No, I think most people here understand the problems with the Secret Service
in general.
And no I think most people here consider the shooter having some type of
mental condition.
I suppose, if we follow law logic, we would have to conclude the shooter was the
more competent marksman in this event. LOL.
Look I’m not pulling for this dumbass in anyway. But he made it plain, he expected to be stopped before he got to this point. That’s what he was calling incompetence. But he was also sure he would end up in the ER. This wasn’t much of a plan, carried out by a complete nobody. Kudos to the agents who apprehended him. A more coordinated effort(say by a country who we’re at war with) could have ended much worse
Doesn’t really matter what he “expected.”
He failed in his mission, and was stopped by the very people he claimed were “incompetent,” yet proved competent enough to do their job, which was to STOP assailants like him without loss of life.
NOW who’s incompetent?
Hint: the assassin much more so than his stoppers/captors, leaving the assassin little room to criticize.
Since when did what an attempted assassin “expects” mean so much to you?
It’s simple. There have been three close call incidents. The first (July 2024) had major failures in the plan and perimeter. I’m not sure about the second. The third, from this weekend, also seems like the shooter was able to get too close. It seems like nothing was learned or changed from July 2024. That is what we are saying needs overhaul.
I think, and as best as I can tell, the agents did what they were supposed to do when each incident happened. My concerns is all the gaps before that.
Exactly.
All the more reason for a WH ballroom for such events that the feds can completely exclude all ingress to and egress from other than identified invitees, right?
Can we upgrade all our schools to ballroom level first?
That was already addressed earlier in the thread by @Duce630. See above.
Anyway, there have been a number of successful political assassinations throughout US history.
Are the secret service and/or other police/security always incompetent in such episodes?
Moreover…should they also be deemed so even when they PREVENT an assassination?
OK…WHATEVER!!!
No, actually, I think that’s a band aid argument. I think having a ballroom won’t protect the President or other protectees when they are playing golf in Florida, New Jersey, or anywhere else. It won’t protect them at an outdoor rally either.
Unless the President is going to never leave the White House.
And that was likewise addressed by me when I said there isn’t much you can do in the case of a hotel with other guests present who are free to come in and leave and roam about the rest of the hotel by virtue of their staying there/having reserved or paid for a room.
That’s why a dedicated event venue is better.
Talk to your local school districts and school boards, or to whatever private entity and its boosters are running the private school of your choice.
Again…still wondering why what a would be/unsuccessful assassin “expects” would mean so much to you.
Since this event was not run by the administration it could not be held at the white house or ir a future ballroom.
Why couldn’t it be if the WH had such a ballroom and the President decided he wanted to have it there?
No reason it couldn’t be.
Again, ammo for Trumpp’s narrative, whether you like the guy or not.
First, I never said the Secret Service was incompetent in whole . I’m saying they need a major overhaul in how they handle protection. The previous incidents you mentioned involved a review, new tactics, etc. after the fact. For instance, you don’t have a President driving down in an open top convertable anymore.
Considering the number of close calls that have been had, and the acknowledged failures that happened (at least at one of them), isn’t it reasonable to call for an overhaul?
Still like to know what more you think could be done at a hotel with other guests with free ingress/egress/roaming privilege to those staying?
Here’s the question, if the ballroom is more secure because there’s more vetting and perimeter security that would keep the shooter out of this event… why can’t you just do more vetting and perimeter security at a venue off grounds?
Because it’s hard to keep hotel guests that have every right to enter and leave as they wish from doing what they will…ya can’t do much of anything about that.
At best, you can restrict access to the ballroom. Which is what they did.
That was enough to stop the guy.
They could have checked all luggage and bags going in and out of the entire hotel for several days before. That would have prevented this guy from bringing a gun in.
What if they keep the gun or other weapon in their car trunk out in the parking lot?
And then go get it and return to the hotel, presumably concealing it when they enter…then try to run through the security checkpoint.
Is that not more or less what happened here?
© 1999-2025 CoogFans.com