Air Marshall Shoots Passenger

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Mr2Geez wrote:
I heard this on the news the day after it happened. I would be a little concerned if it were true that the only two people who heard him mention a bomb were the guys who shot him.

I hate to say this, but nothing else about this situation adds up to him looking suspicious enough to kill. If he was mentally ill, maybe he was nervous about the flight and felt he had to get off the plane?

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/09/D8ECRGBG0.html[/quote]

I agree considering that info. If he didn’t say he had a bomb, there was no reason to shoot him. Apparently no one heard this word aside from the police who shot him. There does need to be an investigation.

82

[quote]Mr2Geez wrote:
I heard this on the news the day after it happened. I would be a little concerned if it were true that the only two people who heard him mention a bomb were the guys who shot him.

I hate to say this, but nothing else about this situation adds up to him looking suspicious enough to kill. If he was mentally ill, maybe he was nervous about the flight and felt he had to get off the plane?

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/09/D8ECRGBG0.html[/quote]

seems pretty weak to me. the guy had cleared all the security checks- whatever those were- was running from the plane, and the only people to hear “the b-word” were the marshalls ?

sorry folks, but i make mistakes all the time and am held accountable for them. sure i intend to do the right thing; that’s what makes it a mistake.
this shooting was a mistake.

83

Where you at snipe?

No bomb threat. Hear that? nice little scenario being painted:

-Alpizar(freaking out) - I have to get off this plane.(gets up and rushes OFF the plane, through first class, where marshalls are located(hmm))
(Marshalls chase Alpizar into the jetway, guns drawn)
-Marshall - Freeze, get down on the ground!
(Alpizar doesn’t listen)(wife pleading in the background)
-Marshall - I said get down on the ground!
Alpizar, at this point may or may not have said bomb.
Alpizar takes five bullets.
Agents don’t find a bomb.
The end. Merry Christmas.

Looks like at least a questionable shoot at this point. Would you agree? Or am I just overcome with my hatred for authority again?

84

[quote]AZMojo wrote:
Where you at snipe?

No bomb threat. Hear that? nice little scenario being painted:

-Alpizar(freaking out) - I have to get off this plane.(gets up and rushes OFF the plane, through first class, where marshalls are located(hmm))
(Marshalls chase Alpizar into the jetway, guns drawn)
-Marshall - Freeze, get down on the ground!
(Alpizar doesn’t listen)(wife pleading in the background)
-Marshall - I said get down on the ground!
Alpizar, at this point may or may not have said bomb.
Alpizar takes five bullets.
Agents don’t find a bomb.
The end. Merry Christmas.

Looks like at least a questionable shoot at this point. Would you agree? Or am I just overcome with my hatred for authority again?[/quote]

None of it makes sense as more info comes out. Why would a guy with a bomb, who somehow walked through all security checks with the freaking bomb ON HIM (now, if that doesn’t speak against airport security, I don’t know what does), leave his wife on a plane as he gets ready to…what, blow himself up outside of the plane??? What was the point of this bombing? It’s beginning to sound alot like bullshit instead of Christmas.

85

I don’t think it matters.

You guys speculating about this is just the same as me speculating that the people who say he didn’t say it, just want to stir up trouble with the government.

People don’t hear A LOT of stuff. Would you all gasp if I said that Americans DON’T PAY ATTENTION to the world around them.

How about this scenario. Baby starts crying on the airplane. We haven’t taken off yet, I throw on my iPod. Guy starts running they shoot him. I never heard him say bomb.

Maybe because… I wasn’t listening.

Stop the speculation.

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.

86

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I agree considering that info. If he didn’t say he had a bomb, there was no reason to shoot him. Apparently no one heard this word aside from the police who shot him. There does need to be an investigation.[/quote]

I suspect there would have been an investigation anyway; and rightly so of course.

I fly a lot. Too much. I found myself nodding and agreeing with the posters that wrote along the lines “if he said he had a bomb, he deserved to be shot and killed”. I really do agree with that - even if he was mentally ill.

However, a part of me is also quite ashamed at my own cowardly thought process. I have two issues:

  1. That we, as a collective society of human beings have become so dysfunctional that we need Air Marshalls (and I obviously believe we do!).

  2. Much worse still, that we do not take care of the people in our society who are obviously incapable of fully looking after themselves. This is the one that upsets me the most, as I know it’s fixable.

I was thinking abut these two things as I read more and more postings - even as I agreed with the majority of them. I wonder if we aren’t just a very sorry excuse for a civilized society.

With all the great people that I truly believe we have, I cannot fathom why we’re in this mess, and why we can’t get ourselves out.

WiZ

87

[quote]TriGWU wrote:

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.[/quote]

What was the situation? It seems to change each day, and each day it looks less and less “right”.

The witnesses interviewed seems like they might have been paying some attention to the guy since they knew other details of his behavoir. The last thing some people do when they see agitated and erratic people get on an airplane is tune-out with their i-pods.

88

[quote]AZMojo wrote:
TriGWU wrote:

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.

What was the situation? It seems to change each day, and each day it looks less and less “right”.

The witnesses interviewed seems like they might have been paying some attention to the guy since they knew other details of his behavoir. The last thing some people do when they see agitated and erratic people get on an airplane is tune-out with their i-pods.

[/quote]

Of course it all makes sense now. Now that we’ve had 3 days to dwell on it. He had … 30 seconds?

I’m not talking about seeing the incident and then throwing on an iPod. I’m talking about how people TUNE OUT to begin with.

Of course they didn’t tune out when he was erratically running. But maybe when he first stood-up and mentioned that he had a bomb. Planes are pretty big too. Its not like we are all standing on top of eachother.

Forgive me for trying to have a logical discussion about this.

You know… pointing out that we’ve had… DAYS to run this through our head.

“You know… come to think of it…”

No. There wasn’t time for a “come to think of it…”

Last time the government didn’t act (9/11) on a 50/50 decision, you guys got pissed.

This time we act on 50/50 decision, you get pissed.

At least one thing is consistent. These same people will always look for a reason to bitch.

I’m not asking for blind patriotism, but damn. Show some support - more often than when it is politically convenient - for SOMETHING.

89

[quote]TriGWU wrote:

Stop the speculation.

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.[/quote]

no one’s speculating. the facts are: there was no bomb. no one heard the b-word. no one was reported to be using i-pods.

if i wanted to speculate i’d be wondering why the air marshalls were so insecure that they’d possibly let a guy w/a bomb get on their plane. or was it off the plane ?

90

[quote]swivel wrote:
TriGWU wrote:

Stop the speculation.

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.

no one’s speculating. the facts are: there was no bomb. no one heard the b-word. no one was reported to be using i-pods.

if i wanted to speculate i’d be wondering why the air marshalls were so insecure that they’d possibly let a guy w/a bomb get on their plane. or was it off the plane ?

[/quote]

They’re insecure now?

You guys just spin… and spin… and spin… and spin.

Keep spinning.

Are you doing this to show right and wrong or to use it as a tool against the government.

Highly doubt this is about an unjust death, because you all seem to be spinning this against the government.

There are two sides you guys are using to play. First you play that he didn’t deserve to die.

You lost that one.

Now we come out and say… well its the governments fault because he shouldn’t have been allowed on the plane in the first place if he really did have a bomb.

You really expect the airmarshal to say…

“No way man. There is no way he has a bomb. TSA is soo good… he HAS to be joking.”

then… lets say the plane blew up.

“Why didn’t you shoot him”

“I have a lot of faith in TSA. They are a very thorough program”

you guys would be all… how the hell did he trust TSA. Shoot the guy… he said he has a bomb.

91

[quote]TriGWU wrote:
swivel wrote:
TriGWU wrote:

Stop the speculation.

The guy was right given the situation.

Go toot your horn somewhere else. This pawn isn’t working for you.

no one’s speculating. the facts are: there was no bomb. no one heard the b-word. no one was reported to be using i-pods.

if i wanted to speculate i’d be wondering why the air marshalls were so insecure that they’d possibly let a guy w/a bomb get on their plane. or was it off the plane ?

They’re insecure now?

You guys just spin… and spin… and spin… and spin.

Keep spinning.

Are you doing this to show right and wrong or to use it as a tool against the government.

Highly doubt this is about an unjust death, because you all seem to be spinning this against the government.

There are two sides you guys are using to play. First you play that he didn’t deserve to die.

You lost that one.

Now we come out and say… well its the governments fault because he shouldn’t have been allowed on the plane in the first place if he really did have a bomb.

You really expect the airmarshal to say…

“No way man. There is no way he has a bomb. TSA is soo good… he HAS to be joking.”

then… lets say the plane blew up.

“Why didn’t you shoot him”

“I have a lot of faith in TSA. They are a very thorough program”

you guys would be all… how the hell did he trust TSA. Shoot the guy… he said he has a bomb.

[/quote]

bro you’re the one who said “stop the speculation” yet that’s all you’ve done. and i like how you characterize me w/ “you guys” since i’ve posting in this politics forum maybe 3 times in 2 years. but hey shoot first and ask questions later.

92

With the limited information we have to go off of, it is perfectly feasible that the guy did say he had a bomb and nobody who has come forward heard it besides the Marshal(s); it is also perfectly feasible that the Marshal(s) got nervous seeing the guy acting crazy, shot him, then tried to cover it up by saying that the guy said he had a bomb.

Either way, there should be an investigation, I just hope the investigation isn’t hindered by the media.

If the guy said he had a bomb, the Marshal is right to shoot; if the guy didn’t give any threat of a bomb, then the Marshal should have taken less drastic action.

93

I say good for the air marshal that shot him. He protected the people of not just that flight, but also sent a message that US Air Marshals are not to be taken lightly. This should set a precedence that will keep flights safer.

I also think that the US should adopt the policy of the British Gov that all muslim terrorists that are found, are cremated inside of a pigskin (which is supposed to send them to muslim hell instead of letting them be a martyr and going to heaven).

Just as a sidenote I thought that I’d also point out that this happened in Miami, meaning that if he had done this outside of an airport in a public place, then he could have been legally shot by anyone carrying a gun, thanks to J B passing the new Duty to Protect law.

94

Ok lets recap, and I will do this objectively. We have an article saying no one heard the bomb word. The problem is we have 2 passengers out of roughly a hundred or so. Secondly, you all that are against these Marshalls act as if just before the incidentthey were saying “you know I think I’m gonna kill me someone today and try and cover it up”.

It is illegal to to scream fire in a crowded movie theater. In post 9-11 era it is basically illegal to say bomb on a plane. If he ran off the plane on to the flight line he was viloating the law, it is the Air Marshalls duty to apprehend him until Miami PD gets there.

If in attempting to apprehend him he mentions a bomb and reaches into his bag you have a split second to determine whether he is reaching for a detonation device or a shaving kit. Anyone remember Richard Reid the shoe bomber, he had a bomb in his shoe on a plane post 9/11. There will be plenty of intensive investigations into this.

Here’s one for you, if you are on that plane and hear him speaking of a bomb and you attempt to subdue him if he has no bomb should you be charged with aggravated assault?

95

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Ok lets recap, and I will do this objectively. We have an article saying no one heard the bomb word. The problem is we have 2 passengers out of roughly a hundred or so. Secondly, you all that are against these Marshalls act as if just before the incidentthey were saying “you know I think I’m gonna kill me someone today and try and cover it up”.
[/quote]

Who is acting like this? I thought we were acting as if it is very possible that the officer overreacted, shot some crazy guy who didn’t say anything about a bomb and made that part up on the spot after a mistake of judgment.

I hate to break this to you, but even though you may be a cop, it isn’t like that particular profession has simply earned the respect of all of America by title alone. That position isn’t trusted because there have been many very public displays that show us that cops are not above human fault and do make mistakes.

The simple fact that on top of this human error, you get to carry weapons and effectively carry out judgment on the spot means you will be investigated if someone dies and no one around you can confirm your story but you and another cop.

I personally don’t see why you don’t understand this. If a doctor were to have a patient die during an operation, every single step of his procedure would be investigated. Even the most minor omission of data would be placed under a microscope in court as the family looked to sue for millions even if the patient died of unavoidable circumstances. How the hell do you think you are so above this as a cop?

Further, why isn’t your concern whether this cop actually did what was right? Does being a cop mean you jump to his side regardless of the circumstances or his own possible fault in the matter? If so, that speaks very poorly of your chosen profession when the issue isn’t even what’s right, but whether your buddy gets off.

96

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Ok lets recap, and I will do this objectively. We have an article saying no one heard the bomb word. The problem is we have 2 passengers out of roughly a hundred or so. Secondly, you all that are against these Marshalls act as if just before the incidentthey were saying “you know I think I’m gonna kill me someone today and try and cover it up”.

I thought you were going to do this objectively? Gee, you almost made it four sentences. Who said they were against marshalls? Yes, two passengers out of a hundred claim they never heard the word bomb. If just one would come forward and claim they did hear the word bomb, this whole argument would be negated. I just find it curious that no one has.

It is illegal to to scream fire in a crowded movie theater. In post 9-11 era it is basically illegal to say bomb on a plane. If he ran off the plane on to the flight line he was viloating the law, it is the Air Marshalls duty to apprehend him until Miami PD gets there.

Since when is it against the law to run off of a plane onto the jetway? A bad idea, yes. Against the law? No.

If in attempting to apprehend him he mentions a bomb

This “if” is what we are discussing. If he mentions a bomb, no further discussion. If he does not, then perhaps we have a shooting that was unnecessary. Again, no one is saying the Marshalls were out to kill this guy from the start, but mistakes can be made.

and reaches into his bag you have a split second to determine whether he is reaching for a detonation device or a shaving kit. Anyone remember Richard Reid the shoe bomber, he had a bomb in his shoe on a plane post 9/11. There will be plenty of intensive investigations into this.

Here’s one for you, if you are on that plane and hear him speaking of a bomb and you attempt to subdue him if he has no bomb should you be charged with aggravated assault?[/quote]

Again, if he said the word bomb, I think you have every right to attempt to subdue him, and the marshalls have every right to shoot him. I just don’t understand why everyone is treating him using the word bomb as a fact when there are as many people saying he didn’t as those saying he did.

I’m not sure how to highlight my responses that I interjected in your quote above, so I apologize for the difficult read.

97

[quote]Professor X wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Ok lets recap, and I will do this objectively. We have an article saying no one heard the bomb word. The problem is we have 2 passengers out of roughly a hundred or so. Secondly, you all that are against these Marshalls act as if just before the incidentthey were saying “you know I think I’m gonna kill me someone today and try and cover it up”.

Who is acting like this? I thought we were acting as if it is very possible that the officer overreacted, shot some crazy guy who didn’t say anything about a bomb and made that part up on the spot after a mistake of judgment.

I hate to break this to you, but even though you may be a cop, it isn’t like that particular profession has simply earned the respect of all of America by title alone. That position isn’t trusted because there have been many very public displays that show us that cops are not above human fault and do make mistakes.

The simple fact that on top of this human error, you get to carry weapons and effectively carry out judgment on the spot means you will be investigated if someone dies and no one around you can confirm your story but you and another cop.

I personally don’t see why you don’t understand this. If a doctor were to have a patient die during an operation, every single step of his procedure would be investigated. Even the most minor omission of data would be placed under a microscope in court as the family looked to sue for millions even if the patient died of unavoidable circumstances. How the hell do you think you are so above this as a cop?

Further, why isn’t your concern whether this cop actually did what was right? Does being a cop mean you jump to his side regardless of the circumstances or his own possible fault in the matter? If so, that speaks very poorly of your chosen profession when the issue isn’t even what’s right, but whether your buddy gets off.[/quote]

No being a cop means I understand where he has a split second to make a decision and then has to spend the rest of his life defending himself to fucking retards like you who hate cops. For every bad incident involving cops in the news, there are a hundred good ones that don’t make it. The problem I have is that all you people do is highlight the bad stuff, typical whiny bitch shit, you would complain no matter what happened.

You are the fuck the PO-LICE type til you need them. Do you ever get tired of talking down to people. I hate to break this to you, just because you are a doctor doesn’t make you better than anyone who posts here.

98

[quote]snipeout wrote:
No being a cop means I understand where he has a split second to make a decision and then has to spend the rest of his life defending himself to fucking retards like you who hate cops.[/quote]

What? Any decision I make everyday has the same potential of being scrutinized for eternity. That may be why the process involved just to get a title in front of your name takes a little more effort than simply sleeping in class. I make those split second decisions all of the time. The only difference between my profession and yours is that you simply work in law enforcement while my environment is much more “sterile”. Also, who wrote that I hate cops?

[quote]
For every bad incident involving cops in the news, there are a hundred good ones that don’t make it. The problem I have is that all you people do is highlight the bad stuff, typical whiny bitch shit, you would complain no matter what happened.[/quote]

Uh, wrong. In this very thread I agreed with him until it was found out that no one else heard anything about a bomb. There goes your attempt to paint me as someone who would simply find fault just because it was a cop. You are wrong.

[quote]
You are the fuck the PO-LICE type til you need them. Do you ever get tired of talking down to people. I hate to break this to you, just because you are a doctor doesn’t make you better than anyone who posts here. [/quote]

Who wrote that I was better than anyone? I wrote that this cop could be lying. Are you saying this is simply not a possibility? If not, then what the fuck was this rant for?

99

Shoot first and ask questions later…

100

[quote]Professor X wrote:
snipeout wrote:
No being a cop means I understand where he has a split second to make a decision and then has to spend the rest of his life defending himself to fucking retards like you who hate cops.

What? Any decision I make everyday has the same potential of being scrutinized for eternity. That may be why the process involved just to get a title in front of your name takes a little more effort than simply sleeping in class. I make those split second decisions all of the time. The only difference between my profession and yours is that you simply work in law enforcement while my environment is much more “sterile”. Also, who wrote that I hate cops?

For every bad incident involving cops in the news, there are a hundred good ones that don’t make it. The problem I have is that all you people do is highlight the bad stuff, typical whiny bitch shit, you would complain no matter what happened.

Uh, wrong. In this very thread I agreed with him until it was found out that no one else heard anything about a bomb. There goes your attempt to paint me as someone who would simply find fault just because it was a cop. You are wrong.

You are the fuck the PO-LICE type til you need them. Do you ever get tired of talking down to people. I hate to break this to you, just because you are a doctor doesn’t make you better than anyone who posts here.

Who wrote that I was better than anyone? I wrote that this cop could be lying. Are you saying this is simply not a possibility? If not, then what the fuck was this rant for?[/quote]

You don’t have to say you hate cops to hate them, its in your actions. Ever heard actions speak louder than words. There you go again thinking because you went to school to be a doctor that your job is so much harder and better than everyone elses.

For the record, ONE associated press reporter reported that TWO people didn’t hear a crazy guy say he had a bomb.