Passenger attempts to enter coughpit on MH128

[juddles]

So basically no cops were sent in, because of the risk to them despite the potential risk of a bomb going off and killing 200 odd passengers and destroying a plane?

This equation does not compute.

I get a bit agro in these types of threads because I know many police and the opinions expressed are against all of them. Maybe if people, in this sort of incident, started to criticize "senior police" instead of police in general then I would not feel so hostile.

In this incident there were dozens of police, trained / enthusiastic / idealistic, who would not hesitate to put their lives on the line to protect any member of society. And there was one or two higher level commanders who have been in office environments for years (decades?) now who have just been polished in how to take no risks.

But somehow the criticism I perceive in this thread is for "police" in general. That is not just unfair on those mainly good police, it is obscene.

There has to be a way to differentiate the majority of the police force from the handful that stuff up.....

 

[Pushka]

I think the Coroner for the Lindt siege found the good spot by commending the men and women ? who were involved in the physical rescue but criticised the 'higher up management' who controlled the timing of their entry.

And in this case I'd bet that none here would criticise the people who did eventually take control of the person but potentially be critical of only those who finally made that decision.

 

[dajop]

I get a bit agro in these types of threads because I know many police and the opinions expressed are against all of them. Maybe if people, in this sort of incident, started to criticize "senior police" instead of police in general then I would not feel so hostile.....

I agree with you, but I tend to read "the police" as the organisations (AFP + Victoria police) rather than the individuals. Much the same way as criticisms of Qantas are generally about the organisation and its senior management, not the frontline employees

Having said even for the organisations there is a lot of criticism by people who perhaps don't have the experience in security and safety related matters and almost certainly don't have the full set of facts of how it played out. After all the internet has made us all experts in everything !

 

[whatmeworry]

I get a bit agro in these types of threads because I know many police and the opinions expressed are against all of them. Maybe if people, in this sort of incident, started to criticize "senior police" instead of police in general then I would not feel so hostile.

In this incident there were dozens of police, trained / enthusiastic / idealistic, who would not hesitate to put their lives on the line to protect any member of society. And there was one or two higher level commanders who have been in office environments for years (decades?) now who have just been polished in how to take no risks.

But somehow the criticism I perceive in this thread is for "police" in general. That is not just unfair on those mainly good police, it is obscene.

There has to be a way to differentiate the majority of the police force from the handful that stuff up.....

Sorry I didn't realise I was criticising all Police. I think you could have made your point in 2 or 3 lines and been more economic with your words.

 

[jb747]

Note that they are called 'management', and not 'leaders'.

 

[drron]

I do agree juddles it is often the top brass who are lacking.The Lindt siege certainly suggested that it was the officers in charge that lacked judgement.The Asst Commissioner who took over control at 2200 was told in the handover that everything was fine and the hostages were moving around freely and jovial so he thought there was no urgency.His predecessor in the role has had her name withheld in the report.
I remember Christine Nixon in the black Friday fires when she went out for dinner with friends and her phone was not answered for 3 hours-she denied she turned it off.

I also agree with juddles that there is a big question over mental health treatment in Australia.Reports are now that he was released from a mental health facility the day before he got on the plane.

 

[DC3]

The Executive staff of the Police Force (who I regard as being more "political" by nature) are meant to leave such decisions to the Operational Officers, and let them get on with the job as they see fit (based on their assessment). Unless someone dies and there's a coronial inquest, the Executive interference (when it exists) will probably never come out.

 

[JessicaTam]

I find the suggestions that emergency service workers are putting themselves before the community utterly repulsive. I have worked in this sector for nearly 30 years so I speak from some authority. It is highly likely that I have met some of those who responded to the MH128 incident.

Police officers get shot at, assaulted, driven at.
Firefighters risk burns/cancer.
Ambulance officers get assaulted and spat at by people who know they are infectious.
SES, Coast Guard, I could go on.

If we were so keen on putting ourselves first, we wouldn't do what we do. Every. Day.
[/rant]

 

[Skyring]

You don't know all of the facts though. Whilst I don't have issue with the posts that contain reasoned debate, the post above mine was overly simplistic IMHO.

NOBODY knows all the facts. That's just an easy way of avoiding criticism.

Why not address the points raised? The intruder was subdued and restrained. I think it's a fair assumption that this information was communicated by the captain to the ground. So why send in a squad of cops armed with assault rifles and body armour? They were kitted up better than my grandfather who fought the Germans with a bolt-action rifle, a set of khakis, and a slouch hat, and those buggers were shooting at him with everything they had.

The possibility that there was a bomb aboard was raised. The fact that this was taken seriously says a lot about security screening, but assume that there was some explosive device. Why leave the passengers and crew aboard once the plane was on the ground if there was any risk at all?

It's one thing to divide "thuh police" into management and footsoldiers. But there is a collective culture shared by police the world over. It amounts to supporting your comrades no matter what, and that extends to fighting off criticism in the press, and denying any wrongdoing in court. As well as backing up your mates in the field. Planning is done with a view to minimising any chance of injury to those at the cutting edge.

That's all very fine, but as we see, the danger and risk is transferred to members of the public.

So far as I can see, the incident was handled quickly, safely, and efficiently by passengers and crew in the air. The police involvement was superfluous, and in fact contributed to raising the risk by delaying evacuation of the aircraft if there had actually been a bomb on the plane.

 

[Scarlett]

You should always carry your own bomb. The chances of there being two are SFA.

Or 24 of them... (24 × GBU38)

 

[Pushka]

I find the suggestions that emergency service workers are putting themselves before the community utterly repulsive. I have worked in this sector for nearly 30 years so I speak from some authority. It is highly likely that I have met some of those who responded to the MH128 incident.

Police officers get shot at, assaulted, driven at.
Firefighters risk burns/cancer.
Ambulance officers get assaulted and spat at by people who know they are infectious.
SES, Coast Guard, I could go on.

If we were so keen on putting ourselves first, we wouldn't do what we do. Every. Day.
[/rant]

Well that was my take too until the comments made by a police spokesperson after Lindt who said they would not risk police officer lives as their priority.

Skyring, if the police actions were superfluous then why did they need to enter in full 'battle gear' and heavy duty firearms?

 

[whatmeworry]

Mark Knight Cartoon.

 

[Skyring]

Well that was my take too until the comments made by a police spokesperson after Lindt who said they would not risk police officer lives as their priority.

Skyring, if the police actions were superfluous then why did they need to enter in full 'battle gear' and heavy duty firearms?

That's what I'm wondering. We see the photographs. A "SWAT" cop in full kit, and passengers in street clothes. Nobody appears agitated or concerned.

The guy was subdued, disarmed, restrained. A beer-gutted security guard could have led him off the plane.

OTOH, if there was the risk of explosions and bullets whizzing around, then why were the passengers still on the plane? They aren't in combat gear.

View attachment 98660

 

[KitKat]

I wonder what the response time would be if someone was critically injured on the flight requiring immediate medical attention.....?

 

[mattm199]

Many good issues raised here; but as a pax, one of the most concerning things is these guys boarding with M4-style (5.56mm) long weapons; precisely as raised as a potential issue at the Lindt inquest. Overpowered, and sure to over-penetrate even if hitting the target. In a crowded aircraft, firing would be sure to hit several innocents. The use of the regular State police SWAT / SERT teams for such critical incidents is concerning, and hopefully subject to review.

 

[Skyring]

Many good issues raised here; but as a pax, one of the most concerning things is these guys boarding with M4-style (5.56mm) long weapons; precisely as raised as a potential issue at the Lindt inquest. Overpowered, and sure to over-penetrate even if hitting the target. In a crowded aircraft, firing would be sure to hit several innocents. The use of the regular State police SWAT / SERT teams for such critical incidents is concerning, and hopefully subject to review.

The States of America have "Sky Marshals" on board flights. That's got to be a cushy job, given they need to sit up front, close to the coughpit.

Presumably they are armed. And presumably some thought has been given to the weapon and the ammo. What do they use, anybody know?

 

[whatmeworry]

The States of America have "Sky Marshals" on board flights. That's got to be a cushy job, given they need to sit up front, close to the coughpit.

Presumably they are armed. And presumably some thought has been given to the weapon and the ammo. What do they use, anybody know?

SIG Sauer P226 and .357 SIG.

 

[DC3]

The States of America have "Sky Marshals" on board flights ...

.... and the equivalent for Oz airlines, as far I know. I recall seeing ads for these jobs some time back.

Edit:

Something like this:

 

[Himeno]

Why not address the points raised? The intruder was subdued and restrained. I think it's a fair assumption that this information was communicated by the captain to the ground. So why send in a squad of cops armed with assault rifles and body armour?

[video=youtube;6onqxk-glgU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6onqxk-glgU&t=0s[/video]

 

[Melburnian1]

If the paywall defeats you, this article 'In-flight terror - looks like we're on our own' by Miranda Devine should be available at the 'Herald Sun', 'Daily Telegraph' or 'News' (dot com dot au) websites:

No Cookies | Herald Sun