No kidding, I thought secret service guys were supposed to be hardcore or whatever. How the hell are they letting somebody point a gun at their charge from not even that far away? I'm not saying it's necessarily what should have been done, but if you asked me what I thought would happen in this scenario I'd have said he would have been turned into swiss cheese from like 10 angles the moment he lifted the sight to his eye

[–] constantokra@lemmy.one 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Most of us thought similar things about the Capitol. Then January 6th happened. Now, not so much.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Fair point, but their reaction at the capitol was tactically logical. There's nothing important just lying around there, nothing to lose really by letting the crowd in and watching them tire themselves out with all the energy of the dog that caught the car.

I can't think of a way letting this guy shoot at trump was tactically sound, except maybe in the sense that they'd have less explaining and/or paperwork to do than if they'd shot someone who technically hadn't yet done anything objectively aside from have a gun.

Honestly though it does kind of feel like I'm learning that the incompetence I see every day in every stage of American life is truly more complete than I thought. This evil machine used to be run by competent fascist soldiers, and they've all died or retired in luxury and now the whole thing is operated by goop-brained failsons who can barely outgun a teenager.

[–] randompasta 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Most likely the further out areas were covered by local law enforcement and the core around the former president was directly covered by the Secret Service.

[–] fox@hexbear.net 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There were two buildings in the area and USSS snipers were on the other one. They absolutely had line of sight

[–] randompasta 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If they saw the guy in time. Which they didn't.