March 12, 2005
"Unidentified helicopters nearly fired upon over [New Jersey] nuclear power plant...two state police helicopters on a training drill...never notified the plant about the drill...decision not to fire is now being examined..." W-ABC

A no-win situation for the plant personnel, had they fired the article headline would have read:

NUCLEAR PLANT SECURITY PERSONNEL SHOOT POLICE

Somebody happened to catch the state police markings quickly.

Now, they could have been stolen or falsely marked helicopters intent on landing hostiles inside the protected area. So it really is a conundrum. Should they have fired or not, this time it turned out to be “good guys” in the helicopter, but what about next time?

[edited to typo a correct]

Big deal. What would they do? Hang a banner saying, "Nukes out of Africa!"?

__________________
Freedom For Fission A breath of fresh Iodine-131

What would who do?

Something similar happened recently when protesters got onto a balcony of Buckingham Palace. Some of the Tabpoids complained that the Special Branch gurards should have shot them. Officers on the ground say they realised they were no real threat.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

Nice, they shoot and they get called trigger happy and worse. They don't shoot and they get 'examined'. Who wins? Why ABC, they win either way. Nice job if you can get it. ABC sucks. Thanks for spreading the word, sarongsong, gg.

__________________
You're a coward and a liar and a thOOF - Bart Sibrel

You do realize that shots fired at a nuclear power plant would do nothing to the plant? The pressure vessel ain't sheet aluminum, and there's plenty of concrete (5 or 6 feet IIRC?) around it...

Was that in reference to jt-3d post? I think the shots that he/she mentioned would have come from the individuals guarding the plant.

jt, I pretty much agree with your rant, though I wouldn't necessarily blame ABC. It's human nature to second guess (in other words, to be unfair). The media gives people what they want.

This is about plant security failing to shoot down two police helicoptors. Nothing to do with shooting at the plant. They could (should?) have downed the helicoptors short of the fence.

How is any of this ABC's fault? It was the police who failed to notify the plant about the drill. It was the security people who decided not to shoot at the helicopters. And it appears to be some unnamed authority who is now investigating the decision. The local TV news station does a cursory story after the fact and they get the blame? That doesn't make sense to me. Would it be preferable for the media not to report things like this?

For the most part, I agree. ABC had nothing to do with the incident.

I interpreted jt-3d's ire as being at the first line The American news media loves to hype, and the use of the phrase "serious security concerns" is hype in my opinion. Again, though, the media feeds the masses what they (the masses) want.

Taking the role of the plant security chief, I'd have ventilated those helicopters and anyone who survived the crash.

Plant security vs. NJPD? Raise a cup of coffee and a donut in their memory. Uniforms can be "borrowed" and helicopters can be stolen.

You may not cause a nuclear incident with a pair of helicopters, but given that the connection between the plant and the outbound AC power lines is the single weakest link in the chain between source and consumer, those choppers dropped in the right spot could have cause massive disruption to a large area without so much as a REM or RAD to show for it.

__________________
I'm not completely heartless, the doctor who removed it told me he'd never be able to get it all.

Actually the bigger concern would be dropping off a contigent of forces inside the main defense perimeter. All sorts of havoc could then be played.

My ire isn't against ABC per se, their choice of wording was sensationlized but as pghnative pointed out, that's the way the unwashed masses like it.