Friday, December 09, 2005
The air marshall shooting
Notwithstanding the authoritarian ring to this post, though, the second reason that I am troubled is that, well, the very first time an air marshall discharged his weapon it was at a crazy but innocent guy. If we let the jihadis inflame our national obsession with safety to the point where are not disturbed when that happens, "the terrorists have won."
My final thought is this: The entire country should breathe a sigh of relief that the innocent dead passenger was not Muslim, or apparently possibly Muslim. The national hanky-twisting in that event would have been too painful to bear.
9 Comments:
By 
Gordon Smith, at
Fri Dec 09, 08:27:00 AM:
The Air Marshalls appear to have acted responsibly, though the poor dead mentally ill guy might disagree.
You're right for being thankful that the dead man wasn't a brown-skinned or muslim person. The shitstorm would have been ginormous.
To those of you traveling: Take your meds. Don't reach for your bag. When an Air Marshall tells you to do something, do it. Or you'll be deader'n'Jeebus.
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Dec 09, 10:02:00 AM:
I can see the results of this now:
Salman: "Holy shit, they DO have men with guns on the planes now!"
Muhammad: "Damn..." *crumples up pile of notes*
/cheer
By MrSurly, at
Fri Dec 09, 10:18:00 AM:
TH, I think you might want to put the word "innocent" in quotes. If you yell, "I have a bomb" on a plane, I don't think it's unreasonable to shoot first and ask questions later. I know I would feel that way if I were a passener on that plane. The guy wasn't a bomber, but I am not so sure I would be willing to make that snap judgment if I am an air marshall and I see a guy on a plane yelling "I have a bomb." Tough break for bipolar air travellers, but I won't lose any sleep over this. Just sayin'.
By TigerHawk, at
Fri Dec 09, 10:54:00 AM:
Odds are high that the guy was innocent, even if the shooting was justified because the innocent guy was nuts. Basically, he is dead by reason of insanity, not because he committed a crime. The marshall did the right thing, but that doesn't make it any less unfortunate or the guy any less innocent.
By Cassandra, at
Fri Dec 09, 11:12:00 AM:
Call me a pessimist, but as time goes on I'm betting the tide of public opinion is going to start to pull the other way and the air marshalls will be fried.
We seem to be living in a zero tolerance environment, and that is just plain unreasonable. We can't be 100% secure and have zero mistakes, but that seems to be what everyone expects from law enforcement, the military, and government.
By Final Historian, at
Fri Dec 09, 04:52:00 PM:
Perhaps we as a society need to make a list of things that, if you do them, will pretty much guarantee you end up getting shot. Such a list wouldn't have stopped this tragedy, of course, but at least it would help other people.
Given the security threat to America right now, saying you have a bomb and then reaching for a container of somesort when told to put your hands up is self-selection to be removed from the gene pool.
I am terribly sorry that this man died. His mental illness in no way meant that this fate was just. But you can't ask any more of the Air Marshall than doing what he did. He has too many lives riding on his decisions to hesitate.
And let us remember this: in the past several years since 9/11, just how many people have died in the US as a result of being mistaken for being a terrorist? I don't think very many.
By MrSurly, at
Fri Dec 09, 06:17:00 PM:
TH, sorry I should probably have been more clear when I implied that Mr. Alpizar wasn't innocent. Clearly, he was innocent of any terrorism related offense. However, his actions, or perhaps more specifically those of his caregiver wife, was certainly the cause of the shooting. Alpizar was not minding his own business when he was shot, so in that sense he was not "innocent." Furthermore, I don't think that you should be troubled by the shooting, on the contrary my impression is that the shooting was righteous. Your post implies that a law enforcement officer should somehow be able to determine with accuracy whether a man who yells "I have a bomb" on a plane is a terrorist, crazy, or just kidding. I just don't think I can bring myself to second guess the air marshall or feel bad about the outcome, not with so many lives at stake and not if the alternative is that an air marshall will hesitate in the face of a real threat. In any event, I find myself agreeing with you 99% of the time, so I cam content to agree to disagree on this issue.
By 
, at
Sun Dec 11, 04:04:00 PM:
Witnesses interviewed said they never heard the "B" word until they were asked if they had by those who de-briefed them. And that it was the term they used - "B word."
Think about how many times that bag had been searched.
The likelihood that it contained anything of the sort is remote enough that it was not reasonable to shoot the man.
By Lanky_Bastard, at
Mon Dec 12, 02:50:00 PM:
So everyone's sorry about this incident, and yet glad we have air marshals read to take action. Me too. I think the air marshal did his job.
Just the same, I think it's foolish to have a single gun on a plane, especially in the passenger area. It's pretty obvious to me that any future terrorist plans will focus on finding and seizing that single gun.
More to the point: I'm not worried about a hijacking with box cutters. A stout briefcase or mechanical pencil are probably equally effective weapons. Enough so that I would take my chances. But if a terrorist gets hold of that one gun...
