Simviation Forums

Name speaks for itself

I was looking on the news and there was a shootout on a American Airlines jetway in Miami

look on www.cnn.com for morre info if there is any

It wasn't a shootout. a guy claimed he would blow up the plane, he got shot. Not exactly a shootout.

More info can be found at:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10367598/

They even have a pic of the plane....and like Craig said...it's not really a shoot out

Ok one dead US citizen (with possibly suicidal thoughts)... now lets look how long that air marshall law will stay in effect as the vultures of law will descend on this for certain

Law wont change. But i bet everyone from the TSA to the marshall who shot him to the airport and flight crew and the airport and AA themselves will be sued.

Rumours are that the guy that was shot had psychological problems and had not used his medication while on the flight

Rumours are that the guy that was shot had psychological problems and had not used his medication while on the flight

thats still only a rumor but would be unfortunate if true. But the simple fact is, they cant know if its somebody whos forgotten their medicine, or someone whos serious. If they take even a split second to hesitate and its a guy whos serious about it, the plane goes up and you have many deaths and the future problems tied with that. If its a case of forgotten medicine or someone who thinks its funny to make a joke like that. You have their family upset and out to make hell for it. Which is understandable.
Damned if you, damned if you dont.

Rumours are that the guy that was shot had psychological problems and had not used his medication while on the flight

 Yeah, well, one less problem.

Rumours are that the guy that was shot had psychological problems and had not used his medication while on the flight

No rumour. His wife was on the plane, they had an arguement, he stormed to the front of the plane claiming a bomb, air marshal shot him 4 times, she said he didnt take his meds  ::)

Man reportedly bipolar
Gardner said she heard the woman say her husband was bipolar and had not had his medication.

From the msnbc.com site link

I may have a more hardened outlook on it, but:

1. Presuming the fellow was bipolar and had not taken his medication as required - something which an air marshal would not know about -  it was irresponsible of them (husband/wife) to subject the rest of the passengers to a possible emotional outburst of any type, disrupting the flight.

2. An air marshall just had a few facts in which to make a decision - a man running saying he has a bomb in his back pack refuses to stop.  WHen he does stop (falls in the jetway, he reaches into the bag.  What is he going to do - detonate a bomb?  pull out a gun?

Similar situation as happened in London a few months ago ....  a fellow runs from the authorities under suspicious circumstances - long overcoat in middle of summer; dives into a crowded area, refusing to stop.  When cornered, hands go inside coat - bomb or gun?

In both cases, avoidable tragedies, but the person on the spot acted correctly and according to training.

I have no doubt that the air marshall acted according to his training.

Only thing is that this is what everyone said was going to happen...

I have no doubt that the air marshall acted according to his training.

I can't argue with that but according to the report he was reaching into his hand baggage. If this is the case why was the bomb. gun or whatever not detected before he boarded the aircraft?

Similar situation as happened in London a few months ago ....  a fellow runs from the authorities under suspicious circumstances - long overcoat in middle of summer; dives into a crowded area, refusing to stop.  When cornered, hands go inside coat - bomb or gun?

This unfortunate incident is currently under review & that was the official statement issued by the authorities directly afterwards. Some reports say that this was completely untrue & that he was not running, did not jump over any barrier & was not wearing a long overcoat or inappropriate clothing. The CCTV film taken on the day in question that could either confirm or disprove this has somehow mysteriously disappeared.

Hi Doug
your correct on the London incident. They have actually published the CCTV pictures in several papers in the past. It showed the guy wearing a denim jacket and jeans. Personally even if he was wearing a large jacket what does it matter? If you remember the jacket I wore while at old warden, it was a big black one, I wear that year round generally. Next thing I know, i'll be shot for wearing it

Hi Doug
your correct on the London incident. They have actually published the CCTV pictures in several papers in the past. It showed the guy wearing a denim jacket and jeans. Personally even if he was wearing a large jacket what does it matter? If you remember the jacket I wore while at old warden, it was a big black one, I wear that year round generally. Next thing I know, i'll be shot for wearing it

Indeed. Or anyone wearing a backpack come to that. I agree that the security services have an impossible task & mistakes are bound to happen. If it does go wrong they should not attempt to cover up the truth.

Read this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4159902.stm