Out of idle curiosity, how do the lambasters of the Marshall in question here expect said Marshall to determine that the man wasn’t reaching for the detonation switch of a bomb?
Once again, NO ONE here is “lambasting” the marshall, or even disagreeing with his actions.
Well, thats a non sequiter.
Martin
Well I guess I didn’t disappoint you. 
I thought folks around the SDMB knew that I have posted a few threads that were not in favor of law enforcement officials. Here’s one:
Officer shoots dog to death in New Hampshire park
I don’t want to hijack this thread but I only mentioned my view to show that my opinion of the Air Marshall’s actions was not being tainted by any pro-law enforcement pre-conceptions.
Right here you said "I’d say he probably fired a bit too soon"
{My Bolding}
If the reports are correct, do you still support that statement? If you have changed your mine, my apologies, but it sounds like you wanted the air marshal to wait longer.
This wasn’t a matter of pulling out a gun, but fear of a bomb being triggered.
Jim
They expect the Marshall should have waited until such a time when it became obvious what he was reaching for, is what I gather. But obviously the problem with that is, you wait that long and bomb will be detonated if it actually is a bomb.
Well, there’s a difference from being critical of some of the things law enforcement does, and being generally anti-law enforcement. I assumed from what you posted you were the latter, not the former.
I also said:
Try again.
Is this, like, how Righty talking points get started?
No need, I was honestly trying to clarify. The point of my trying to phrase the question in a non-hostile way. From your post, it sounded like you thought the Marshal may have shot quick. I am glad to know I was wrong.
Jim
When i heard the story on the radio this evening, i turned to my wife and said, “Well, if that’s really how it went down, then the marshall can hardly be blamed for shooting the guy.”
That said, i’ve always thought that one of the most worthless contributions to these message boards are the type of pre-emptive bullshit that the OP of this thread has engaged in. If someone says something you disagree with, then by all means argue your case. But pre-emptive statements of this nature usually just make the author look like a tool.
YMMV.
Two words, Amadou Diallo
What are you on about? The dude, at least according to the news, said he had a bomb. What, exactly, would you be thinking the guy’s reaching for when the coppers tell him “don’t touch anything” and he reaches into the bag?
“Righty talking points?” Sheesh, what a moron you’ve become.
I would just like to thank Ferret Herder for writing what I was thinking.
If a man on a plane was saying he had a bomb and was in danger of being arrested, when he reached for something, I would assume he was reaching for a bomb, simply because of the percieved difficulties of bringing a gun onto a plane and because it wouldn’t make sense to bring two weapons on board because it increases your risk of being caught. It’s a bit like not wanting to be caught speeding after successfully robbing a bank.
CJ
I’m reading this as there was more than one marshall on this particular flight. I wonder if that’s normal? Was there some compelling reason for this and, if so, might the marshalls have been reacting while under the influence of a heightened alert?
I think what he’s “on about” is that no one here is lambasting the air marshall, as you specifically claimed:
I suspect that his comment on talking points is that your post seems to attack an position that no one is holding, and that your more recent post is changing the subject and avoiding the issue.
I may be wrong, though.
It would seem that there was.
I’m shocked that nobody has yet come in here to denounce the air marshal, demand and investigation, and somehow tie this all back to GWBush. 
It sounds to me like the marshals did exactly what they should have. I hope that this guy is back on the job quickly and without any fuss. I hate to think that other air marshals will hesitate in the moment of truth because they are worried about PC fallout after the fact.
:sigh:
At first glance, the shooting appears to be justified. My position is subject to change as more information comes out.
I must say, though, that the picture in my morning paper of the passengers filing off with their hands in the air showed a bit of overexuberance on the part of the marshalls/cops.
Yes, I’m of a mind they acted properly and would strongly suspect they’ll go over all aspects of this case and, if necessary, make whatever modifications they deem proper to their protocol to address similar incidents in the future.
It’s a crying shame but how were they to know the true intent of another’s mind when he’s screaming he’s got a bomb. I’d even venture that it was correct not to immediately assume the wife wasn’t complicit.
I hope all travellers in need of meds take this to heart.