Apologies for the grim topic, but this has been on my mind and I haven't seen it discussed anywhere. After 9/11, there haven't been many airplane hijackings, possibly because it changed the 'rules.' Before then, everyone would sit quietly and wait for the plane to land in the place the hijackers picked out, and for the negotiations with the authorities, and finally everybody got let out of the plane and eventually made their way to wherever they were going.
After 9/11 it was pretty clear that airplane hijacking will be met with resistance by all of the passengers: because if the hijackers are planning to destroy something by flying the plane into it, the passengers haven't got anything to lose by resisting them. And 50 or 200 people can overcome a few hijackers, even if they are armed.
And now, with the Mumbai attacks, the rules of personal hostage taking seem to have changed as well. Why would anyone meekly obey just because there's a gun pointed at them, when the terrorists don't have any demands and plan to kill as many people as they can? At one point in the Taj Hotel, there were something like 40 people being herded up some stairs by at most two gunmen. Forty people can overcome two armed men. Better for two or three people to die or be injured disarming the terrorists, than for all 40 to sit around passively waiting to be shot.
Security professionals and policemen say that if you are attacked, it happens in a location (Location A). Often the attacker will try to take the person to another more secure location (Location B). The pros say, never allow yourself to be taken to Location B. React immediately and bite, scream, run in a zigzag pattern, make the car go off the road, whatever you have to do. Because what happens at Location B will be worse than what happens during your resistance at Location A.
If terrorists try another attack similar to Mumbai, they may encounter a completely different response from their targets.
3 comments:
Yikes. What else do you know that I need to know? I still thought you were supposed to submit so the bad guy would let you go. He won't, will he? Life seems so much cheaper nowadays. The gangs in this town think nothing of killing each other, and probably me too, if I get in their way.
I don't know how I'd react. Would I think quickly and clearly enough to be a Todd Beamer?
Larry and I are going to Israel in February. (It's a trip sponsored by a couple in our church who went last year.) We'll probably be in a hotel full of ugly Americans that could be targeted. Would I protest Location B? Hmmm...
Interesting insight, Mom. And a good reminder. When I was held up at Wendy's, I completely fell apart. I could have run out the front door and gotten help. Instead I obeyed the robber, even though he couldn't see me. Since then I, too, have worried how I would react.
Yes that's something that was consistent in the books/articles-- they said you have to react immediately, and most people stay frozen with shock. You have to consciously decide to act.
Post a Comment