biopolar man was shot dead on the airplane
-
No 1 use tranqz for subduing pple,
1. Trnqz take time 2 take effect.
2. Qty need 2 be rite else can lead to OD or less effectiveness.
tazer?? cause they do not want to accidentally trigger the bomb, if there are any. -
i tink otherwise, on dat the wife shld sue the organisation.Originally posted by shade343:Oh? So now we can go around killing people for the greater good?
I think the wife should sue the organisation in charge of the air marshals.
they noe everyone is on alert on terrorism. esp air travel, they shld b more sensitive to the security measures dat the govt take. its their responsibility to take the appropriate actions to prevent the man frm goin out of control. even if it means riskin his health by takin his medication (if its poisonous) or the least the wife cld do is to inform the cabin crews...
wats so difficult abt takin these precautions to make the air marshalls wrk easier? in the end, 1 life is lost n u put the blame on the ppl who's juz tryin their best to protect the lives other passengers, is dis fair for the marshallers? -
You can't blame the Air Marshal in this case.Why? As in the tight confines of the aircraft, in any situation you will only be given a split second to decide pulling the trigger and a missed opportunity. On top of that, all military,law enforcement personnal, when confronted with a situation like this, their brains literally turn into water and flows out of the ears,and countless hours of training at the range,snap shooting and quick target acqusition and evaluating of threat/s just take over.
And i belief, these Air Marshals are actually going through an emotional turmoil each time they board a flight. They are like tightly wound springs, just waiting to unleash when the need arises. And I salute them for that, as nobody who is sane would feel good pulling the trigger fully knowing that it can kill or injure another person who has got parents and family like they themselves.
**just my 2 cents** -
bad luck lo...
-
Originally posted by Netkr0:
i doubt it cos transquiliser darts are WAY more ex then bullets.
No 1 use tranqz for subduing pple,
1. Trnqz take time 2 take effect.
2. Qty need 2 be rite else can lead to OD or less effectiveness.
tazer?? cause they do not want to accidentally trigger the bomb, if there are any.
their thinking is "just cap his ass b4 he can blow the bomb" -
Can't blame the air marshals.
They were trained for this and when it came,they just executed what they are supposed to do.
I bet if it is any of us there,and we sense that this person might just have a high probability of killing us,we would also not react rationally by trying to think thru how high is the probabilty that we will be killed,if we have the time to react,we would just act like what those air marshals did,try to prevent it -
so transquiliser dart cost is more expensive than a human life?Originally posted by matrixeg:i doubt it cos transquiliser darts are WAY more ex then bullets.
their thinking is "just cap his ass b4 he can blow the bomb"
I am not sure how fast any such best transquilser take immediate effect on a human being but if it will disable a person's movement just as fast as a killing bullet,the cost is justified -
Have you shot anything with tranquilizers before. First there is the problem of dosage - too much kills , too little than not enough to put down. Only in movies, the tranquilizers work instantly.Originally posted by renorenal:I'd definitely go with tranquilizers... believe it or not, it's the right treatment for such aggressive and vigorous behaviors when the patient swings to manic phase... One HPL shot will do, and they'd be sedated before you know it... but then again, the debate will rise on what if the guy is the real terrorist...
Next come the person may have alleriges reaction to the it. So in real world, when you shoot an animal, it take time for the drugs to take effect . may take a minute to five, before it is knock out, during that time all you can do is hope that it does not do anything stupid.
For a so call suspect terrorist, you need to instantly incapable him/her, so tranquilizers is out. -
but about stun guns which release a sudden high voltage to knock them out?Originally posted by storywolf:Have you shot anything with tranquilizers before. First there is the problem of dosage - too much kills , too little than not enough to put down. Only in movies, the tranquilizers work instantly.
Next come the person may have alleriges reaction to the it. So in real world, when you shoot an animal, it take time for the drugs to take effect . may take a minute to five, before it is knock out, during that time all you can do is hope that it does not do anything stupid.
For a so call suspect terrorist, you need to instantly incapable him/her, so tranquilizers is out. -
if i am not wrong,stun gun are close range type weapon right,as in you need to be next to the person to use it.Originally posted by striderz_o405:but about stun guns which release a sudden high voltage to knock them out?
If so it will not be effective since you may not have the luxury of time to get into a close enough position to use it. -
That's intradermal, I was referring to the intravenous route. The recentmost tranquilizers or better known as sedative-hypnotics / anxiolytics are much safer from the previous groups...Originally posted by storywolf:Have you shot anything with tranquilizers before. First there is the problem of dosage - too much kills , too little than not enough to put down. Only in movies, the tranquilizers work instantly.
Next come the person may have alleriges reaction to the it. So in real world, when you shoot an animal, it take time for the drugs to take effect . may take a minute to five, before it is knock out, during that time all you can do is hope that it does not do anything stupid.
For a so call suspect terrorist, you need to instantly incapable him/her, so tranquilizers is out.
No doubt, anaphylactic shock is possible, but in my clinical practice, we have a good group of standby specialists to counteract this with IV epinephrine... -
willl that trigger explosives?Originally posted by striderz_o405:but about stun guns which release a sudden high voltage to knock them out? -
airsPolicemen are pychopaths 
:::next time fly by SIA
::: not in the friendliest skies
:::and live to a 100yrs old grandnanny or grandpa
:::goto see how good the job believe to be..
::: read about it
http://www.sgwiki.com/wiki/Life_expectancy -
Good call?? You guys are un-fukking-believable! They shot a mental patient and its a GOOD CALL???Originally posted by SpecOps87:Well, I would say that the Air Marshals made a good call this time, as he could potentially be a tango. And besides that, the world always makes noise when something like this happens,but what if the guy is actually a tango, and is acting as a mental patient? -
they did not shoot a mental patient, they shot a guy, who claim he have a bomb and he is going to detonate it...at that time.Originally posted by Rexdriver:Good call?? You guys are un-fukking-believable! They shot a mental patient and its a GOOD CALL???
imagine, i got a parang in my hand and said i gonna kill u, what would u do if u got a gun in ur hand? -
taser ?Originally posted by SpecOps87:Well, I would say that the Air Marshals made a good call this time, as he could potentially be a tango. And besides that, the world always makes noise when something like this happens,but what if the guy is actually a tango, and is acting as a mental patient?
Could the situation be resolved differently? Probably if the Air Marshals are equipped with Tasers.Then we would be looking at a different ending to this situation already.
bo ko leng and will never happen....use ur brains little kid... -
something else abt this man. He just happened to have the bag hung in the front (chest), making him more likely to carry explosives. So take-home msg, don't put the bag in front. Always carry on ur back.
-
James Bauer?
hehehehe, the lead in the serial 24 is Jack Bauer...... -
did u ever think abt wat u would do if u r the air marshall? it is always easy to pinalise them when the threat turns out to be false. but wat if the guy is really a terrorist?Originally posted by Rexdriver:Good call?? You guys are un-fukking-believable! They shot a mental patient and its a GOOD CALL???
nobody condons shooting a innocent man, but if the man appears to be threatening, he had to be neutralised, simple as that. I was called to duty right after september 11 occur, and my instruction at that time is very clear, i will have to issue verbal warning, but if the threat do not comply or appear to be an imminent threat, my order is to put a bullet into him. i do not even hve to see the bomb, i just have to see him trying to reach or activate something which i thing may be a bomb or a weapon. period. This is to protect national interest and lost of lives. So it is your respossibility not to put yourself in such situations.
Rules of engagement in singapore is very similar, dun believe me? take a box, go to jurong island entrance, shout out loud "i have a bomb", then try to open the box, i m sure you can find several bullet holes in you pretty instantly -
Sorry, u can't even approach Jurong Island lor. They've got the approaches to jurong island pretty well covered.
Tazer can be considered using on the plane. Along with the normal sidearm. The Tazer shud be considered as primary weapon of choice due to its rapid capability to incapacitate someone, and non-lethal nature. -
i dun think cost is an issue here. But the fact is clear, transquilser will nv be able to stop a bomber from activating his bomb, it is common sense, transquilser shot is like an injection, after an injection the fluid will flow into the blood stream, and then flow to other parts of the body to take effect. that is why when you get bitten by a poisonous snake, you dun die immediately, even the most poisonous snake's bite take mins to kill you. unless u r so sure that the threat is really a madman and not a terrorist. otherwise will you choose tranquilser or a bullet? i think the answer is very clearOriginally posted by Aveme:so transquiliser dart cost is more expensive than a human life?
I am not sure how fast any such best transquilser take immediate effect on a human being but if it will disable a person's movement just as fast as a killing bullet,the cost is justified -
you r wrong, you can approach jurong island, they seldom stop any cars from going towards jurong island, otherwise how the workers get there? it is just whether you can pass the security check right before you enter jurong island.Originally posted by Shotgun:Sorry, u can't even approach Jurong Island lor. They've got the approaches to jurong island pretty well covered.
Tazer can be considered using on the plane. Along with the normal sidearm. The Tazer shud be considered as primary weapon of choice due to its rapid capability to incapacitate someone, and non-lethal nature.
but i dun oppse to using that tazer thingy if it is really effective in instantaneously incapacitating the threat. The key word here is "effectively" and "instantaneously"! -
anyway it is stil difficult to differentiate between real threat and those that are just acting mad.Originally posted by Shotgun:Sorry, u can't even approach Jurong Island lor. They've got the approaches to jurong island pretty well covered.
Tazer can be considered using on the plane. Along with the normal sidearm. The Tazer shud be considered as primary weapon of choice due to its rapid capability to incapacitate someone, and non-lethal nature.
In singapore and many other countries, when securities forces react to such situation, their duty is not to identify whether you r realy a terrorist or not. that is the job for investigators after that. Their job is to put the situation under control. In 1991, SQ117 is hijacked, when special operatons force from SAF commandos storm the plane, their job is also not to id who is a terrorist, they will go in, and if u appear to be a immediate threat, they will put a bullet into your head, then they will tie eveyone else up including the stewardess and passengers, and move them out ouf the plane for the investigators to id who is a terrorist and who is not. -
for the pple who recommended the use of tazer/electric incapacitator,
ARE YOU FARKING IDIOTS OR SOMETHING?!
U do not want 2 electrecute a bugger who carry a bomb!!!, in a detonator is circuits to detonate a bomb, and in a circuit they use electric current.
Do the Maths.
again,
ARE YOU FARKING BRAINLESS OR SOMETHING?! -
Aim for somewhere distinguished,like the arm/hand or the legs. I mean I really dun understand why Chunyong slam me for suggesting the use of taser.
Mebbe it would be a good idea to launch something like a baton round/beanbag round at that fella to knock him/her out and subdue the fella?