Shots fired aboard AA flight.

[Steff]

CNN is reporting Federal Air Marshalls fired on a passenger.

 

 

Edit... Not ON the place.. on the jetway.

[Rex Kickass]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/07/airplane.gunshot/index.html

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- Federal air marshals shot and wounded a man on a boarding bridge at Miami International Airport after he said he had a bomb, federal officials told CNN....

 

When the man appeared to reach into his baggage, at least one shot was fired by the marshals, wounding the man, the official said, adding that marshals' actions were consistent with their training.

 

Wow. Nice catch by the Marshals.

[Rex Kickass]

Fox News and MSNBC is reporting that the guy shot was killed. CNN says wounded.

[kapkomet]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/07/airplane.gunshot/index.html

Wow. Nice catch by the Marshals.

Moral of the story - don't even JOKE about it. They'll shoot your ass.

 

Of course this remains to be seen what really happened, but you get the idea.

[Rex Kickass]

CNN is reporting that the person has died.

[Controlled Chaos]

I think they should shoot to kill. Turn his clock right off so he can't do whatever it is he intended to do.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think they should shoot to kill.  Turn his clock right off so he can't do whatever it is he intended to do.

 

Let's dispell a myth right here:

 

In law enforcement, unless you are talking about a guy with a sniper rifle on a tripod, there is no such thing as shoot-to-wound. It's always shoot to kill - aim for center mass. Officers are not trained to shoot someone in the leg, or any other Hollywood nonsense like that (I am sure some have tried on their own, but it's not what they are trained to do). If the shot happens to not kill them, and they can subdue, then great. But shooting someone is pretty much always considered use of deadly force (again, with a few very unusal circumstances).

[southsideirish71]

Let's dispell a myth right here:

 

In law enforcement, unless you are talking about a guy with a sniper rifle on a tripod, there is no such thing as shoot-to-wound.  It's always shoot to kill - aim for center mass.  Officers are not trained to shoot someone in the leg, or any other Hollywood nonsense like that (I am sure some have tried on their own, but it's not what they are trained to do).  If the shot happens to not kill them, and they can subdue, then great.  But shooting someone is pretty much always considered use of deadly force (again, with a few very unusal circumstances).

 

 

As a former law enforcement employee, thank you for this clarification. The idea that every police officer is some sort of marksman that can shoot the gun behind the back and shoot the gun out of the suspects hands is consistant only with hollywood.

 

Plus this was most likely close quarters with people around, to draw your weapon in that circumstance the first reaction would be panic and screaming from the people around. The fact that he hit the target in that circumstance tells a lot of their training.

 

That being said, Hopefully it was a clean shoot for the officers sake.

Edited December 7, 2005 by southsideirish71

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Was the in flight movie 50 Cent's new flick?

[Steff]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/07/airplane.gunshot/index.html

 

 

American Airlines Flight 924 was in Miami on a stopover during a flight from Medellin, Colombia, to Orlando, Florida, when the man, idenitified as Rigoberto Alpizar, said there was a bomb in his carry-on luggage

 

Alpizar was confronted by a team of federal air marshals, who followed him down the boarding bridge and ordered him to get on the ground, the official said

 

Alpizar had boarded the plane in Colombia, Air Marshal Service spokesman Dave Adams said. After he got off the plane in Miami and went through customs, he got back on the plane and said he had a bomb, Adams said.

 

Air marshals asked him to get off the plane, which he did, but when they asked him to put his bag down, he refused, Adams said. Alpizar then approached the marshals in an aggressive manner, at which point two or three shots were fired, he said.

 

 

 

 

Sounds like the guy had every opportunity to give up the bag.

[Kid Gleason]

Sounds like the guy had every opportunity to give up the bag.

 

Yeah, but I've heard he had the XXX-Mas edition of Juggs magazine in there!!! That thing is like GOLD!!!

[sox4lifeinPA]

Ironically, I got this in my email box today:

 

Happy AAdvantage Anniversary! Save An Extra 10% At AA.com

 

I'm pretty sure that 10% isn't going to cut it for me to fly the friendly skies with AA for a while.

[SoCalSouthSider59]

I think they should shoot to kill.  Turn his clock right off so he can't do whatever it is he intended to do.

 

My sentiments exactly.........Oh well for the terrorist.........

 

 

[Balta1701]

Ok, I'm loathe to even bring this up, but if CNN.com can run it as their banner headline, I guess it at least deserves notice...Currently, CNN is reporting that none of the passengers on the plane have come forward to corroborate the story of the air marshalls who opened fire - that the deceased said he had a bomb.

 

The air marshalls reportedly stated that the guy had run up and down the plane saying that he had a bomb...a scenario which would have almost certainly made it so that at least a couple other passengers would have heard him.

 

I'm at least curious to figure out the difference between the 2 stories. Is it possible that the press just hasn't gotten to all of the people on the plane, and the dozen that heard him are still not talking/still being interviewed by the police? Is it possible he said it outside the plane? Or could the air marshall have heard something wrong?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Ok, I'm loathe to even bring this up, but if CNN.com can run it as their banner headline, I guess it at least deserves notice...Currently, CNN is reporting that none of the passengers on the plane have come forward to corroborate the story of the air marshalls who opened fire - that the deceased said he had a bomb. 

 

The air marshalls reportedly stated that the guy had run up and down the plane saying that he had a bomb...a scenario which would have almost certainly made it so that at least a couple other passengers would have heard him.

 

I'm at least curious to figure out the difference between the 2 stories.  Is it possible that the press just hasn't gotten to all of the people on the plane, and the dozen that heard him are still not talking/still being interviewed by the police?  Is it possible he said it outside the plane?  Or could the air marshall have heard something wrong?

 

Not sure myself but my thing is if a police officer or federal agent has his gun out and is telling me to do something Im damn sure going to follow his instructions to the letter.

[Rex Kickass]

The story I heard was that he was being disruptive and told it to either airline personnel and/or police. And that he was reboarding the plane after going through customs in Miami and it was in customs, not on board the plane where the problems occurred.

[Balta1701]

Not sure myself but my thing is if a police officer or federal agent has his gun out and is telling me to do something Im damn sure going to follow his instructions to the letter.

So would I, but it's hard to expect a person with a genuine disease to behave rationally like that.

[RibbieRubarb]

He said we was "bombed" after spending the night at P. Diddy's party!

[Rex Kickass]

It's harder still to expect Air Marshals to know he has that problem.

[Balta1701]

It's harder still to expect Air Marshals to know he has that problem.

Very true, even though his wife claims she was yelling it.

[SoxFan562004]

Very true, even though his wife claims she was yelling it.

yeah, that's what I heard, but I still think if the other facts are correct, he did the right thing. You never know if the wife is in on a potential conspiracy or not.

 

Also, it's being reported this guy was manic depressive and not on his meds, but again, I side with the marshall if all other facts are correct.

 

I have an undergrad degree in psychology and I know in one of our classes our professor told us that many mental health professionals tell their manic depressive patients and their families that they shouldn't fly. The theory is that the stress of traveling can set off people, even if medicated, and it is such a dangerous thing to mess with that mistakes aren't tolerated, as they shouldn't be.

 

(note to Balta, I don't want to make it sound like i think your opinion is they shouldn't have shot, I know you were just forwarding some facts along)

[Mercy!]

Regarding his saying he had a bomb - the statement one of the officials made at that press conference type of thing yesterday was very carefully worded. The official didn't say the person said he had a bomb. I believe he said that the man said something "consistent" with having a bomb.

[Balta1701]

Ok, I gave this another hour of so of thought while preparing for my complex analysis final...

 

Let's imagine for a moment that the guy never said anything about a bomb. Neither in the tunnel nor in the airline. The guy causes a disturbance on an airline. The guy forces his way off the airline. The guy is confronted by air marshalls in the tunnel with guns. They order him to drop his bag and get down on the floor. They repeat the order. He disobeys that order...and starts to reach into his bag.

 

At this point, should the air marshalls shoot? I think the answer is absolutely yes. They haven't a clue what he's reaching for in that bag...it could be a gun, it could be a knife, it could be the trigger on a bomb. With that many lives at risk, their instructions would be to not take a chance of him doing something concealed in a bag.

 

So even if the air marshalls completely invented any reference to a bomb...they were almost certainly right in still shooting. That would beg the question as to where the "the guy said he had a bomb" portion of the story came from, but that still would justify the shooting.

 

My point here with this part I think is this...why the Hell does CNN think that the question of whether or not he actually had a bomb is so important as to make it their banner headline today? Ditto Drudge, Time Magazine, etc.

 

Unless there's some legitimate reason to think that the marshalls acted improperly, why is this a story? Given that the guy caused a disruption on the plane, about the only thing that would make the Marshalls' actions improper was if the guy dropped his bag, lay down on the floor, and then was shot while already down and not moving. Any other action would be considered disobeying the orders of one of the marshalls and grounds for them opening fire.

 

So why the Hell is this news?

[sox4lifeinPA]

someone gets shot at an airport, I want to know. I would imagine the airlines want this to be news as well. It shows that crazy people are detected and removed from the passanger list, and in some cases removed from the life list. If I only heard rumblings and rumors of someone being killed on an american airlines plane, you can bet the already fragile market would take a plunge. it's called PR. something happens and everyone scrambles to make themselves or the companies they represent look clean as possible.

[Balta1701]

someone gets shot at an airport, I want to know. I would imagine the airlines want this to be news as well. It shows that crazy people are detected and removed from the passanger list, and in some cases removed from the life list. If I only heard rumblings and rumors of someone being killed on an american airlines plane, you can bet the already fragile market would take a plunge. it's called PR. something happens and everyone scrambles to make themselves or the companies they represent look clean as possible.

I'm not really asking why the guy being shot is news...that's clearly a news story - first time the air marshalls have done anything lethal since 9/11, yeah. But I'm asking why CNN is putting stories up suggesting that there's doubt as to the motives/propriety of the actions of the air marshalls when there really is no logical reason at all to doubt their actions.