Selfish Sacrifice

by

John A. Eyon

Letter to the Editor

We are writing to honor our friend, George Lyons, murdered in the Magnolia Bank hostage incident last Wednesday. The best way we found to express this honor is by denying and contradicting the news media's attempt to characterize his actions as self-sacrifice. A hero he may be, but an altruist he was not.

George Lyons was in many ways a typical multifaceted individual. A family man with friends, a career and a facility for fun. He was loved, and hated, and everything in-between in various proportions. He was atypically intelligent and principled. And one of those principles was not to sacrifice himself for anyone but his loved ones.

We, the authors of this letter, know this because we often discussed philosophical issues with George. We can testify that his philosophy was thorough, refined and unconventional. He actively challenged the traditional thinking which most people absorb from the surrounding population unquestioned. And one popular principle he repudiated was the virtue of self-sacrifice. We know from personal exposure to George Lyons' thought that he was passionate on this issue. We don't hesitate to assert that George Lyons actually gave his life in his own self-interest. How is that possible, you ask?

Let's try to reproduce the events. The indisputable facts of the Magnolia Bank incident are that it involved two armed bank robbers and 16 hostages after an alarm had alerted the police while the robbery was in progress. The standoff went on for hours into the evening. The robbers threatened to execute someone every half hour starting at 8:00 p.m. if they weren't allowed escape. At the 8:00 p.m. deadline, George Lyons was selected as the first victim. He surprised the robbers by grabbing them and rushing out of the bank into the open. In the process, he was killed by the robbers, who were immediately shot down by the police.

Virtually every newscast and newspaper report that we heard implies that this demonstrates that George Lyons must have valued the lives of the others more than his own. We say this is unlikely.

Our own reconstruction of his thought processes goes like this.

1. George Lyons perceived the deadly earnestness of the robbers. Surviving hostages agree that these guys were ready and willing to go through with their executions.

2. We think George would have been determined to try to do something rather than be passive if his knew his murder was imminent and inevitable. Thwarting or killing his own murderers would have been satisfying to George. It would be his way of personally punishing them--especially, in this age of the ACLU and the handicapped prosecution of criminals.

We think he would have studied the situation for opportunities of any sort and that early on, George arrived at the plan to hurl the two robbers simultaneously through the entrance to the outside where they would be vulnerable to the police shooters. George Lyons was a large man, a former football player, wrestler and boxer, who exercised and trained regularly to maintain his physical prowess. A likely alternative for a man of George's physical skills would be to try to disable or even kill one or both of the robbers with his bare hands. However, if he succeeded with only one robber, the other would probably continue on the plan. Because of the possible outcomes, we think that George would have preferred the first course.

Obviously, we can't know if these or other alternatives actually occurred to George. But these exhibit the type of reasoning the-George-we-know might have used. Whatever plans he might have made, we think that ultimately he would have let the situation dictate the choice.

3. We think he would have waited until the last possible minute to execute his plan in case something lucky happened to make it unnecessary. After all, he had a wife and 2 children whom he dearly loved and hoped to return to. But, at 8 o'clock, according to witnesses, the robbers beckoned to him to approach the entrance. The last possible minute had arrived.

A review of the videotape and of interviews with witnesses from both inside and outside the bank detail the last moments. George Lyons approached the two bank robbers who were standing by the entranceway, one on each side of him, guns aimed at his head. George was a fast man as well as powerful. As he neared one gunman, he ducked and grabbed him by the waist while batting the gun of the other man, then quickly grabbed his arm. Both their guns went off harmlessly. George then rushed outside dragging them through the sliding door and kept running. The one robber held by the waist struck George with the butt of his gun a couple times, then pressed the pistol to George's back and squeezed off a couple shots. George fell several feet from the entrance, releasing the robbers who were then shot to death by the police riflemen. But George was fatally wounded and died on the scene. No other hostages were harmed.

From this perspective, George commited an act of vengeance. While it appeared to be an act of self-sacrifice, it had a selfish core.

To George, self-interest or selfishness was a vital principle for living--and for dying. Should others benefit, that would be as a by-product of that self-interest. Let that be the message from George Lyons to all his new admirers.

We realize, this is all surmise. But it is based on an intimate acquaintance with George Lyons to a degree the news media cannot approximate.

We can only imagine the horror of those last moments. And the intensity of his thoughts and emotions for his wife and children. For them, our dear friends, we grieve. For ourselves, who lost a great companion, we grieve. George Lyons is a hero to us--those of us who think we know better how he died.

Signed,

Friends and Family of George Lyons

THE END

An old story idea put to electronic paper a few years ago. While I am interested in non-narrative forms, this one remains unsatisfying. Maybe, someday I'll rewrite it.

Copyright 2004 by John A. Eyon