dc0de wrote:

I respect your opinion, but making this tragic incident into something more, is simply wrong.

My opinion is that this should not be tumpeted as a success. If you call the incident "tragic" I presume you agree that it is not a success. The two ideas are mutually exclusive. I also offered that the situation ought to be given a critical look to see if this failure can be avoided without weakening security. Are you suggesting that is a bad idea think critically about incidents like this?

The Air Marshall did his job, and under great risk, took the action he needed to in order to protect the other passengers and bystanders from harm.

I object to the assertion that you know whether or not the Air Marshall followed the proceedures. Do you know what the proceedures are? Do you know the specific details of the events in question? I certainly don't. Neither does the federal government, which is why they have started a formal investigation.

In the wake of the shooting in London I assumed that there was no problem with police action, but over the weeks that followed we learned that absolutely nothing about the person's behavior should have aroused suspicion. He was dressed appropriately for the weather and did not behave in an eratic way. Most of the early information reported in the press was either incorrect or incomplete.

This time I think it makes sense to wait for an investigation to take place before one jumps to conclusions about either the correctness of the actions or the effectiveness of the policies.

So where does the line get drawn?

I prefer to err on the side of safety... besides, sometimes it cleans the gene pool...

I submit that arguing against taking a critical look at situations where innocent people are killed by the police is not erring on the side of safety. Its erring on the side of killing innocent people. It may be the case that the only policy which can effectively prevent terrorist incidents results in some innocent people being killed, but you can't know that without asking questions. To celebrate the killing of an innocent person as evidence of the success of the anti-terror program before any investigation has occured is grossly irrational as far as I'm concerned.

RE: Shooting Is Defended But Gets Mixed Reviews