# Hijacked Bus and an Innnocent's Death **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 4, 2001, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357 "2001-05-04T15:52:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2001, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/1 "2001-05-04T15:52:02Z")
I had a difficult time deciding if this should be in the BBQ Pit or in Great Debates. Obviously, ranting about the bus driver’s actions and, most assuredly, about the hijacker’s actions would be appropriate in the Pit, I do see a question worthy of debate. So here goes: Recently, a felon hijacked a bus and forced the driver to continue driving to flee from the police. The bus finally crashed into a minivan, killing the driver, and the felon attempted to flee but was apprehended by the police. The questions: What should the driver have done differently? Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? I’m also curious as to a recent emergency landing in Florida in which a small plane landed on a beach and almost hit (killed) people on the beach. Why didn’t the pilot attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance on killing people - is his life more important than theirs? ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2001, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/2 "2001-05-04T23:54:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > **What should the driver have done differently?** You mean like he should have done a Steven Seagal and taken the gun away from the guy? Or maybe he should have driven more like Sandra Bullock in _Speed_ and miraculously managed to avoid killing anyone? Those are movies. In real life, when someone holds a gun to your head, you do what the man says, no matter how many baby buggies happen to be crossing the street at the next intersection. \*\* > [@](#): > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else?\*\* No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. \*\* > [@](#): > > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death?\*\* No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. \*\* > [@](#): > > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training?\*\* Should bus companies all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Should airlines all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Should taxi companies all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Should cruise lines all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate training? Should the U.S. Postal Service assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Should Svendsen’s Florist assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Are you starting to see a trend here? 😉 > [@](#): > > \*\*I’m also curious as to a recent emergency landing in Florida in which a small plane landed on a beach and almost hit (killed) people on the beach. Why didn’t the pilot attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance on killing people - is his life more important than theirs? \*\* No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. Actually, he _did_ “attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance of killing people”–kudos to him for keeping his head and picking a big, presumably mostly empty beach, instead of trying to bring it down on a busy interstate or something. You sound like you think he deliberately _aimed_ his plane at people on the beach. Do you fly planes? When you’re up in the sky at 1500 feet and the engine starts missing, all you wanna do is get DOWN. It’s not easy to find a spot for an emergency landing in the first place, let alone be able to set it down in an emergency without racking it up. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/3 "2001-05-05T00:11:18Z")
> [@](#): > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? I didn’t pay much attention to this story when it was broadcast, and I’m having a little trouble finding a link; but if I heard the report correctly the hijacker forced the driver to the floor and drove the bus himself. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/4 "2001-05-05T01:50:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose \* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > > What should the driver have done differently? > > You mean like he should have done a Steven Seagal and taken the gun away from the guy? Or maybe he should have driven more like Sandra Bullock in _Speed_ and miraculously managed to avoid killing anyone? > > Those are movies. In real life, when someone holds a gun to your head, you do what the man says, no matter how many baby buggies happen to be crossing the street at the next intersection. So you think it’s okay to kill babies to save your own life. Tnanks for the answer. Oh, please let your neighbours and everyone else on the planet know when you’re on the road. Perhaps a better solution would’ve been to flood the engine, throw the vehicle into the wrong gear, immediately drive it into unoccupied vehicles - or something along those lines. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? > > No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. Two things: 1. YOU just asserted that’s the way it is, and 2. I did not suggest it. I asked the question. Personally, I’m appalled that the driver did what SHE did instead of doing something, anything, to keep the bus from colliding with other OCCUPIED vehicles. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? > > No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. What’s silly about it? Police departments nationwide get sued for the actions of their officers, and the outcome of the suits tend to be, IIRC, based on the training the officers have received. Since the police departments are part of the government, the taxpayer ends up paying for that. Bus companies in many places fall into the category of government-run entities and thus it might behoove the government running it to find a solution BEFORE the event happens. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? > > Should bus companies all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Well, since airplane passenger companies provide such training based on such an assumption why shouldn’t the bus transportation companies do the same? > [@](#): > > Should airlines all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? See above. > [@](#): > > Should taxi companies all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Yes. I think they should. > [@](#): > > Should cruise lines all over the world assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate training? Yes. I think they should. > [@](#): > > Should the U.S. Postal Service assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Yes. I think they should. > [@](#): > > Should Svendsen’s Florist assume that their vehicles are going to be liable to hijacking at any time and provide the appropriate anti-hijacking training to their employees? Yes. I think they should. I think that any employer who has his employees interact with the public should have some kind of policy, and training in that policy, on how said employer expects said employees to act in the event of an emergency. Kind of like how my local credit union trains the tellers on how to deal with bank robbers. > [@](#): > > Are you starting to see a trend here? 😉 Yep. You’re insensitive and unaware of reality yourself. Reread my OP and you will see that I asked some questions - I didn’t suggest anything. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > I’m also curious as to a recent emergency landing in Florida in which a small plane landed on a beach and almost hit (killed) people on the beach. Why didn’t the pilot attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance on killing people - is his life more important than theirs? > > No, and IMO it’s silly for you to suggest it. Then explain why the pilot landed amongst the beachgoers. > [@](#): > > Actually, he _did_ “attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance of killing people”–kudos to him for keeping his head and picking a big, presumably mostly empty beach, instead of trying to bring it down on a busy interstate or something. You sound like you think he deliberately _aimed_ his plane at people on the beach. Actually, from the news footage I saw, he could’ve ditched the vehicle in the water - well away from people on the beach. And it looked like that stretch of beach wasn’t mostly empty. > [@](#): > > Do you fly planes? When you’re up in the sky at 1500 feet and the engine starts missing, all you wanna do is get DOWN. It’s not easy to find a spot for an emergency landing in the first place, let alone be able to set it down in an emergency without racking it up. My personal opinion is that anyone who pilots an aircraft ought to assume the responsibility of sacrificing his life in the event of a wreck rather than endanger those on the ground. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/5 "2001-05-05T01:54:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Johnny L.A. \* > > > [@](#): > > > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? > > I didn’t pay much attention to this story when it was broadcast, and I’m having a little trouble finding a link; but if I heard the report correctly the hijacker forced the driver to the floor and drove the bus himself. The news footage stated that the driver had a weapon held to her head and that she was forced to drive. Not a word about the hijacker driving. ---
**Author:** ![ladybug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/46a35a/32.png) [@ladybug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladybug)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/6 "2001-05-05T02:01:17Z")
I found one [report](http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010503/us/hijacked_bus_10.html) of the story: > [@](#): > > Garcia held a semiautomatic handgun to the driver’s head and forced her to drive, police said. Witnesses said Garcia had his arm around the driver’s neck. > > “With a gun to her head, it was clear the driver was scared. She was doing whatever she could to stay alive,” Pasquariello said. Hope this helps. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/7 "2001-05-05T03:32:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > \*\* > > What should the driver have done differently? \*\* Beats me I’ve never been a hostage before. Maybe he could have crashed into a stationary object or something. Maybe. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? \*\* No actually it does not give him the right to kill someone else. But he isn’t criminally responsible for any of the deaths which might occur that honor goes to the jerk with the gun. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? \*\* I don’t think so. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? \*\* This happens on a daily basis? Should I, as a licensed driver, be trained by the state in case someone decides to carjack me? > [@](#): > > \*\* > I’m also curious as to a recent emergency landing in Florida in which a small plane landed on a beach and almost hit (killed) people on the beach. Why didn’t the pilot attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance on killing people - is his life more important than theirs? \*\* Maybe because the pilot had no other choice. Unless the pilot was negligent he probably attempted to find a better place to land. Shit happens sometimes and it really sucks. Marc ---
**Author:** ![McMurphy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e19adc/32.png) [@McMurphy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/McMurphy)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/8 "2001-05-05T11:44:12Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Monty_ > What should the driver have done differently Depends on what you think her priorities should have been? Should she, an untrained and presumably terrified woman have tried to disarm the dangerous criminal with the gun to her head or should she have focussed on trying to stay alive through this nightmare? If she’ done _anything_ differently the chances are she wouldn’t be around for you to castigate her. > [@](#): > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? I don’t see what you’re getting at here. In the situation we’re discussing that question just doesn’t apply. The driver was being forced, on pain of death, to keep driving. There was no element of choice involved. > [@](#): > > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death IMO no. Why should he? The blame cannot be placed upon anybody but the guy with the gun, the guy who was _forcing_ her to keep going. > [@](#): > > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training Why don’t they just employ a load of retired navy SEALS and have done with it? :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > I’m also curious as to a recent emergency landing in Florida in which a small plane landed on a beach and almost hit (killed) people on the beach. Why didn’t the pilot attempt to land where he wouldn’t take a chance on killing people - is his life more important than theirs? Well if the pilot had had a choice between a crowded beach and an empty field then doubtless he would have chosen the field. It seems clear to me that the choice was not available to him, same as with this bus driver. > [@](#): > > Perhaps a better solution would’ve been to flood the engine, throw the vehicle into the wrong gear, immediately drive it into unoccupied vehicles - or something along those lines. Or perhaps she could have tapped out a morse code message against the steering wheel telling the ther passengers to rescue her. hindsight is a wonderful thing monty but you have to understand this woman was probably scared to death. Do you really think it’s as easy to come up with solutions like yours under that sort of pressure? ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/9 "2001-05-05T13:42:44Z")
Ditching a plane in a lake or river requires specialized landing techniques that you have to learn. It’s not like setting her down on the ground, with water added. Ditching a plane successfully in the _ocean_ is even trickier, and requires even more specialized landing techniques… [http://www.equipped.com/bschiff-ditching.htm](http://www.equipped.com/bschiff-ditching.htm) > [@](#): > > But when landing in the ocean, much more thought must be given to the safest landing direction. > > The surface of an ocean almost always is characterized by long, parallel swells. These large undulations are caused by distant storms and are not wave irregularities caused by local winds. It is important that a landing be made parallel to these swells because landing into the face of one can be like flying into the side of a mountain. Although water often is regarded as a soft substance, it can be as hard as granite when struck head on at landing speeds (as anyone who has done a belly flop from a lofty diving board can attest). > > Unfortunately, it is very difficult to detect swell movement when below’ 2,000 feet msl. The state of the sea must be assessed from a higher altitude and even this is not particularly easy unless the swells are pronounced. Learning to recognize swell direction, however, is one aspect of ditching that can be practiced during routine flights along a shoreline. > > The Coast Guard often refers to secondary swells that also may influence the direction of landing; but since these usually are visible only to the trained eye, any further discussion of them is only of academic interest, except for one point. Occasionally, major and minor swell systems interact (even in rough seas) to form areas of relatively smooth water. This occurs where the peaks of one swell system fill the valleys of another. So, if time and altitude permit, execute a shallow’, 360-degree turn to see if such an oceanic oasis can be found. > > Although it is tempting to disregard swell movement and land directly into the wind, this must be avoided. Landing into the face of a well-developed swell can be catastrophic unless the wind component across the swells exceeds one-third of the touchdown speed. In this ease, the pilot probably should compromise between landing parallel to the swells and into the wind. If the crosswind component exceeds half the landing speed, it might be wiser to land into the wind as long as the touchdown can be made in a valley between swells or on the backside of a swell… Plus a sizeable dollop of luck… > [@](#): > > To this must be added, “Good luck.” So, your Florida pilot was supposed to emulate the late, lamented, heroic William Seymour? [http://www.union.lib.nc.us/GoldStarMothers/seymouw.htm](http://www.union.lib.nc.us/GoldStarMothers/seymouw.htm) > [@](#): > > The Boston Post > > Monday, July 17, 1944 > > In a valiant effort to save the lives of hundreds of bathers at Malibu Beach, Savin Hill, yesterday, Ensign William Oren Seymour, Jr., of Monroe, N.C., a navy pilot in a crippled plane shunned an emergency landing on the beach and went to his death offshore. > > The plane, which had been towing a target sleeve for gunnery practice, was returning from a target area and when it approached the Squantum naval air base showed signs of being in distress > > The beach was crowded with thousands of Sunday bathers, and the plane, a single seat pursuit ship of the latest type, swung in toward the level strand to make an emergency landing. But, as the plane came close to the beach and reached an altitude of less than 100 feet, the pilot saw the crowd and yanked the plane around in a sharp turn to head back over the water and away from a small boat anchorage offshore. Notice that the Malibu Beach that day in 1944 was “crowded with thousands of Sunday bathers”. I sure can’t find any kind of news link to the story you’re referring to. Just how many people were on your Florida pilot’s beach? No, I wouldn’t expect a pilot to deliberately squash people. But I wouldn’t expect a Florida pilot, faced with choosing between a tricky ocean ditch and a landing on a beach with only a few people, to definitely put his own life in even more danger on the off-chance that he might hit someone. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/10 "2001-05-05T13:44:48Z")
…and, um, I would kinda expect folks to get out of the way, ya know? “Incoming…” :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/11 "2001-05-05T14:06:50Z")
> [@](#): > > The news footage stated that the driver had a weapon held to her head and that she was forced to drive. Not a word about the hijacker driving. I stand corrected. > [@](#): > > The blame cannot be placed upon anybody but the guy with the gun, the guy who was forcing her to keep going. No, it was the **NRA’s** fault! Had the gun not been easily available, practically given out free with every box of Cracker Jacks, the earlier shooting victim would not have been shot, the bus would not have been hijacked, and the woman in the mini-van would still be alive! It’s not the man’s fault (who took the action); it’s the NRA’a fault! **That was a joke!** The blame rests entirely on the hijacker. > [@](#): > > …and, um, I would kinda expect folks to get out of the way, ya know? “Incoming…” :rolleyes: Well… people generally tend to be pretty clueless. There’s a good chance they didn’t see the airplane until it was too late, especially if the engine was not developing power since it would not be heard. I didn’t hear about the incident cited, but without knowing the details I’ll guess the pilot made the proper decision. The OP said he _almost_ hit people. A miss is as good as a mile. Given a choice between a relatively empty stretch of beach and the ocean, I’d choose to attempt a landing on the beach. I’d try to land in the high surf line since the sand would not be as soft there and I’d be more likely to make a safe landing there than in the soft dry sand. Of course as a helicopter pilot, I don’t really need all that much space. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/12 "2001-05-05T16:05:46Z")
[http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mlb/lake.html](http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mlb/lake.html) > [@](#): > > Hail, most the size of baseballs, severely damaged the roofs, knocked out windows in nearly 600 homes, and severely damaged 3,000 vehicles in Lake Wales, Polk County. Softball size hail (4.50-inch) also occurred in Lake Wales, which set a new record as the largest documented hail for the state of Florida. [http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/WDBJ-7/script\_archives/97/0497/041197/041197.n.htm](http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/WDBJ-7/script_archives/97/0497/041197/041197.n.htm) > [@](#): > > The twisters produced lightning and large hail-- cracking the windshield of the news vehicle. [http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/1999/J99-16.html](http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/1999/J99-16.html) > [@](#): > > May 13, 1999 > SPACE SHUTTLE LAUNCH ADVISORY: DISCOVERY LAUNCH POSTPONED TO REPAIR FUEL TANK HAIL DAMAGE > > Space Shuttle managers today postponed the launch of Discovery for at least one week to permit technicians to repair foam insulation on the external fuel tank that was damaged by a severe hail storm last weekend. You know, large hail can fall at any time, disabling vehicles of all kinds. Maybe owners of fleet vehicles should assume that they’re going to be liable to be struck by softball-sized hail at any time, and provide the appropriate anti-hailstone training to their employees. Maybe the [Workplace Fleet Safety System](http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/roadsafety/papers/fleet_safety_in_the_workplace.html) should stop worrying so much about car crashes and add a chapter on deterring hijackers and disarming gunmen, so all those FTD Florist delivery guys will be able to emulate Steven Seagal and avoid having to run over any babies in strollers. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/13 "2001-05-05T16:22:15Z")
Well, the pit thread got closed, so I will repeat my point here: The bus driver decided that the possibility that she might hurt someone was preferable to the certainty that she would have died. Deciding to follow the gunman’s orders in no way insured that some third party would die–it simply increased the probability. There are plenty of carjacking cases where people follow the orders of thier captors and no one gets hurt. Monty said: > [@](#): > > Ane yes, I would more than likely not have a problem if the other driver had not sustained any injuries. The point is the other driver died. No, it isn’t the point. The quality of a decision can’t be judged by its outcome. Buying a lottery ticket is a stupod thing to do whether or not you win. By your logic, had she let the driver shoot her and then he, unable to drive a bus worth a damn, had run it into a busload of nuns and puppies, that would have been her fault as well–she shouldn’t have given in to the selfish desire to “be a hero” and instead should have done her best to keep a lethal weapon-a huge bus–out of the hands of someone obviously unable to weild it safely Monty ignored all that and came back with: > [@](#): > > I did fucking ASK what the driver could’ve done differently instead of sacrificing someone else to save her life. And I pointed out that she didn’t sacrifice someone else’s life, she risked someone else’s life. There is a difference. Sorry to repeat myself, but I would really like Monty to see why someone might chose to risk a life over the sure certainty of losing a life, and he won’t have a chance to do so in the other thread. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/14 "2001-05-05T16:58:30Z")
Personally, I think these “what should so and so have done differently” threads are kind of silly. Unless you were in a similar situation, you don’t really know what you would do. It’s very easy to judge someone elses actions in hindsight, from the safty of your couch. But anyway, here’s my 2 cents: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > What should the driver have done differently? Turned. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? It does not give the driver the “right” to kill other motorists. The driver can’t just say “well, I’ve got a gun to my head. Now’s my chance to finally smash into these annoying cars since I can’t be blamed.” Bear in mind, the driver is also responsible for the lives of the passengers on the bus. Given the choice between a known threat (the guy with the gun) and a possible threat (potentially hitting another car), most people go with the known threat. Blaming the driver is like blaming a rape or burglery victem. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? No, unless the bus company was negligent. Which they were not. It is highly impractical to install metal detectors and armed security gaurds on every city bus. Unless you want your bus fairs to increase to $10 a ride. The only security device that would be practical would be a silent alarm and/or a lo-jack style tracking device. Possibly a device that keeps the bus from going faster than 50 mph. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? Basically the same training bank tellers get. Just be cool and do what the gunman says. Basically, it is ridiculous to blame anyone but the highjacker. The highjacker has the gun and is in control. Thats why they have “felony murder” laws that state if someone dies, even accidently, while you are commiting a felony, you are responsible. The highjacker created the situation when he pulled the gun on the driver. He should hold all the responsibilty. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/15 "2001-05-05T17:20:20Z")
msmith537 is right - the bus driver was _responsible_ for the bus passengers’ lives. They were a known quantity, on the bus, and who knows what would have happened to them had she not complied with the hijacker’s demands? She _knew_ that they were in direct, immediate risk. She didn’t know how much risk there was to other drivers on the road. Maybe they’d all get out of the way in time - who knows? It was a crap shoot. Should she have let the hijacker kill her, and then left him to kill all the passengers too? Or, as others has brought up, let him careen all over the road, driving the bus himself, slamming into nuns and puppies? We can second-guess this sort of thing 'till the cows come home. It seems to me that by Monty’s standards, she’d be damned if she did, damned if she didn’t. _Someone_ probably would have ended up being hurt or killed because of this hijacker. So why is _she_ supposed to have a crystal ball and know how it’s going to go? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/16 "2001-05-05T18:51:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Manda JO \* > Well, the pit thread got closed, so I will repeat my point here: The pit thread should’t have been started. > [@](#): > > The bus driver decided that the possibility that she might hurt someone was preferable to the certainty that she would have died. Deciding to follow the gunman’s orders in no way insured that some third party would die–it simply increased the probability. There are plenty of carjacking cases where people follow the orders of thier captors and no one gets hurt. Actually, this is the kind of input I’m looking for here. Thanks. I’ll repeat that: **Actually, this is the kind of input I’m looking for here. Thanks.** > [@](#): > > Monty said: > > > [@](#): > > > > Ane yes, I would more than likely not have a problem if the other driver had not sustained any injuries. The point is the other driver died. > > No, it isn’t the point. The quality of a decision can’t be judged by its outcome. I’m differing with you here because there are a lot of things which people do that the consequences are different based on the outcome, not the initiation of the action. > [@](#): > > Buying a lottery ticket is a stupod thing to do whether or not you win. I agree with you there. That’s why I’m one of the few folks who voted AGAINST the California State Lottery. Now, I’m sure the folks who’ve won the Lottery disagree with us. > [@](#): > > By your logic, had she let the driver shoot her and then he, unable to drive a bus worth a damn, had run it into a busload of nuns and puppies, that would have been her fault as well No. The hijacker would’ve been solely at fault because his was the sole action in driving over the hypothetical nuns and puppies (an aside: I’ve never seen a group of nuns and puppies, but I have seen a group of nuns and ducks.) > [@](#): > > –she shouldn’t have given in to the selfish desire to “be a hero” and instead should have done her best to keep a lethal weapon-a huge bus–out of the hands of someone obviously unable to weild it safely But you’re ignoring what I think is the point: should she have been a hero or should she have complied given the eventual result of another driver’s death? I don’t see either as selfish. > [@](#): > > Monty ignored all that and came back with: > > > [@](#): > > > > I did {expletivve deleted by Monty since this is not the pit} ASK what the driver could’ve done differently instead of sacrificing someone else to save her life. > > And I pointed out that she didn’t sacrifice someone else’s life, she risked someone else’s life. There is a difference. Bad semantics there, MJ. If she risked someone’s life and that someone dies, then she sacrificed someone. > [@](#): > > Sorry to repeat myself, but I would really like Monty to see why someone might chose to risk a life over the sure certainty of losing a life, and he won’t have a chance to do so in the other thread. Basically that’s what I’m asking here. Should she have done anything differently or is what she did do what she should have done? I really don’t remember the thread about the pilot landing on the highway and killing the other driver generating this much rancor. But then I didn’t keep up with that thread. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/17 "2001-05-05T19:06:34Z")
> [@](#): > > should she have been a hero or should she have complied given the eventual result of another driver’s death? That’s the flaw in your thinking, Monty, and people have been trying to tell you this entire time. **She couldn’t possibly have known that by complying with the gunman’s words that it would have resulted in someone else’s death.** This has been hinted at here, and explicitly stated in the Pit thread. Why you’ve chosen to ignore this refutement of your logic is beyond me. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/18 "2001-05-05T19:19:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by msmith537 \* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > > What should the driver have done differently? > > Turned. See above where I posted “…or something.” I’m going to belabor this: I DON’T KNOW WHAT SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY OR THE SAME. That’s pretty much why I asked the question in the OP. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > > Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? > > It does not give the driver the “right” to kill other motorists. The driver can’t just say “well, I’ve got a gun to my head. Now’s my chance to finally smash into these annoying cars since I can’t be blamed.” I did not say that and I did not imply that. I find it not only disingenuous but also dishonest to say that I did. > [@](#): > > Bear in mind, the driver is also responsible for the lives of the passengers on the bus. Granted. Also every driver on the road is also responsible for not endangering the lives of others. Yet another reason why asked the question I asked in the OP. > [@](#): > > Given the choice between a known threat (the guy with the gun) and a possible threat (potentially hitting another car), most people go with the known threat. Most likely. Also most people tend to react more strongly to insults and perceived physical threats than most (good) cops, that’s why most people aren’t police. I asked what the driver should’ve done differently or if she did the exact right thing. > [@](#): > > Blaming the driver is like blaming a rape or burglery victem. THIS IS INSULTING TO ME THAT YOU IMPLY THAT I MAKE SUCH AN INFERENCE. A very close friend was the victim of rape and suffers daily from the societal blame she gets for it. Now if someone holds down a victim while another person rapes the victim, then YES, both the person holding the victim down and the one doing the actual physical act of rape are both guilty. There may be an extenuating or mitigating circumstance of the rapist holding a gun to either person’s head at the time. Also, I’m sure the busdriver in the story related in the OP is emotionally devestated by the fact of the other driver’s death. What I’m asking here is: DID SHE DO THE RIGHT THING OR SHOULD SHE HAVE DONE SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > > Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? > > No, unless the bus company was negligent. Well, the Police Departments get sued for negligence and wrongful death when a felon fleeing from the police kill another driver. Again, I’m asking: SHOULD THE BUS COMPANY HAVE A STANDARD POLICY AND TRAINING ON THESE THINGS? Please note that bus drivers get robbed on occasion, too, and sometimes by armed robbers. > [@](#): > > Which they were not. It is highly impractical to install metal detectors and armed security gaurds on every city bus. Unless you want your bus fairs to increase to $10 a ride. A. I’m asking if the company was negligent. B. I’m asking if there’s a solution to prevent a repeat occurrence. C. I don’t think it’s a good idea to put metal detectors on the bus. D. It MIGHT be a good idea to randomly have armed police in civilian clothes on random buses and inform the public about that. That way the “crap shoot” is in the hands of the cretinous felon. E. I’ve lived in Tokyo where the fares for some routes are well above $10. I wasn’t too impressed with the service on the bus there. > [@](#): > > The only security device that would be practical would be a silent alarm and/or a lo-jack style tracking device. Possibly a device that keeps the bus from going faster than 50 mph. EXCELLENT! This is what I’m looking for! A suggested solution to prevent a future occurrence of what happened. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > > Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? > > Basically the same training bank tellers get. Just be cool and do what the gunman says. I’d like to venture here that most people, if the gunman says “take this knife and cut this other teller’s throat” won’t do that. For those of you who will do that: I hope I don’t live anywhere near you. > [@](#): > > Basically, it is ridiculous to blame anyone but the highjacker. AGAIN AND AGAIN: I DID NOT THEN, NOR DO I KNOW, ABSOLVE THE HIJACKER OF HIS BLAME. > [@](#): > > The highjacker has the gun and is in control. Thats why they have “felony murder” laws that state if someone dies, even accidently, while you are commiting a felony, you are responsible. Right. Agreed. And I, for one, am very glad that California is one of the states with such laws. Others feel that such laws or in error. I disagree with those individuals. > [@](#): > > The highjacker created the situation when he pulled the gun on the driver. He should hold all the responsibilty. Actually, I was kind of hoping the incident would’ve just been a case of “suicide by cop” without anyone else getting hurt. It didn’t turn out that way. I was interested in input from all sides (however many “sides” there may be in this discussion) and what kind of suggested solutions there might be. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/19 "2001-05-05T19:26:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > That’s the flaw in your thinking, Monty, and people have been trying to tell you this entire time. **She couldn’t possibly have known that by complying with the gunman’s words that it would have resulted in someone else’s death.** > > This has been hinted at here, and explicitly stated in the Pit thread. Why you’ve chosen to ignore this refutement of your logic is beyond me. Let’s see: Big-assed bus against minivan - bus drives over/through/into occupied minivan - what’s the likely result for occupant of minivan? I obviously agree that at the very instance of complying with the hijacker she couldn’t have known that she was going to wreck, but there’s a point where the driver should’ve known she was likely to lose control IN TRAFFIC. I think I’ll refer you to my last response to you in the pit thread. I’ll also state what I implied in that pit thread: I personally think that if someone else had started this particular thread, you and a few others would’ve stated your points differently. I personally think you want to take potshots at me. Take them and be done with it. Then address the actual questions I asked. Anyway, what about that small plane driver who killed the automobile driver when the pilot landed on the OCCUPIED highway? What’s your take on that? Same as on this issue or different since I didn’t post to that thread, IIRC? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2001, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357/20 "2001-05-05T20:25:22Z")
\>\>What should the driver have done differently? Nothing. \>\> Does the fact that someone had a weapon pointed to the driver’s head give the driver the right to kill someone else? The right to kill? No. The right to take risks which would otherwise be unacceptable and which _may_ result in death? Yes. She has to make a choice by balancing two very difficult choices, both of which involve danger of death. Choice (a), refusing to comply with the hijacker, seems to me to be much more likely to lead to someone’s death. Therefore she made the right choice. You obviously would rather let the guy shoot you in the head rather than obey. Good for you. \>\> Does the bus driver’s employer share responsibility in the minivan driver’s death? Here I am going to disagree with the majority. The employer, obviously, shares no moral responsibility nor is there negligence of any sort, _but_… corporations and individuals are deemed to have a civil liability by the mere act of owning property which causes an accident, even if there is no negligence involved and they are not at fault. I am not saying this is right or wrong but it is the way things are, so, in this case the courts would find the bus company liable for the damage done, without (I repeat) needing to find any fault. If your car is parked in your driveway and some kid steals it and kills someone with it, you are civilly liable, whether you like it or not. If you left it with the keys in the ignition you may be found negligent but even if you secured it with all possible measures, you are still civilly liable. That is what insurance is for. As long as the injured party is not at fault, you have a certain liability by the mere possession of property. That’s the law. \>\> Should the employer provide training to the bus driver’s for such situations as this? If so, what training? Gimme a break. Are you delirious or have you been smoking something? What are the odds per driver-hour of this happenning? If they had to take training for ll contingencies which have a greater chance of happening, they’d never get to drive a bus as they would get to old age before they were half way through their training. Come on! [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hijacked-bus-and-an-innnocents-death/64357.md?page=2)