This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 163.191.100.10 (talk) at 19:14, 20 April 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Are women permitted to be marshalls? There's no mention of a sex restriction, but some of the information mentioned (e.g. that all marshalls must be clean-shaven, etc.) suggests that it's a male-only organization. If so, it ought to be mentioned.

Women are not allowed to be marshalls, just flight attendants.

why aren't women allow to be air mashalls?(Raniya 15:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC))

Sign your posts! (type ~~~~) The second comment was a chauvinistic, vandalistic anonymous post. I doubt there would be a sex restriction for air marshals (there's no restriction on police officers for instance.) If the article implies this, it should be fixed up so it doesn't have that male perspective :) Mrtea 00:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I remember reading an article about FAM and their training a while back. They mention that one of the FAM was female. I'll try to look it up and link it.Attakmint 19:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

APRIL 20, 2006:

Women are allowed, and encouraged, to be Federal Air Marshals and there are several that have been employed since 2001, when they first started hiring. There aren't any "male-only organizations" in the Federal law enforcement system. rachel2026

Is this the first FAM incident ever? or since 9/11?

Someone added that the shooting today in Miami was the first FAM shooting since 9/11. Did a FAM shoot someone on 9/11? If there were only 33 Sky Marshals prior to 9/11 that would seem unlikely. I suspect this is the first shooting ever in the FAM/Sky Marshal history.Rhallanger 00:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I thought I remembered reading both, which is why it stood out for me as well. I don't remember any Air Marshals actually shooting anyone on Sept. 11th... Sorry I can't be of more help. Mrtea 02:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Brian Doyle of DHS during a press conference said, "This is the first time that air marshals have used a firearm during a mission since 9/11." The "since 9/11" phrase was probably first used by him. Many media outlets have clarified the quote to mean: since the Federal Air Marshal Service was expanded after 9/11. --A rabbit 01:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The history page http://www.ice.gov/graphics/fams/history.htm doesn't actually appear to say whether or not an air marshal has ever shot a passenger. Any better references out there? Tim Pierce 20:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Reminder: please supply sources

Can anyone provide sources for the statistic that "Until the American Airlines Flight 924 shooting incident at Miami on 7 December 2005, only two Federal Air Marshals have fired a weapon on or near an airplane"? Tim Pierce 13:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Have 90% of your answer. Two citations posted. The first citation is from a TSA spokesman in an AP article dated Nov 26 2002. He said no FAM has ever fired a weapon on a plane. The second citation is from Brian Doyle of DHS, who says no FAM has even fired their weapon while on a mission since 9/11. Therefore, first time ever, unless ... a FAM has fired a weapon while near but not on a plane prior to Nov 26 2002. --A rabbit 01:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

dress code

witness's on cnn said that the airmarshall was wearing a hawaiian shirt, a edit might be nessisary

• Thanks, I've added a note to that and a link to a CNN article. Tim Pierce 20:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Should Air Marshals Carry Stun Guns

December 14, 2005

I recently read a article (USA TODAY .com article, “ Airport Shooting: Tragic Product of Post 9/11 World”), The article mentioned about a incident that took place at Miami International Airport between a 44-year-old man named Rigoberto Alpizar and U.S. Air Marshals and the impact that incident had on homeland security in the United States. I understand that the current worldwide situation with violent extremist ideologies demands step-up security. However, what should these security measures consist of? In the case of the tragic shooting death of Alpizar by federal air marshals the article mentioned questions put forth by the article’s publisher USA TODAY.com; one of these questions asks: “ should air marshals also be given stun guns, to deal with situations in which non-lethal force is appropriate?” Currently electrified weapons technology is not adequate enough for use in situations like the one regarding Alpizar and the air marshals; however in a article titled “ Electrified Water Cannon” from Misplaced Pages a online encyclopedia service that article mention’s about a water cannon under research by Jaycore Tactical Systems that can fire electrified water jets at a target to deliver a electrical shock to that target. This non-lethal weapon is a step in the right direction to developing a non-lethal weapon that will work well in most situations where a fired projectile weapon like a gun would most likely be used. In situations like the one mentioned in the USA TODAY.com article, law enforcement officials in today’s world have a hard time distinguishing between a threat and not-so-threat, it’s up to society to develop the weaponry needed to give law enforcement officials a greater array of options to deal with certain situations that arise in our world.

Anon. User