Wednesday, December 07, 2005

So Now We're Shooting The Mentally Ill

Air Marshall Shoots Man, While Wife Pleads

In this time of terror, is it ok to shoot first and ask questions later?

When the London police killed an innocent man, initial reports that said the man resisted proved false.

Will it be the same in this case?

Too early to tell. But is it likely that a REAL terrorist would go screaming OFF a plane, YELLING ABOUT a bomb?

REAL terrorists blow themselves up without a sound. They don't announce they have a bomb, then blow themselves up.

Was there reason to believe this man was a terrorist?

Or was it an itchy trigger finger that took the man down?

Was he black? White? Would that have mattered?

When is it right to shoot?

[UPDATE:] Let The Conflicting Reports Begin

Says Rep. John L. Mica in the Washington Post:
"This shows that the [air marshall] program has worked beyond our expectations. This should send a message to a terrorist or anyone else who is considering disrupting an aircraft with a threat."
Except... this guy didn't have a bomb. And he was killed. So that's a success in Rep. Mica's book? Yikes.

The only message this seems to send to terrorists is... Don't run around screaming before you blow the plane up.

[Update II]

Wow. That's a lot of comments! Thank you all for posting. And thank you trix foley for your passionate defense of my work. Although you may want to be on the look out for pissed off 15 year old girls.

Of course I wasn't blaming blogs for the murders. That's rediculous. What I was saying is that a blog or online profile can provide a window into the mind of a teenager.

I was not aware of the Switchfoot song.. thanks for bringing it to my attention. Reading the lyrics though... I'm not convinced I read into this the wrong way.

Mike, I agree with you... check my response to the guy who had a similar comment a couple posts below.

Scott... if blogs are so gay, why you reading them?

Anyways, regarding this air marshall shooting... its just tragic. It didn't really do anything to prove we have good security. Some people's comments to the contrary, if someone is gonna blow up a plane, they don't go running OFF it. The fact is, an unarmed man got shot. We should feel sorry for his wife and family, rather than say the guy deserved it. That said, you can't judge the air marshalls either. They made a split second decision.

I ask these questions only to point out the difficulty a shoot-to-kill policy creates.

Undoubtedly, some innocent people may be caught in the line of fire.

Something like this shouldn't be celebrated, or lauded as "success," but rather, lamented.

It's sad whether you believe the air marshalls were right or wrong, or whether the shoot-to-kill policy is right or wrong.

Anyways, thanks for writin in.

44 comments:

dematerialized said...

What got (to) me was the following strings, in the article you linked to: "Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, praised the air marshals’ actions. 'Air marshals put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe,' he said. 'Thanks to the efforts of an alert air marshal, an individual was prevented from causing a potentially dangerous situation on the American Airlines flight that could have harmed passengers and crew members.' "

The way that's constructed sounds part of the larger "no, you're not allowed to ask questions, because asking questions means you support bin Laden!" plan. Oof. Sigh.

Hokule'a said...

Im sorry but I think that they did the right thing. We awk a lot of law enforcement we ask them to be careful but then if they hadnt gotten the guy and he did kill someone they would get blamed so what???? What can you do. Better safe than sorry.

That dude was lucky that the passengers didnt get him.

Anonymous said...

i just read your article on msnbc regarding the double homicide and the kids that were somehow involved and their myspace accounts. at the end of your article you wrote "Kara's headline is eerily ironic and utterly familiar, to anyone who knows the frustrations of feeling like an overprotected teenager.Kara Borden's headline was "meant to live." "

perhaps meant to live represents switchfoot's song (a popular Christian band that has cross over appeal to pop music?)? just a thought.

otherwise, thought it was a well done article. keep writing!

Danielle,a vey angry teen... said...

Hello,my name is Danielle and I read your artical on MSN.I don't appriciate what you said about bloggers.Not everyone is stupid and gives out their address or goes and kills their parents.Myspace and Xanga have nothing to do with the killings and if you were a good writter you would know that.I myself have a Xanga and a Myspace.I got 'caught' for my Xanga when I was in 9th grade for what I said about my JROTC class.My mom went in and reamed my school's ass out.It's no ones buisness what anyone puts on their PERSONAL site.Yeah some people are like that Kara girl and lie about their age me and my cousins DON'T.We've had our blogs for a really long time and have had no problems,except for my school deal.Because of articals like yours,my new school is looking up everyone's Myspace and telling their parents about what they have on there.My mom knows everything that's on my site.I don't lie about that shit and I'm not dumb and put personal stuff on there.I'm 15 about to be 16 and with all do respect I think your artical was totally wrong.I'm so mad about it too.How can you yourself as a fellow blogger say that?If You'd like to say soemthing back to me,my email is Moon_Bitten_Wollfie@hotmail.com
or I have a Xanga which is Its_Wolfie.I'd like your opinion of what I have just said to you.
<3Danielle<3

Danielle,a vey angry teen... said...

Exuse me,I made a mistake....Moon_Bitten_Wolfie@hotmail.com

Mike Lewis said...

In your artical you mention "Would they have been more aware of David's capacity for violence if they had seen the pictures on his blog? How does gutting a deer suggest a capacity for violence? What about a chicken, or if I draw and quarter a watermelon, do I have a potential for violence? That was an ignorant comment.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Adam, I disagree. I think the Air Marshalls did the right thing. I don't care who you are...you should not be on a plane yelling about a bomb. How many people do you know that would yell about a BOMB on a PLANE? None I can think of. And if I recall correctly the terrorists on the 4th 9/11 plane were taunting passengers (hence why some of them made calls back home from the plane). This is why we have Air Marshalls on planes. I think it is unfortunate this man was killed. I also wonder why a man in this mental condition (off his bi-polar meds) is flying on a plane. And if he is, why the flight personal weren't aware of it? All in all it is sad this man lost his life, but I hope that it does not lead to the gov't taking Air Marshalls off flights.

Anonymous said...

on msnbc.com an article was posted by you about a girl named kara who had a myspace and was suposedly connected to her parents murder. At the end of your article you say that the myspaces could be a plea for help and used Kara's example "meant to live" as proof. She also has many Christian attributes in her profile, and Meant to Live is a song with a Christian band called Switchfoot. so not everything is an attention seeking plea for help.

Trix Foley said...

Danielle...

Just a wake-up call for you, Adam never once claimed that the blog sites were responsible for the murders. He suggested that what is posted on the blogs could be analyzed to provide hints and warning signs to future dangerous behaviour, such as the murders or the drug overdose as experienced by the other two girls who were mentioned. It's true, however. Our hearts are poured into the blogs as we feel that no one, or very few at the most, will ever see what we've written down. In this sob fest, we can mess up and accidentally let something slip that could tip off others that we are experiencing some problem or are suffering from a mental illness (such as depression or substance abuse). I think you need to re-read the article, and this time use your brain.

Scott said...

blogs are gay plaz

Anonymous said...

I also disagree. I think the Air Marshall's are justified. There was no choice but to put him down. It is unfortunate, but if they hadn't acted and he did detonate a bomb...? Even more loss of life.
Also totally disagree with the statement from your MSNBC article about David's "capacity for violence" that was taken from pictures of gutting a deer. Very irresponsible of you and MSNBC for allowing it. Although it doesn't surprise me, as liberal as they are.

Anonymous said...

you can dance if you want to, you can leave your friends behind because if your friends dont dance and they dont have pants then they a'nt no friend of mine

Shawn T Lippert said...

Yes, well done writing. Your views are interesting on the current events effecting our ever changing society. I believe our online journals give a good feedback, and can very well be an educational tool for many readers. Online expression of ones opinion is no doubt a great way to show your feelings, or concerns. Im sure as the internet becomes more popular world wide, we are going to read about murder and suicide online, at an increasing rate. People will be reading about the lives of interesting individuals like an open book, and may take them as a modern day soap opera. The only thing is these soaps may be able to manipulate by outside forces that could have a negative or harmful effect.
Daily impressions

Anonymous said...

Regarding the Air Marshall shooting an airline passenger: It is nice to evaluate events with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight. The painful truth is that we all would rather read about the death of one innocent individual instead of the deaths of 125 innocent individuals. I mourn the loss of this gentleman's life but I respect the Air Marshall for making a difficult decision in a no-win situation.
In your article you state the terrorists quietly blow up whatever they wish to destroy. This is simply not true. There are countless examples of terrorists using obvious and blatant display of force, power, and terror before carrying out their ultimate mission.
I believe that I will trust the Air Marshall's specialty training in terrorist law enforcement and the experience of those individuals who trained him to identify realistic threats.
Again, we benefit from the clarity of 20/20 hindsight.

Trix Foley said...

I just thought I'd go public with the rest of this:

This is an email the Danielle sent me regarding my last post;

Quote:
"Well excuse the fuck out of me bitch.Fucking read my comment a little slower retard and maybe you would understand what I was saying.I didn't say HE was saying the blogs caused it I'm saying that warning signs are not always in blogs.And for you to even say anything about my comment you're fucked cause I'm a bitch and I always get back to people who say shit about me.So before you TRY to insult me little girl,first check yourself before you THINK I don't know what I'm talking about you ugly skank."

Let's pick this apart, shall we?

"I didn't say HE was saying the blogs caused it I'm saying that warning signs are not always in blogs."

I commented on her claiming Adam wrote the blog sites were to blame.

Earlier post:

Quote:
"Myspace and Xanga have nothing to do with the killings and if you were a good writter you would know that."
---
"And for you to even say anything about my comment you're fucked cause I'm a bitch and I always get back to people who say shit about me."

Good for her, she's followed through.
---
"So before you TRY to insult me little girl,first check yourself before you THINK I don't know what I'm talking about you ugly skank."

She's right, how could I ever believe she doesn't know what she's talking about? It's funny that she calls me a little girl, and at the same time cannot form a reply without swearing or personal attack.

alliebee said...

Hi, I realize that several other people have already commented about your appearance on msnbc.com, which too brought me to the attention of your site. I'm a blogspot user myself, so I thought I'd take a visit.
In regards to the post you have just put, Yes when it comes to airlines and airports, itchy fingers are becoming more common. Paranoia has certainly become the dominant drive for officers working in airports. To them, anyone can be a terrorist. The mother with her two young kids is one! (hell, her three year old daughter could be hiding a pair of tweezers to stab the pilot with!), the 16 year old teenager could be hiding a bomb in his skateboard shoes! So when you ask "Was there reason to believe this man was a terrorist?" The answer is, in their minds yes. Because every single person passing through security is a potential terrorist. Is this paranoia justified? Four years ago it was. And to some effect today, it still has some justification, basically one has to define when one has the right to shoot or not shoot, which seems to be more lenient as to the occassions it is liable since our fear against the invisible "War Against Terrorism" began and has risen to what the United States would call an orange security alert level.
As for your article on msnbc.com, it was shocking to hear that this boy just one day up and shot this girls' parents. Maybe the question isn't so much "If the parents had viewed the blog, would they have been more cautious to the tendencies of their daughters boyfriend?" but really teh question should be "Should the daughter have been more open with her parents about her boyfriend, rather than leaving her life to a blog?" The blog only gives vague hints. As to the purpose of this horrible murder, I guess the only people who may grasp the concept as to why this happened would be David, and maybe Kara. I personally don't think that the parents could have prevented anything having seen the blog, blogs are usually harmless (unless in the form of cyber-bullying, but let's face it, it usually doesn't get as serious or as common as the media and the education boards like to think it is). But I do think that this blog does provide a bit of helpful information, and in some cases I can bet some insight into the minds of these people involved in such a mess is helping officials possibly get a little closer to finishing this case. But are blogs to blame for the inner workings of a disturbed teenage boy and his christian, home schooled girlfriend whose parents were killed, could something really have been prevented? In this case, I think not. But maybe in future cases, this may be proven wrong.

Will Powers said...

I just read the article too. You've done well out of the whole story. MSN crediting your blogspot! One day in the not-to-distant future, bloggers will be reporting the news, while the media will be turning to blogspots for the "latest".

You ate of the apple and it's been good, r-e-a-l good! You know what happened to Adam after he did eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil? He got alot more bloggers to his garden of Eden. Good Hunting!

Anonymous said...

This is bull that you are complaning about this. would you rather act the way you are suggesting and take a chance on losing hundreds of lives instead of losing one crazy guy??

Anonymous said...

your MSN article sucked ass! You are a terrible journalist. SO this comment is not really that valid because I didn't elaborate, but fuck that just know that you suck.

Anonymous said...

you're a shitty journalist

Adam said...

Wow. That's a lot of comments! Thank you all for posting. And thank you trix foley for your passionate defense of my work. Although you may want to be on the look out for 15 year old girls.

Of course I wasn't blaming blogs for the murders. That's rediculous. What I was saying is that a blog or online profile can provide a window into the mind of a teenager.

I was not aware of the Switchfoot song.. thanks for bringing it to my attention. Reading the lyrics though... I'm not convinced I read into this the wrong way.

Mike, I agree with you... check my response to the guy who had a similar comment a couple posts below.

Scott... if blogs are so gay, why you reading them?

Anyways, regarding this air marshall shooting... its just tragic. It didn't really do anything to prove we have good security. Some people's comments to the contrary, if someone is gonna blow up a plane, they don't go running OFF it. The fact is, an unarmed man got shot. We should feel sorry for his wife and family, rather than say the guy deserved it. That said, you can't judge the air marshalls either. They made a split second decision.

I ask these questions only to point out the difficulty a shoot-to-kill policy creates.

Undoubtedly, some innocent people may be caught in the line of fire.

Something like this shouldn't be celebrated, or lauded as "success," but rather, lamented.

It's sad whether you believe the air marshalls were right or wrong, or whether the shoot-to-kill policy is right or wrong.

Anyways, thanks for writin in.

Anonymous said...

I first heard of you when i read you article about MySpace on MSN, and it took me about two sentences before I realized you were just another prick who thought he could be a journalist, because...anyone can do it right? Clearly not. Regarding the article about Myspace, you said "...she listed her age as 17...". Since you have clearly never visited Myspace.com, let me fill you in. Until very recently, the minimum age that could be listed was 17. When a person creates their account, it will not let them put their age as anything less than 17. She wasn't deliberatly lying, she had no choice. Don't assume that she must be a murderer becasue she lied about her age, before you research the topic. Moving on from the Myspace story, I then came to this site, your blog, which is really where you belong, not on a Journalism website, but on a site that anyone can get a blog and bitch about whatever they want to. Again, I only needed a few sentences to determine that this article was also, as the other and probably all of yours, bullshit. "...shoot before you think...". Since you clearly didn't hear what happened in this incident, the man ran up the aisle yelling about a bomb, and was told to put his hands on his head when he reached the cockpit door, when he did not, he began to run up the jetway, back into the airport, which was when he was shot. Since you clearly think that the air marshals acted incorrectly, try to visualize a man running through a huge airport screaming about a bomb at the top of his lungs with two armed men following him. Then rewrite you story.

Anonymous said...

I just wanted two second the comment by Mike Lewis. In what way dose gutting a deer or playing with air pistols show that he is a violent person. I have been around guns and hunted my whole life and have never had problems with shooting people. In fact most people that have been around guns and have a hunting background have more respect for what a gun can do. Remember it is the person that kills not the gun.

Anonymous said...

If you had a law enforcement background, you would know that the kind of situation that took place on that American Airlines flight puts everyone on the airplane, as well as in the airport, in harms way. The Air Marshals did their job, to the best of their ability, while under a great deal of stress. Moments like these are charged with adrenaline and split second decision making is a requirement, not an option. They did the right thing, given the circumstances, and should not hesitate to do the same again if called upon. The dead man's wife knew he was bipolar and off his medication, therefore unstable, yet she talked him into boarding the aircraft just the same. Lay blame where it is due, with the wife, who could have prevented this event, not with the Air Marshals that performed their mission, and protected the other passengers from possible harm. Put a uniform on and "stand a watch", until then you are not qualified to pass judgement on these brave men.

Anonymous said...

heh i like how every single comment on here disagrees with you.

and to jump on the bandwagon, meant to live is a switchfoot song. switchfoot is a band, they play music. maybe you're never heard of such a thing...i dunno.

D said...

Adam, I totally agree with you. It doesn't matter what others have said about the air marshall acting before doing, it doesn't excuse the reason an innocent man was shot. There are other ways to detain a man without killing. Tasers and pepper spray would have brought a screaming man down.

It seems that lately, us Americans are so willing to throw away our rights and liberty just so that we can be safe from all evils. When is the line drawn if our government decides to trample all our liberties?

Anonymous said...

A taser? Why would you want to subject an explosive device to an electrical current? Most detonators would discharge out of spite, resulting in the explosion we are trying to avoid! Pepper spray is a joke, and is not much more than a mild irritant, like yourself. Educate yourself on the subject of explosives. Most will NOT detonate when hit by a projectile. Personally, I don't want my "liberties" trampled on by some nut job without a clue.

Anonymous said...

David's Xanga site stated that he enjoyed "soft air gun wars" and "getting into trouble." He provided a link to his pictures. An album full of pictures of only him, and an album of hunting photos. Several show the teen gutting a deer.
Would they have been more aware of David's capacity for violence if they had seen the pictures on his blog?
I'm sorry you need to explain to me what pictures of gutting a deer have to do with a "capacity for violence" or are you refering to something else on the site? Gutting a deer is no more violent than your local butcher cutting you a steak for dinner! Maybe you have spent way too much time in cyber space and need to get out more?

mike k said...

Adam, I understand that this man was not a terrorist. You're right when you say that a terrorist would not act that way. In fact, that type of behavior is pretty much limited to a man who's mentally ill. However, is it not equally as likely that a mentally ill man who had a bomb would react that way? Think about it: he said he had a bomb in his backpack, and then he made a move for it. Now, I think this is the perfect case of hindsight being 20-20; if you were in that situation, and a man who said he had a bomb then reached for where he said it was, in a public setting no less, would you sit there and assume "oh, he's just mentally ill?" And even if you do assume that, are you then to assume that that translates into him lying? Many people who carry bombs are mentally ill and are subject to that sort of behavior. It sucks that he died, but I don't think that the air marshals had much of a choice...

Anonymous said...

"Lay blame where it is due, with the wife, who could have prevented this event..."

This comment completely shocked me. It is not the wife's fault that her husband had bipolar disorder and there does not seem to be any reason to believe that she "talked him into boarding the aircraft" as a previous annonymous poster claimed. There is no way of knowing if the man's wife "could have prevented this event." The poor woman just lost her husband in a very sudden and tragic manner. To place the blame solely on her ends the discussion of whether or not the air marshall was truly justified in shooting this man. Yes, being an air marshall in this situation would be stressful and would require split second decision making, but the air marshall did not enter into the field of work unknowingly.

In a situation such as this, it is not fair to haphazardly place blame on the most convenient scapegoat. A mentally ill man was shot and killed. Is this really the way we want our country to operate? To simply write this off as the wife's fault dismisses the true issue at hand, simply because this is easier than discovering the truth about the situation on the aircraft.

Annabelle Echo said...

I thought this post was about the Air Marshalls' itchy fingers? Why so many posts about the dangers of blogging?
Anyway the Marshalls may have been on higher alert than usual because of recent case of 50 year old Eygptian passenger who had an "explosive substance TATP on the interior of his shoes between the heel and sole." !?
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1383832
He of course, was released.
Very odd, don't you think?
I think the Marshalls had to make split second decisions. Even though Rigoberto Alpizar was running from the plane, he might have had some kind of remote trigger that could have ignited a bomb aboard. How could they tell?

Reality Hurts said...

Perhaps this can put all the talk to bed about the MSN article. First off, to the all the girls that defend their blogs and personal web pages being private, and upset that certain persons read them... I would suggest not posting them in public view. When i have diahrrea i don't take a picture of it and post it around town unless i'm willing to accept the consequences of the different people viewing it. If you want to have privacy then maybe don't post your life or any incriminating pieces on the world wide internet. I get the therapy of online blogging, people used to call them diaries and stores sell the little journal pads with a tiny lock on it. I get that it's good for networking and finding people with similar interest but please... Try having a conversation for a change and get to know someone instead of reading their online dossier. I believe that reading into the blogs after the events is 20/20 hindsight. It's easier to pick out "the clues" if you are of the opinion that they are there. Otherwise things like that are typically overlooked in the big scheme of writing.. kind of like this comment..

buck fush

joeblogg said...

I feel danielle is overly defensive of personal web sites. i don't think the writer is or ever was against these services, but rather pointing out that it is misused. Like stupid 9th graders on a services meant for older teens, because they know better then to talk trash on a personal site, and certainly wouldn't cry about being caught after. Whispering is better then passing notes.. cause it leaves no trail. Maybe next time you need to vent, call a friend, or start a neighborhood newspaper

Rowan said...

I wondered if the passenger didn't want to commit suicide, and figured that he'd get shot by marshalls? Why else would you run up and down the aisles of a plane claiming to have a bomb.

Moreover, why did they allow the man to board the plane to begin with since there were reports that he was clearly agitated at the gate? I read on a news site that a woman sitting next to the man and his wife at the gate for more than an hour said that he was very agitated and the wife was telling him that they had to 'get thru this' and asking him to 'just do this for her please'.

Someone in the terminal should have said something. I can't imagine that he was in great shape going through security, either! This was a failure on the part of lots of people but not the air marshalls.

As someone who has been on a plane with a fellow passenger who was mentally disturbed, I can tell you it's a harrowing experience. Good thing the plane didn't get into the air before the man freaked out or this could've been much worse than it was.

I don't blame the marshalls for what they did. They don't have time to diagnose if a person is sane or not. They told him not to move, he moved. They shot.

Anonymous said...

FYI, a high-profile murder of a teenage girl recently occurred in St. Louis. The girl was murdered by a friend, both had blogs on the internet, Stlpunk.com . The boys' included info on the girl, although it held absolutely no clues as to what was about to happen.

Anonymous said...

My name is Melissa and I have rarely heard of "blogs", but after reading your articles, which were insightful, have come to the realization that I have to agree with you that the content of the sights can be very dangerous. I totally agree with joeblogg. I think you are a greater writer. Keep up the great work.
PS I dont agree with you about the AA shootings, but i cant say what i would do if i was put in that situation.
Great Work---Melissa ;NC

Reid Neighbors said...

Hey,
I would just like to say I think your way over analyzing these peoples blogs I mean take a look at my blog (www.xanga.com/REC_Neighbors)and look my inerests. I am a Christian, I like airsoft, I have hunted before, I play video games, oh and I'm homeshooled.
Now from your view dosn't that make me like 200% more likly to kill some? Anyway check out my blog and comment.
Cya.

Libertee said...

While the incident in Miami was sad, unfortunately the Air Marshall was doing exactly as he was trained. My husband is a police officer, and I can tell you that if he encounters someone that is refusing to cooperate and reaches for his pocket, jacket, bookbag, etc., my husband will shoot him period. Officers are trained to shoot to kill, it's instinct. I would rather my husband shoot someone than lose his life because he was being cautious. I feel for the man's family in this incident, however, he should have been taking his meds before he ever boarded that plane. It is a no win situation.

Anonymous said...

I would like to comment on Danielle's post. Two words, "spell check".

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Anonymous said...

for the love of everything holy people, adam never said that blogs WILL tell a killer from a non-killer. he merely said that they MIGHT offer clues. i would have to agree seems how some people choose to reveal some pretty personal details through blogs and other online profiles. but make a note, i just said SOME, not ALL. also, from what i gather from the lyrics to "meant to live," its talking about how we as a people are not supposed to cease to exist after we physically die, but in fact that we are all supposed to go on to a different realm of existence. almost like its saying that if there is no God and no Heaven or Hell, then there is nothing to shoot for after death and in turn our lives are completely meaningless. as for some of these comments, a spell checker is definitely needed. i certainly am not going to take advice, nor take seriously, someone who cannot spell as good as me nor can they go two sentences without using some sort of vulgarity. now i know i dont capitalize or use correct punctuation, but thats because im lazy, at least i admit it. by the way danielle, if you dont want people finding personal stuff about you, heres a thought, dont broadcast it on a blog. even if it is private, you see, there are these people called hackers who can get virtually anything they want off of the internet. maybe you should try thinking a bit before you go shooting your mouth off to someone. just the fact that you're this mad about a simple internet article kind of lets me get a feeling for how intelligent you truly are.


good article adam. you did your homework on the subject you chose to write about with the exception of the switchfoot song. nothing anyone can really hold against you there if they are somewhat intelligent.

Huda said...

I agree with you adam. You can't blame the man totally though. He was mentally ill. He doesn't even know what he was doing.

Will Powers said...

MURDER BY A BLOGGER...

http://willpowers-cerebytes.blogspot.com/

Anon. said...

To Adam and others,

I was reading some of the comments on the shooting and not being from North America, the event only made about a 30 second time slot on TV news. It was interesting reading everyon'e opinions, so here is mine - with limited facts.

I agree with Adam - stating that you have a bomb is not "typical" terrorist behaviour - and i would like to point out to Mike K who said "Many people who carry bombs are mentally ill and are subject to that sort of behavior." that he really needs to question where he gets his facts from.

I am generalising here but most of these suicide bombers and terrorists are not mentally disabled. They are fighting for a cause in which they believe in, they know exactly what they are doing, and have control over what they are doing. I am not saying that terrorists and suicide bombers have the right to hold people's lives and fears in their hands, but i think that the general public should be kept informed.

Generalising is the worst possible way to catergorise people (hypocritical i know) who have certain disablities or share certain attributes. Would you like it if i said all American's were ignorant idiots? Or all blondes were ditzy bimbos? Probably not.

Libertee said:
"Officers are trained to shoot to kill, it's instinct..." This maybe so, but shouldn't the Air Marshall Association of America - or whatever it's called, shouldn't they have trained their men in cautious shooting? I know that if you shoot someone in their knee that they can't walk, they feel an enormous amount of pain and they arn't dead. Similarly, shooting the guy in the hand and then in the knee would have stopped him, long enough for the Air Marshalls to take his backpack off him.

She also said:
"...he should have been taking his meds before he ever boarded that plane."
Sometimes this is impossible. I don't know all the facts, and probably should have researched them before writing this, but maybe this man didn't know any better? Maybe he lied to his wife about taking them? Maybe he ran out? There are so many maybes - in my mind anyway, about this situation. Maybe to avert situations like this happening again your airlines need to ask you or whoever is booking the ticket if you or anyone going with you has any mental or medical disablities, although then i would imagine the debate about privacy would come up.

Oh! And why not, since im commenting now - blogs and MySpace and all those online diaries things are great things that you can vent to. But i know for mine, i am always aware that someone is reading or has the capacity to read it, thus i don't put anything like rar on it. But of course, like all diaries and creative outlets it will tell you something about the person - what their favourite colours are, music, who their friends are etc.

However i do see Adam's point of view.
"Would they have been more aware of David's capacity for violence if they had seen the pictures on his blog?"

If someone states that KILLING deer is their idea of a hobby, you really have to wonder the capacity for violence that they have. If they say also that they are Christian, then one really does question what is the basis for their moral and ethical belief structure. I'm sure that most Christian denominations do not encourage the killing of innocent animals for entertainment. And if the person has the skills, the stealth, the intellect and the strength to be able to stalk, kill and then gut a deer, a deer - mind that has done nothing to them, that is native to it's habitat. It's not quite like the rabbits here that kill the crops which is many families lifeblood - one really does have to question from where does all the anger and malice come?

Anonymous said...

I find your writings inspiring, informative, and entertaining! I first read your article about myspace and teenagers blogging on msn, I agree completely and find it quite intriguing and unusual how our generation has suddenly turned into "bloggers." I'm not sure if this is a step forward, or a step behind. I look forward to reading more from you.

P.S. I agree COMPLETELY about the air marshall scenario!

Visitor Map: