[skiddy]

British military forces are known for being somewhat less trigger happy than our American allies - that is a generalisation, but surely you must admit its based on facts.

We're trained in the UK to warn once, then shoot. If a law enforcement officer or soldier believes someone to be a threat to their own life or the lives of those around them, a warning is shouted. Usually something along the lines of "Armed Police, halt!" - there is no stated phrase that should be used, but it should be short and to the point. If the suspect / threat does not respond then legally we are allowed to shoot. Be that shoot to kill or shoot to injure - shoot to kill is the first option as it instantly eliminates the risk posed by the suspect.

This post is based purely on the British way of doing things, the way I was taught how to respond in situations like that. I'd imagine American doctrine on the subject is very similar.

In short. I'd have shot him too. Anyone who blames the guy have a serious think about what they would have done in that situation - a man claming to have a bomb running into a crowded terminal. Options here are limited and instinctively posting in disgust like s|k seems to have done is, although understandable for an 'outsider', is little help.


Another possibility is, that he actually was mentally ill and believed the backpack had a bomb planted into it. He ran off the plane stating there was a bomb in the backpack as he was trying to get it off the plane to save the passengers. I'd still have shot him as this would simply have been a possibility and the risk couldn't have been taken, but it's an option worth thinking about.