Reply #106: My opinion is BP has nothing to do with the issue...

[davekriss]

...that demands investigation. If someone presented himself as an imminent threat, the FAM is assigned the job to mitigate that threat -- he or she has the responsibility to take action to ensure a greater number around the "threat" are safe. Quite a responsibility.

Whether or not an individual is a "mock threat" or "real threat" (bipolar expressed as wildly manic vs. terrorist waging asynchronous warefare) is beside the point if it truly is impossible to distinquish between the two. In my mind the question becomes: Can the two be differentiated in the split second someone has to decide to use (lethal) force? And, if they can, how do we improve awareness, protocol, training, whatever, to ensure the tragedy that unfolded does not happen again?

Hey, I score like a -9/-9 at politicalcompass.org, it is not like me to side with the State on anything, but so far I perceive a tragedy, not a crime. Something those of us involved with these illnesses learn to do: Blame the illness, not its victims. This may hold in this situation.

(Now, having said that, I adhere to LIHOP and question whether any of the publicly visible security measures in airports are necessary. Are they instead pure "show" to maintain and politically exploit fear in the general populace? That takes us away from the poor dolts that killed the man in the jetway -- disarmed of his backpack, away from the passengers -- and onto other issues, however.)