Man claiming to have bomb shot at Airport. - Page 4

Larry_OHF · 12-08-2005, 07:47 PM

Who can say that a bipolar man is incapable of killing somebody when they are having an episode? He was sick, but so are psychopaths. The idea of a man not being right in the head can be argued for too many murderers.

If he was only normal when he had medication...what does that make him when he was not on the medication? As dangerous as a puppy? Have any of you actually ever seen a bipolar person have an episode when not on their meds? They can get scary. I suppose nobody read the three men to subdue one woman post that I made...

johnny · 12-08-2005, 08:00 PM

Yeah, i've seen one once, he was sitting in a field eating doggydroppings, or rubbing it all over his face, i remember it didn't stimulate my appetite.

Morgeruat · 12-09-2005, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aragorn1:
What a load of rubbish. It makes it look really bad when they try to twist facts, there could no more have been a dangerous situation than i could have died 10 minutes ago. Sure, he did what he thought was the right things, but it was an mistake, not his fault, but a mistake. Its not something to be celebrated as a heroic saving of the day.

I disagree, the shooting was not a mistake, the gun didn't "just go off" nor did the projectile hit a bystander, it hit a person who had loudly made threats about having a bomb, and then apparently reached for it. It was a shoot to kill situation, and that's exactly what happened.

Morgeruat · 12-09-2005, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SecretMaster:
Agreed. My question is why did he aim to kill? I'm sure they have basic target training with fireams, otherwise people are carelessly handing out lethal weapons. I'm pretty sure any Marshal could have easily disabled the target, instead of a kill shot.

Can't speak for DHS but when that question was raised during our security training while I was in the army the short answer they gave was "you train to shoot center mass."

shamrock_uk · 12-09-2005, 03:30 PM

Always nice to agree on the occasional topic Morg

In books written by former SAS men describing their training, they also were trained to shoot for the torso. It makes the most sense as aiming for an arm or other limb runs the risk of missing a fast-moving target. If you aim for the chest and miss, odds are you'll still nick an arm or something else.

[ 12-09-2005, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Illumina Drathiran'ar · 12-09-2005, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Larry_OHF:
Who can say that a bipolar man is incapable of killing somebody when they are having an episode? He was sick, but so are psychopaths. The idea of a man not being right in the head can be argued for too many murderers.

If he was only normal when he had medication...what does that make him when he was not on the medication? As dangerous as a puppy? Have any of you actually ever seen a bipolar person have an episode when not on their meds? They can get scary. I suppose nobody read the three men to subdue one woman post that I made...

I have. We're entering semantics now, but a bipolar person having an episode isn't a bomber. Bringing a bomb implies premeditation... Episodes don't last that long. And if they did, the person wouldn't be able to function enough to get to and through the airport.

People, the "Potential terrorist" angle simply does not work because terrorists don't tell people they have bombs, remember? They don't. That simple fact means that if somebody DOES make such a claim, something's up. I do agree that you shouldn't make such a claim, but I do believe that perhaps a leg shot should have been more in order, don't you?

Aragorn1 · 12-09-2005, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Morgeruat:

quote:
Originally posted by Aragorn1:
What a load of rubbish. It makes it look really bad when they try to twist facts, there could no more have been a dangerous situation than i could have died 10 minutes ago. Sure, he did what he thought was the right things, but it was an mistake, not his fault, but a mistake. Its not something to be celebrated as a heroic saving of the day.

I disagree, the shooting was not a mistake, the gun didn't "just go off" nor did the projectile hit a bystander, it hit a person who had loudly made threats about having a bomb, and then apparently reached for it. It was a shoot to kill situation, and that's exactly what happened. [/QUOTE]He mistook the man for a terrorist, I didn't mean it was an involuntary act, or that the shooting was an accident.

Larry_OHF · 12-09-2005, 06:54 PM

...

Quote:

but I do believe that perhaps a leg shot should have been more in order, don't you?

I will agree with you to a point that will make the difference to me. I read that he actually started reaching into the bag, and that is when he was taken down. Maybe not a bomb, but if he had a gun in there instead...it still could have been a dangerous situation. I would agree to take the man down with a non-lethal shot if he could be seperated from that bag he was bragging about...but if he actually did reach in and that is not just media hype...that was the deciding factor for that marshal and for me.

On a side note...I heard Neal Boortz talking today on the radio about it, and he mentioned that the majority of the people trying to demonize the marshal's decision are people:

1. who oppose guns in the US
2. Who oppose Bush, and are hoping that the bad hype will be a slap in his face.

Is there any truth to this claim?

shamrock_uk · 12-09-2005, 07:11 PM

Well, I oppose Bush and guns but support the actions of the sky marshall

I think what's more likely is that those most likely to oppose Bush and gun ownership are simply the same people who would place the value of an innocent human life above other considerations, even the risk of him carrying a bomb.

I doubt there's an explicit agenda to it, simply that the views tend to correlate. I'll stop making sweeping generalisations now [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 12-09-2005, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Timber Loftis · 12-09-2005, 07:13 PM

Larry, Boortz's concern is half true. I vehemently support gun ownership in the US. But, he is right that I oppose Bush -- in fact that'd be one heck of a good use for a gun about now, in my mind. But, I don't see this as a slap in Bush's face in particular. He's merely one of a whole nation of idiocy that makes this Marshall's actions acceptable by the masses.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go put more donations to islamic radicals in the post.

12-08-2005, 07:47 PM	#31
Larry_OHF Ironworks Moderator Join Date: March 1, 2001 Location: Midlands, South Carolina Age: 49 Posts: 14,759	Who can say that a bipolar man is incapable of killing somebody when they are having an episode? He was sick, but so are psychopaths. The idea of a man not being right in the head can be argued for too many murderers. If he was only normal when he had medication...what does that make him when he was not on the medication? As dangerous as a puppy? Have any of you actually ever seen a bipolar person have an episode when not on their meds? They can get scary. I suppose nobody read the three men to subdue one woman post that I made... __________________

12-08-2005, 08:00 PM	#32
johnny 40th Level Warrior Join Date: April 15, 2002 Location: Utrecht The Netherlands Age: 59 Posts: 16,981	Yeah, i've seen one once, he was sitting in a field eating doggydroppings, or rubbing it all over his face, i remember it didn't stimulate my appetite. __________________

12-09-2005, 07:13 PM	#40
Timber Loftis 40th Level Warrior Join Date: July 11, 2002 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 11,916	Larry, Boortz's concern is half true. I vehemently support gun ownership in the US. But, he is right that I oppose Bush -- in fact that'd be one heck of a good use for a gun about now, in my mind. But, I don't see this as a slap in Bush's face in particular. He's merely one of a whole nation of idiocy that makes this Marshall's actions acceptable by the masses. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go put more donations to islamic radicals in the post. __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Topic Moved: Airplane Bomb Guy Shot	Larry_OHF	General Discussion	0	12-07-2005 11:41 PM
Lawsuit claiming Bush knew or should have known about 9/11 beforehand	Chewbacca	General Discussion	10	01-12-2004 01:54 PM
What do you think of this? Romance at the Airport	Harkoliar	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	10	12-18-2003 09:30 PM
Manowar claiming responsibility for massive power outage	Grojlach	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	0	08-27-2003 05:00 AM
Best airport in the world....	Yorick	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	13	11-02-2001 10:28 AM

12-09-2005, 03:30 PM	#35
shamrock_uk Dracolich Join Date: January 24, 2004 Location: UK Age: 42 Posts: 3,092	Always nice to agree on the occasional topic Morg In books written by former SAS men describing their training, they also were trained to shoot for the torso. It makes the most sense as aiming for an arm or other limb runs the risk of missing a fast-moving target. If you aim for the chest and miss, odds are you'll still nick an arm or something else. [ 12-09-2005, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

12-09-2005, 07:11 PM	#39
shamrock_uk Dracolich Join Date: January 24, 2004 Location: UK Age: 42 Posts: 3,092	Well, I oppose Bush and guns but support the actions of the sky marshall I think what's more likely is that those most likely to oppose Bush and gun ownership are simply the same people who would place the value of an innocent human life above other considerations, even the risk of him carrying a bomb. I doubt there's an explicit agenda to it, simply that the views tend to correlate. I'll stop making sweeping generalisations now [img]tongue.gif[/img] [ 12-09-2005, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)