Wednesday, December 07, 2005

I've called Miss Cleo...

Air Marshal Kills Erratic Passenger in Miami
An agitated passenger who claimed to have a bomb in his backpack was shot and killed by a federal air marshal Wednesday after he bolted frantically from a jetliner that was boarding for takeoff, officials said. No bomb was found.

The passenger, identified as Rigoberto Alpizar, indicated there was a bomb in his bag and was confronted by air marshals but ran off the aircraft, Doyle said. The marshals went after him and ordered him to get down on the ground, but he did not comply and was shot when he apparently reached into the bag, Doyle said.

First, I'm sorry that someone had to die today. While I don't know the mental state of the man who got shot I do know that the air marshal acted reasonably.

But now I'm going to make a prediction about the results of this incindent. First, the media will pounce on this one with nothing but utter contempt for the air marshal. The "victim" will be the man who was out of control and claiming to have a bomb.

Editorial boards will call for "reviews" of the "process" that is involved in shootings. (I could simply lay it out for them: man threatens lives, man gets shot. But that's too simple and doesn't involve the subtleties of race, socioeconomic status, whether or not the weapon used looks scary and could be called an "assualt" weapon...)

Some windbag congressman will call for the disarming of air marshals. Blah blah blah. Some time passes and BBBBOOOOOMMMMMM.

Same windbags, same editorial boards will be saying "Why didn't Bush do something to protect that plane?"


Anonymous said...

I think I heard that the man suffered from bipolar depression and wasn't on his meds at the time.

Daniel said...

Which is unfortunate. But when a man is acting crazy and says he has a bomb the air marshal has no choice but to use deadly force.

Ken said...

I agree.

Man says he has a bomb.
Law enforcement confronts him.
Man runs away.
Man reaches into backpack containing said "bomb."

What else could law enforcement do?

Robin said...

I also agree... most people that I know that are in law enforcement have never had to fire their weapon at anybody and when it does happen, it is very devastating. however, hesitation on the part of the officer can cost him his life and people that he is protecting.

From what I've read, the marshal acted properly under the situation.

The Cheezer said...

Amazingly, every news report I heard shortly after this incident agreed the Marshal had acted correctly.
But then, I was watching Fox News.

Kristopher said...

If there were no airmarshals aboard, and the man had claimed he had a bomb in flight, the passengers would have simply killed him bare-handed.

A manic Depressive committed suicide. Simply that.

Tony said...

Interesting parallels to our own Oregon story about Faoud Kaady, shot in Sandy by 2 officers.

There was a big outcry from the anarchist crowd, who believed that since he was "naked and unarmed" that he did not pose a threat.

A similar argument was used in every other shooting (Kendra James, for example, or the Clackamas County shooting of a retarded woman).

I agree, Daniel, that there will be those who take the side of the one who was shot. It is easy to say what shoulda coulda been done after the fact, when you don't have to make split second decisions about life and death and when you have never had to deal with out of control mental patients. They often pose a grave danger - similar to a person on PCP (pcp makes you the same as a mental patient - not the other way around. You dont get superhuman strength, you just forget your limitations).

It is unfortunate, and we should feel sorry that the person had to be shot. But we should feel equally sorry for those who had to do the right thing and now carry this burden.

terry said...

Since none of us was there, we don't know what really happened. Michael Savage - for what his opinion is worth - says there is an eyewitness who says the guy never said bomb. Savage faults the marshals and thinks somebody(s) should be tried.

fatrichie said...

I heard a female witness (on CNN radio) say that EVERYONE in the first class and Business class heard the "bomb" threat. Distinctly heard it. I choose to believe that. And Michael Savage is a bag of ill smelling wind anyway!

terry said...

Then the overwhelming preponderance of evidence is clear, and Savage is just plain wrong, and I don't know why he said what he did. I'm pretty out of touch with news media, as I usually buy a newspaper only on Sunday (for the job ads etc) and don't even watch TV. (I have a 5-inch black-and-white set I never watch because it gets only three broadcast channels and there's nothing on worth watching.)

Anonymous said...

OH BOY! Does this subject hit closs to home.

Having worked for some sanity VS the insanity of placing 5 "CRIMINALLY INSANE" men in a group home next to a school with 400 little kids in it, and then allowing them 90 minutes of "UNSUPERVISED" walks pass the school and in the neighborhood I live in, I really understand what had to happen.

First of all, you do not get a court of law to judge you "guilty but insane" for stealing hupcaps.

Yet, do to the complete SPIN of two really good laws, their being there is totally and completly protected by the Federal Fair Housing Act,an the American's with Disabilities Act.

There is no information given, even to law enforcement because it's all confidential.

If these people are on there meds, and that's why they are there...the FING STATE, can't mange the money we gave them(bet some went to illegals) they say, "hey there Mr. Taxpayer, we can save you alot of money since we closed down the places where they belong!" An we can put them in your neighborhood for alot less!"

Here is the bottomline, that Marshall had no choice,neither do any of you, if these places(group homes) are not managed correctly which is what I HAVE been asking for for 9 yrs.

Thank GOD, he was on that plane!

FOR YOU TONY,FOR VANCE DAY, VERA KATZ, RANDY LEONARD, GORDON SMITH, DIANE LINN, SERNA CRUZ, LISA NAITO, and all the other elected officals,and people that want some of us to be "nice" when they fail and run from the problems we have begged them to fix, that being tha safety of those they swore to protect. Jack Peek