LordMitford

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/....ap/index.html

Anyone FT'ers on this flight?

I wonder if there is more to this story than "man detained by Air Marshal for speaking to woman in the row behind him, causing 2nd Air Marshal to aim gun at rest of passengers for remainder of flight."

Spiff

"If he would have accidentally fired, he would have killed somebody or hurt somebody," said passenger David Johnson, 51.

Very true. Talk about wanton endangerment!!! The TSA should have to come clean on this one, especially since they let the guy they had detained go almost immediately!



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

snake

Come on guys, cut the Air Marshalls a little slack, a lot of 'em got suckered into leaving their exciting jobs with the Border Patrol, where they got to exchange gunfire regularly with real criminals.

It shouldn't come as any surprise that 40+ hours a week of modern air travel will drive 'em a little squirrelly.

Surly FA's, airline "food", delays and misconnections wasn't quite what they expected.

Plato90s

And would you believe that if the pilot were to accidentally turn off both engines, the plane would have crashed!!!

Talk about your reckless endangerment!

Mr. Johnson is just venting about things he doesn't know much about. We trust professional pilots not to accidentally crash the plane, so why doesn't he trust a trained police officer not to accidentally fire at you. Especially since all the police agencies (not sure about air marshal program) I know of train officers not to disengage the safety on the weapons until it's absolutely necessary, in order to prevent accidents.

Other than having a gun pointed down the aisle (not AT any passenger), what exactly is the harm done?

If the air marshals had not revealed themselves, and let this woman be harassed, I think some of the same complainers would be talking about negligence as well.

Frankly, I doubt any air marshal can do anything to make you happy, Spiff. They could have resuscitated a passenger who had a heart attack, and you'd likely complain that the air marshal was sitting in a FC or bulkhead seat that a paying pax could have had.

mikey1003

I thought the the AMs job was to protect the plane and prevent hijackings. Since when is it their job to blow their cover over a " passenger who was acting in an odd and obstreperous manner."

I have seen lots of odd and obstreperous passengers who were effectively quieted by other pax.

Where is Dirty Harry when you need him. Oh, nevermind, he was standing in front of the plane scaring the **** out of the rest of the pax on board

Rover

Looks like poor training.

AS Flyer

I've always tried to give the TSA the benefit of the doubt. I think, in this case, their Federal Air Marshall's definetely over reacted and should be let go. They are there for one reason only - to protect the cockpit. If someones life is endangered on board, due to another passengers actions, I would expect them to react as well. It doesn't sound like there was ever a time where the flight deck's security was in danger of being compromised, nor the safety of another passenger. From what I've seen, it seems as though the passengers and crew are on the same page. The FAM's should be fired. That does not mean, however, that the program is worthless. If it could be fine tuned it has real possiblities.

gsw

"Federal prosecutors declined to charge the detainee after discussing the incident with the marshals, FBI spokeswoman Jerri Williams said Saturday. She wouldn't release his name or elaborate on the incident."

Interesting that armed marshal would need to reveal themselves in a situation where the detainee was not charged with a crime.

rawbert

It appears to me a few people are making a lot of assumptions about an incident they know absolutlely zero about. The CNN article had very little information.

It appears none of us were on that plane and knows exactly what happened. I don't think any of us can make any conclusions based on the minimal information released so far.

These AM's have a tough job and sometimes need to make quick decisions with minimal information. Decisions that are generally designed to protect the passengers.

"I have made up my mind, please do not confuse me with the facts"

Rover

That's right-all you wiseguys would be sorry if there were no air marshalls and women were harrased by brutes who when they were finished with her, came for you. You would be sorry then. It's a small price to pay for the security of having an air marshal on board, even if they do point their gun at you. If you haven't committed a crime, why should you worry about having a gun pointed at you anyway? I think some of you (I won't mention any names) have guilty conscionces. Anyway the air marshall programme is just starting out, and after a while everything will be allright. In the meantime you are helping terrorists by complaining about things like this, but I suppose that is what you intended. Wait till Brian hears about what you said.

Track

I thought that Ashcroft and Fleisher were so ridiculed when they accused people of being unpatriotic and of helping the terrorists when questioning their arrogant claims and demands that no one would ever try that again. I guess I was wrong and we still have to worry about having our free speech curtailed.

ozstamps

Free speech in or near an airport/airplane?

When was that rule re-introduced?

------------------
~ Glen ~ Calling all United 1K Members - please join .. www.1Kflyers.com

dctorres

I thought the Air Marshal program has been around for a long time now, just not on the scale it is now.

Anyone, is this correct?

bdschobel

That is correct. Before 9/11, it was down to something like 80 marshals. Now they have 6000, according to some news reports.

Bruce

mikey1003

That is not their job. These idiots blew their cover by defending the damsel in distress.

I have seen several instances of air rage...both before 9-11 and after.

Before...we kinda just sat their and kept our mouths shut.

After, it was the PAX who helped control the bad guys.

The AMs in this case blew it. If the bad guy was a diversion, he succeeded in sniffing out the AMs. He probably wasn't..... The AMs should do their job.

I do not believe this was in their job descriptions.