Air Marshalls Shoot Man In Florida

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Deputy Dawg, Dec 7, 2005.

  1. Deputy Dawg

    Deputy Dawg Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,382
    Location:
    Central Texas Gulf Coast
    Air Marshalls shoot man at Miami Intl.Air Port,who said he had a bomb on the plane, this happened today, it is now on all of the news channels 12/7/05.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2005
  2. 22WRF

    22WRF Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,608
    And all the talking heads are out make a bad shoot out of it :eek:
     

  3. KyBlaster

    KyBlaster New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    249
    Location:
    Kentucky
    I have been watching on Fox News. They're saying good shoot. Giving the Air Marshalls the benefit of the doubt. Fox is about the only news I watch just for that reason.
     
  4. Country101

    Country101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,687
    Location:
    NW AR
    I just watched our station down here and they were putting a positive spin on it. Suprised the heck out of me. I wonder if they are all sick or something?
     
  5. berto64

    berto64 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    7,488
    Location:
    Owyhee County, Idaho
    No, they ain't sick.

    There were too many witnesses for them to make it out to be a bad shoot.

    There will be more Lithium available for others now.
     
  6. henry0reilly

    henry0reilly Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    558
    Location:
    Indiana
    Katie Couric just asked a former Air Marshall if the Marshalls should have tried to shoot to disable rather than kill the mentally unbalanced man who claimed to have a bomb.

    I found his response odd, “The standard protocol is to shoot to stop the threat.” He went on to specify that in some cases shooting a perpetrator in the knee might be sufficient, but not in this case.

    I have always had the understanding that if deadly force is justified and required, it should be intended to be deadly.
     
  7. It is indeed both sad and unfortunate that the incident occurred given the actual reasons behind the man's irrational actions. Yet in my view, the Sky Marshal acted in all ways correctly. He simply prformed his duty and acted properly to protect the public from what appeared unquestionably to be an immediate and mortal threat. People who have never been in that type of situation do not understand that a shoot/don't shoot decision is one that has to be made right the hell NOW; it cannot wait for a team of experts to evaluate the circumstances. The one I most feel sorry for is that Sky Marshall, who simply did his duty but now must live with its memory for the rest of his life.
     
  8. Deputy Dawg

    Deputy Dawg Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,382
    Location:
    Central Texas Gulf Coast
    I could not agree with you more,that is the same way I see it. In a shoot or no shoot situation you do not have time to think about it, you just react
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2005
  9. JohnK3

    JohnK3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,635
    As far as "the actual reasons behind the man's irrational actions" goes, I was listening to Neal Boortz this morning and he had a caller who has bipolar disorder call up who stated that he had never heard of a bipolar disorder patient hurting others or becoming violent towards others. Towards themselves, yes. Towards others, no.

    Of course, we only have that person's word for it and he did not claim to be a doctor, only someone who suffered from bipolar.

    It would be interesting to find out if his claim was true, or if there actually are cases where bipolar patients go violent against others.
     
  10. Yes, it would be interesting to find that out, John. Yet, as we would all agree I suspect, the truth of it doesn't really matter in terms of the action taken by the officer. He, of course, had no possible way to know what the man would actually do, or how much threat he actually posed. To perform his duty he had no choice but to assume the worst. We had a somewhat similar case here in the town where I live about three years ago. A man, who later turned out to be a drug addict (to no one's surprise), attempted to rob a downtown drug store of morphine sulphate at gun point and in broad daylight. A silent alarm brought the police to the scene before he left the premises. When he came out of the store at the demand of the officers, he appeared to reach under his coat, presumably for the pistol he had used to rob the store. One of the officers (a sniper) covering the scene then had no choice but to place a .308 caliber slug through the man's head. We'll never know the perp's actual intent when he reached under his coat. Maybe he only wanted to scratch his navel for all we know, but the officer had a duty to protect the other officers at the scene and acted appropriately.
     
  11. 1952Sniper

    1952Sniper New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    5,133
    Location:
    Texas
    Shooting to "stop the threat" is standard protocol. 99.99% of the time, this means shoot to kill. There are only very rare instances when any professionally trained enforcement officer will shoot to wound. I imagine that this guy said that simply so that it wouldn't sound like they're always shooting to kill, even though that's pretty much the truth.

    I know when I did my concealed handgun training, the ex-cop that taught it said that if you ever have to draw your weapon, you'd better shoot to kill. Don't ever screw up a dangerous situation and make it even more dangerous by shooting to injure.
     
  12. Deputy Dawg

    Deputy Dawg Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,382
    Location:
    Central Texas Gulf Coast
    If you fear for your life , you do shoot to kill, but if you have to go to court you would never say that, the only thing you should say is I shot him untill he was no longer a threat, because I feared for my life,or somthing like that.
     
  13. Carl S

    Carl S New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,014
    Location:
    Bunnell, FL
    Airhead Katie Couric also asked him if Marshalls shoot to kill. His reply was that they shoot to stop the threat. It was she that raised the issue of shooting for the knee. which shows how stupid she is. :(

    I support the Marshall; he made the right decison under the circumstances with the knowlege he had.
     
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Discussion US Marshalls don't screw around Jan 3, 2016
General Discussion time2shoot Feb 9, 2017
General Discussion school mass shooting averted! Jan 27, 2017
General Discussion Idiot shoots himself in the mouth Jan 11, 2017
General Discussion active shooter at va hospital near me Dec 13, 2016