazy, irrational things.  Often, those things are just that--irrational statements, acting out.  But sometimes--think of Regan, think of John Lennon

And yet Mark David Chapman and John Hinkley are NOT dead and this man who did not comit a crime IS. No, I don't buy that argument. If someone had overpowered Chapman or Hinkley they could have easily been disarmed. This man did not deserve to die.

[Velvet Elvis]

I don't think anyone is saying the guy deserved to die.  I think we're all pretty much in agreement that what happened was a tragedy.  A horrible tragedy. 

That said, I don't see any huge miscarriage of justice here either.

I don't get how or why you are making this political.  The same thing would have happened if he'd done the same thing on an airplane flying under the flag of any number of nations.

Had it been at an Israri airport (no anti-semetism implied) I doubt they'd have even given him a warning like they did here.

[Guest Guest_lilie_*]

"I have heard, locally, that the man was "afraid there was a bomb" on board. Whatever the case, once he left the airplane onto the jet port, he did in fact begin yelling about a bomb."

Heard locally? From what gossip? What actual news link says that?

Lilie

[LunaRufina]

As to "it could be you or me".  No.  It couldn't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah. I think it could. I really really do.

One example:

When I was in the accident in March, and flying back, I was all kinds of messed up.

I was having some problems with perception, talking, and just basic maneuvering my way around the airport. I had some notes with me that said, I think, that I had a neurological disorder and High Functioning Autism, in case anyone gave me crap and I couldn't talk. But to be clear, it wasn't like I looked like a drunk staggering home at 3AM.

I had a problem where I had to change planes and was stuck at Concourse B and wanted to go to Concourse C.  But I really couldn't make it there without an escort.  I tried to ask someone for help and was having some problems with that, even, but really wasn't acting like a jerk, or all that bizarrely.

I was fucking exhausted, seeing things strangely, having some troubly talking, and had to think hard about walking. I was, however, pretty lucid and calm.

I did get agitated as the situation unfolded though.

I was online at the time and checking in. Some of the things that I was writing at the time:

And they don't want to let me on the fucking flight.

Well, the manager of concourse be doesn't.

"I don't feel ok with this. I am concerned about the safety of OTHER PASSENGERS.  Your pupils look diallated. I need to call an EMT"

Yes. She did say that she was concerned about the safety of other passengers based on what she had in front of her. But at least she was going to get EMT's, right?

So I need to wait for the EMT to give me an examination...  Though the manager of concourse B will have to hold me against my will in that concourse to keep me from flying.

She can't leave the concourse... The likelyhood that I could make it to the end of the concourse with my shit quicker than anyone else is non-existent...

This all worries me. What if I wasn't online at that point? What if I wasn't talking to my mother on the phone? What if I thought that maybe I could try to make my way out of B? 

What if, what if...

I just wanted to go home. And, honestly, the weight of her words didn't strike me then. They pissed me off, but didn't hit me deep enough. Unless the guy was intending for the situation to lead to his death, I doubt that the gravity of the situation penetrated his freak-out.

EMT's and airport officers came over and the EMT's started talking to me, asking me about medications, what was going on, etc.

It ended up that the EMT's saw what was truly going on- I was coherent despite my language difficulties, and that I needed an escort to my gate. Nothing else.

I don't know what the officers thought. I don't think they could have assessed the situation appropriately and I know that the airline/airport employees certainly weren't.

The entire thing was some Fucked Up Shit.

''I am concerned about the safety of OTHER PASSENGERS''

Was that necessary? Really?

And bringing over an officer when I agreed to be examined by the EMT's?

Yeah I was pissed and thinking those things, but I am pretty sure it was more because I was seen as a threat than anything else.

But now it makes me wonder what the fuck to do.

Why didn't

she even think to warn someone (OK we KNOW why - but the cost of

saving some embarassment over social stigma or taking a later flight

is that she's now having to look for a burial plot for her beloved.

God, maybe this was her worst fucking nightmare come true.

Look at the above situation that I am describing from my trip to the airport- it is, I imagine, according to social stigma, fairly benign.

I am not going to go up to someone when I am getting on a flight, say 'hi. I'm bipolar, I have the flu, and have been having a few anxiety problems. JUST TO WARN YOU.'

That will get my ass booted. You think I could even disagree safely?

I wouldn't. Honestly.

Past experience.

My solution now, is to change my seating to available disability when i get to check in [i kind of have people and space issues about flying, anyway] and always wear a med-alert.  It isn't like I expect to have problems in the future, but security checks, for instance, can sometimes be a little much. That's all I got.

Who's the real

crazy person?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am not sure, but I know when I was checking in and writing from the airport in March, I said it was the airport manager, who tried to imply that I may be a threat to others. Cause neurological damage+HFA always =dangerous. Right?

What if the notes that I had written out telling her I needed assistance to my gate had also said that I was Bipolar?

I really don't know that the possibility for this sort of situation is as unlikely as we would like to think. I am certainly included in that we.

[december_brigette]

Hi All,

I posted this a few pages ago and also on my springer thread, but just wanted to repeat it, why not?

I had a major anxiety attack in the bathroom on a plane while we were taxing. of course, the airplane cannot under federal law take off with someone in the bathroom - much less someone crying and screaming in the bathroom.

the airplane went back to the airport and i was escorted off by EMTs and Police. I couldnt tell you what I was saying, i dont remember, and it was probably all jibberish.

what if in all that jibberish i mentioned a bomb?

Since I was able to walk, they asked me to walk off the plane. However, I was also shaking so much that i was holding one of the police officer's hands.

Once we got into the concourse, they put me in a wheelchair. there was quite the group of BIG MEN surrounding me. There were the EMTs that were working on me. There were the cops surrounding me, and then there were the airline workers. Luckily I had all my pills in their bottles with me in a sheer pink carry-on bag.

I dont remember the second-by-second details. and sometimes my eyes were closed (like when the dude was putting in the IV). But up until the point of me being put in the ambulance (i walked on and sat...there was another woman on with heart & blood pressure issues who was laying down on a stretcher). I was surrounded by a lot of BIG MEN.

Now, we all know I am cute. I look very eastern european/ russian (that is part of my background). and what if that day security had a warning to look out for a young woman of eastern european dissent?

I dont know the answers. Its very possible they could have done the same thing and yanked me out of the bathroom or who even knows. I am very thankful for the treatment I received at the airport from the EMTs, the cops, and the airline workers.

I am not defending or accepting any of the recent events. Being MI, we have to be careful travelling period. Had I taken my meds and slept appropriately, I may not have had that anxiety attack....but I thought I was doing good and didnt need them even though I know I have to take them. That is part of the issue of being BP2 for ME.

again, i dont know what is right or wrong in this case. Quite frankly, Im very happy and honestly surprised with the treatment I received. and I hope that the incident in miami will open more discussions & more training in dealing with MI or other disabled passengers.

december

[Mack]

I don't get how or why you are making this political.  The same thing would have happened if he'd done the same thing on an airplane flying under the flag of any number of nations.

Has it? The Brazillian was killed in the subway in London, which caused quite a row. I cannot think of another similar incident in a country like the United States. Would it have happened in Canada, Germany, France, Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, Ireland?

Maybe. I don't know. Even if it did, would that make it right?

My point is that it was not justifiable. The politics comes in with the use of "terrorism" and "safety and security" as an excuse for summary execution. I feel able to raise that point because others brought the fact of a "post 9/11 world" into the discussion beforehand.

[Jemini]

What the hell are you talking about?

What about the guy who had a plan to kill Richard Nixon, tried to hijack a commercial flight, shot someone, and was shot himself? Should we review his case and see if he had an undiagnosed mental illness? Guess what -- he did. What the hell difference does it make?

These air marshals were reacting to a threat. That's all. Most people do not believe there is some acceptable excuse for saying you have a bomb on an airplane (or saying this while running away from armed security on the tarmac). Especially post 9/11. If anyone here is actually saying they can't trust themselves not to do such a thing, maybe you should just lock yourself up for your own protection.

Was justice served? No. It was tragic. Was there any discrimination here? No, there was not. If you believe these air marshals acted out of insensitivity to the mentally ill or out of actual prejudice, you're crazy.

[yo123]

perhaps he was in his delusion running away from the plane because he thought there was a b-word under the plane and that was what he was trying to communicate to the marshals.

all we know is that he was acting weird.

and the issue isn't that some MI can be guilty, it's that many MI are innocent although the two present the same way.  so unless we want to accept summary executions for acting weird, we've got to include MI in the protocol.  i have no idea what that would look like:  even less freedom for MI as we are made to sit next to the marshals, have special screenings, etc.?

finally, it was a mistake, what the marshals did, but it is one i probably would have made too 

[Jemini]

I'm not commenting at all on whether the reports are correct about him saying he had a bomb. I'm responding to people who seem to accept that he did this and don't understand why he was shot. I don't think a single person has argued that it would be okay, or legal, to shoot someone because they were simply acting erratic.

[LunaRufina]

I'm not commenting at all on whether the reports are correct about him saying he had a bomb. I'm responding to people who seem to accept that he did this and don't understand why he was shot. I don't think a single person has argued that it would be okay, or legal, to shoot someone because they were simply acting erratic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know who you are addressing, is one problem.

I don't know that many other people do either.

You also might be addressing people who do seem to be saying what you think, but actually aren't. Because you are misinterpreting.

So, hmm.

I am confused.

Cause I don't really know what you are saying here, since I don't know who you are responding to, exactly.

...

edit:

  so unless we want to accept summary executions for acting weird, we've got to include MI in the protocol.  i have no idea what that would look like:  even less freedom for MI as we are made to sit next to the marshals, have special screenings, etc.?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This possibility scares the crap out of me, by the way.

[sepia]

For what it's worth, no one I know in the airline industry -- including a check-in attendant, a flight attendant, two former stewardesses (yep, that long ago), and a former air traffic controller -- or their vocal coworkers think that this situation was handled reasonably.  That was their word the day of/day after this tragedy, and it's the word now.  I doubt their Canadianness has much to do with it. 

[null0trooper]

As to "it could be you or me".  No.  It couldn't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah. I think it could. I really really do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you are dangerously wrong.

One of the things people are managing to not take away from participating here is that your mental

illness is not my mental illness.

As I was originally responding to Breeze, I'll expand from there - she has an anxiety disorder. My

main behavioral problems stem from ADD. I don't HAVE panic attacks and run screaming from

planes (besides, I detest crowds far more than enclosed spaces).

No. Unmedicated, I'm the jackass going ballistic from petty frustrations at the counter, still seeing

red at the concourse screen, and liable to shoot my mouth off in a way that would buy me a "Sir.

You are going to have to come with us. Now."  Been there, came VERY close to doing that.

Note: A non-MI friend - years before the 9/11 incident - was taken for a body search for

essentially wearing too much black.

Why didn't

she even think to warn someone (OK we KNOW why - but the cost of

saving some embarassment over social stigma or taking a later flight

is that she's now having to look for a burial plot for her beloved.

God, maybe this was her worst fucking nightmare come true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hard to see it as only "maybe"

What if the notes that I had written out telling her I needed assistance to my gate had also said that I was Bipolar?

I really don't know that the possibility for this sort of situation is as unlikely as we would like to think. I am certainly included in that we.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is one of the things that worries me about all of this "They need to be more sensitive to mental

issues" talk.  I could see that leading to having insurance companies/doctors reporting their patients

to Homeland Insecurity just as neurologists are expected to report epileptics in some places, IIRC.

And you are right - I can see them booting bipolar and schiophrenic/schizoaffective folks

"for the safety of the passengers" because of the associated misinformation and stigma.

[Mack]

What about the guy who had a plan to kill Richard Nixon, tried to hijack a commercial flight, shot someone, and was shot himself?

Ummm...carrying a weapon on a plane, attempted hijacking, shooting someone are all criminal activities. Tell me again how that is even close to similar to the case of the man in Miami who did not comit a crime.

I don't know that I see it as an issue of being more friendly to the mentally ill. I see it as an issue where Osama must be laughing his ass off. He doesn't even need another attack, he's got us so damn screwed up that many of us are justifying a summary execution of our own citizen who did nothing wrong but act in a very bizarre manner. We spend billions of dollars and have politicians in Podunk, Nebraska promising to spend billions more as well as send thousands of kids to there deaths over a threat that is less likely to harm any of us than an idiot driver or a flash flood.

Imnop is right, it was handled poorly, by people who had only been on the job for three years. And while some of you may feel much safer flying, knowing that these "threats" are being handled in such a "expedient" manner, it makes me feel a hell of a lot "less" safe knowing just how quickly these guys go for their weapons.

So disparage the ACLU (whatever that has to do with the price of tea in China) all you like, but a US citizen was summarily executed and should not have been. This is "safety and security" at its finest and I don't want my name on the sheet of people who feel justified in taking an innocent life for those two words.

[Jemini]

Mack --

I am not disparaging the ACLU. I am a member. I don't feel more secure. Airport security is still a joke, and this guy obviously wasn't an actual threat.

I'm saying something so so so simple. You can't say you have a bomb on a plane. Expect to die if you do.

A lot of people here are extrapolating that fact to mean all sorts of absurd shit. This story is not about stigma of mental illness. It is not about how you could be treated if you wigged out on an airplane.  If I ever have a psychotic episode while flying, I hope they calm me down and sedate me or something, but if they escort me off the plane and send me to the ER, as I suspect might happen, I'll understand this later when I'm no longer psychotic. Likewise if I ever get so psychotic while flying that I decide it might help things if I say I have a bomb, and they shoot me, I will understand this later when I'm dead.

If you can't accept that mentally ill or not, people have some responsibility for their actions, at least realize that being mentally ill does not make *others* responsible for one's actions.

There are bombs that exist that could take out an airplane and fit in a suitcase. Terrorists have killed a few thousand people worldwide since 9/11, many on trains. A bomb can be detonated with the push of a button on a radio trigger. If someone is a raving lunatic and is claiming to have a bomb you need to immediately contain them to ensure the safety of the passengers. To air marshals, there is zero difference between someone saying they have a bomb who doesn't have a bomb and someone saying they have a bomb who does. If the person is running away from the airplane this is also not a good sign. Which part of this paragraph don't you understand?

[crazynotstupid]

Grrr.  It's really this simple, people: if a cop, particularly one who has his gun pulled, tells you to stop, and not only do you *not* stop, but instead reach in your bag...  Well, they don't know what's in there.  If he said he had a bomb (which we don't know; he WAS on the concourse, not the plane, where the alleged claim was made), then there was NO choice but to take him down.  Wounding isn't an option as a wounded man can still detonate a bomb or pull out a weapon.

This man died not merely because he was acting "erratically" or even totally batshit, but also because he failed to obey orders to stop.  He still could have lived, I believe, had he NOT reached into his bag.

Besides all that, hindsight is generally 20/20.  The marshalls had seconds to act.  It was obviously confusing, with the guy going nuts, the wife screaming, etc..  Split-second decisions are just that: amazingly fast.  Yet, they can be second-guessed for years.  It was a tense, chaotic situation, and in that split-second training took over.  It's tragic it ended as it did, but I think the marshalls acted as they did out of necessity.

[wifezilla]

If you ever happen to be in Colorado Springs, take a drive down a little, quiet street called Mark Dabling Blvd. It is named after a police officer who, while making a routine traffic stop, was shot in the back and killed. No yelling, no screaming, no flip out. He just happened to have pulled over an escaped convict..who happened to have a gun concealed on the passenger seat.

When this can happen during a quiet, supposedly simple traffic stop, what do you think is going to happen when someone is yelling, screaming, flipping out, and wont follow orders? Someone who reaches into a back pack?

Yeah, I am very sad this guy died. As the wife of a BP, I could TOTALLY see myself being in the wife's shoes. It is a tragedy. It could have been totally avoided...if he would have taken his meds. HE put himself into a position where his actions could easily be seen as a danger. That air marshall wasn't out to get an MI person when he clocked in to work that morning. He was responsible for a WHOLE PLANELOAD of people. I also try to put myself in the air marshall's position. I really think I would have done the same.

[yo123]

I think Jemini and wifezilla have never been delusional.

[crazynotstupid]

And someone who is irrational does not follow orders. Hence, we need a separate analysis for those who cannot follow orders, even if it is called Amtrak. Evidently the alternative is DEATH.

If one is not cabable of, or simply does not, follow orders, the following consequnces of their actions are still on them.  Of course, police et al can not know what they are thinking (or if they ARE thinking).  Speaking from the point of one who has been cuffed, frisked, and nearly had a gun pulled on him--ALL unnecassarily (from my POV), I know the importance of following directions from the guy holding the gun.

Delusions are true in the eye of the beholder; to the rest of us, we can only guess.  To a cop/air marshall, who is concerned with protecting the lives of others (themselves included), guessing is NOT an option.

[Mack]

then there was NO choice but to take him down

There is always a choice. And yes you should follow orders, I agree. Yet, you cannot place the responsibility completely on the individual. As someone about to take a life, you hold some of the responsibility in making that decision as well.

Also, when did it become illegal to say the word "bomb" on an airplane? There are many meanings for the word and last I checked it was not a capital offense to say the word in an airport or on the plane itself.

Yes, he shouldn't have reached into the bag, but was the response justified? In my opinion it was not. Hindsight being 20/20 has nothing to do with it.

[wifezilla]

"Also, when did it become illegal to say the word "bomb" on an airplane?"

I don't know about the airports YOU go to , but in the ones I have used THERE ARE SIGNS EVERYWHERE! In the parking garages, in the elevators, in the walkways...They pretty much say DON'T EVEN MENTION THE WORDS GUN, HIJACK, BOMB, ETC OR WE WILL ARREST OR EVEN SHOOT YOUR STUPID ASS. (No, not the exact wording...hee hee hee...but it was worded strongly enough that this is the message I got!)

[Mack]

So in a casual conversation you cannot even mention the word "bomb?" Even if you are talking about Dresden or Pearl Harbor with your neighbor?

I haven't flown post 9/11.

Which part of this paragraph don't you understand?

Yet, the individual did not have a bomb.

Let me explain something. If you want to tie dynamite or plastique to your body and run into a building full of people there isn't a whole hell of a lot anyone can do to stop you. The Israelis and British have dealt with it for decades and yet they've never come up with a full proof scheme.

That is reality. Like it or not. Now, if you want real security we could make this country like Franco's Spain or Salazar's Portugal and every streetcorner would have a few men with machine guns just waiting for you to give them a strange look or show the slightest look of suspicion. You'd have to suspend just about every right you enjoy and hope you win favor from the people in charge. It is hard to prevent people from obtaining a technology from the 1860's. It is even more difficult to make sure every building, every mode of transportation is safe and sound.

It is also reality that more people will die in a given year from many other things besides terrorism. There were 1,907 terrorist deaths internationally in 2004 - one of the worst years on record. We'll go with 3000 from the WTC though.

So in 2004:

1907 Terrorist deaths worldwide (3000 in 2001)

42,636 Automobile Fatalities in the United States alone (NHTSA)

5703 Fatal Occupational Injuries (United States Only) (BLS)

283,100 Killed by the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004 (US Geological Survey)

16,137 Individuals murdered in the United States in 2004 (FBI CIUS Report)

roughly 700,000 die from heart disease in the US alone.

30,622 people died from suicide in 2001

So, no I'm not convinced that such radical action is necessary at all. I think it was much more likely that the man did not have a bomb as was the case.

[anotherBP]

The bag had already been thru the x ray screener and the wife was saying stuff.  I just wonder what she was saying specifically.  And to who.  Also are air marshals trained in MI delusions?  How long was he off his meds?  I dunno.

I also wonder if the flight attendants said "ba bye now" when he ran off the plane.

[scream_phoenix]

i guess the lesson here is : don't bring an empty bag and a mental illness to a gun fight.

(yeah i'll probably edit this later)

and as for the retort 'he was just doing his job"

to me that's like saying, "yeah that german sheperd police dog bit off my genitals but y'know  . . . he was just doing his job, its the only thing he knows how to do.  sure those nazi soldiers pressed the button to gas all those jews but y'know . . . they were just doing a job, it said as much in the propaganda video.  bless those agents of the state.'

the point is not 'had he fully read over the employee manual, and carried out their instructions dutifully'.  its the larger question of the state's policy, and should these people have this 'job' in the first place.  maybe he was just really bored, and finally wanted to use his gun.  from what i saw on cnn these people ride on airplanes 80 hours a week, can't listen to headphones, videos, or anything, except read.  there's too many brown skinned characters out there who want to cause trouble (except this was the first time that i'm aware of that they've killed someone, and in the aftermath he turned out not to be a terrorist)  a job well done air marshall.  you can only read skymall so many times before you want to put a bullet in the first person that causes trouble. 

[crazynotstupid]

Re:  Israelis, British, and suicide bomners.  They both have a pretty good solution: shoot 'em in the head if they don't stop as ordered.  Bomb or no.

Brutal?  Yep.  Effective?  Well, definately, if it prevents a bomb going off and killing civilians.  (A person shot in the head has a tough time triggering a bomb)

Re: police dogs.  Hey, if one happens to be chewing MY balls off, it's A: because I didn't obey the cops and ran, and they set the dog after me; and B: I didn't drop when the dog caught me.  I can't blame the dog for my actions; if not for my disobeying an officer's orders, then I wouldn't BE in that situation.

If the guy didn't obey orders to stop, then whether or not he was delusional, he created the situation.  While he may not be to blame, he is not blameless.  There are rules to be followed; he did not follow them.  Sadly, it cost him his life.

As for my comment on the marshalls "just doing their job"--their JOB is to PROTECT the air traveling public.  It is NOT their job to dx someone as MI.  They cannot, and should not.  In such a situation as this, the guy is either crazy, a threat, or both.  It was a judgement call on the marshalls' part, and while it may not have been the right one, I feel it wasn't the *wrong* one, or a bad one.

Just one that had tragic consequences.

[Velvet Elvis]

The bag had already been thru the x ray screener and the wife was saying stuff.  I just wonder what she was saying specifically.  And to who.  Also are air marshals trained in MI delusions?  How long was he off his meds?  I dunno.

It went through all the required checkpoints in Columbia where corruptions is everywhere.  Lots of scary people fly from Columbia to Miami on a regular basis.  I don't think anyone has brought this up yet, but the outcome might have been different had this been a domestic flight or one originating in Copenhagen.

[Mack]

Re:  Israelis, British, and suicide bomners.  They both have a pretty good solution: shoot 'em in the head if they don't stop as ordered.  Bomb or no.

And both have had no terrorist attacks in recent times...oh wait...yes they have.

As I said, if you really want to strap dynamite on your body and run into a building there isn't much anyone can do to stop you. You can live your life in fear and hir air marshalls, etc. to take down civilians and every once in a while maybe an actual terrorist - but you won't change that simple fact.

Don't believe me, ask the people of Manchester on June 15, 1996? By the way all one needs is a dead man's switch to detonate a bomb and it doesn't matter if you've been shot in the head or not.

Feel safer now?

No, there was no need to kill the man in Miami. He quite obviously was not a bomber.

[Guest Guest_lilie_*]

The most important part of this was: THERE WAS NO BOMB. The whole thing about a bomb was the Air marshalls doing. Air marshalls supposedly go through crisis training and supposedly through marksmanship training. If the other passengers had seen a problem BEFORE all the shit hit the fan then where were the marshalls then? Why didn't they escort him off the plane(as they usually do) BEFORE it got out of hand? I guess all that training goes out the window when the air marshalls get scared. You'd think their reasoning skills were above and beyond the passengers but I guess not. They were just scared and panicked. There is the debate that he did or didn't  say bomb but I guess the  bottom line is how well the air marshalls(who are supposed to handle crisis situations) acted in the face of fear.

Just shut your mouth and sit in your seat or your ass may be grass. Hope there aren't any screaming babies on any of these flights...

Lilie

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/decem...amiincident.htm

[chinacat]

NO NO NO__you cannot mention the word "BOMB" in an airport, on a plane, etc. without being severely questioned/arrested/harrassed WAAAAAAY before 9/11, cause I worked on the Delta Ticket counter in 1967--anyone here even alive then??  And it was HIGHLY illegal and ill advised even then--we were taught that.

This is not a joke, this is nothing to joke about--in fact, an airport is just really a no-joke zone all together.

And its sure a "Take your meds, sit down and try to be quiet" zone and has been for many many years--1967 was almost FORTY years ago, kiddies.

Please--

china, who does not want any of her mentally interesting friends to be toted off, cause any disturbances, be harassed, or Goddess forbid--shot.

[wifezilla]

"He quite obviously was not a bomber"

What??

And you know this...and an air marshall would know this....how? By the "I am not a bomber, I am just fucking crazy!" T-shirt he was wearing?