This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Security doesn’t just impose monetary costs on the entity paying for the security. It imposes procedural costs on everyone remotely involved.
You can’t simply say that the Secret Service has ≈unlimited resources and so they should be able to provide ≈unlimited security. The social cost of the TSA is not its $11 billion annual budget. That doesn’t account for the lines at airport security, the pain in the ass of having to buy tiny bottles of liquids to take on the plane, the patdowns, the detainment for “bomb”jokes, or the bodyscans.
In a similar way, if the Secret Service was as trigger-happy as people expected them to be, we would have a lot more accidental shootings. Maybe a nearby business schedules roof maintenance for the day of a Trump rally. What do the agents do when they see a guy carrying a big tool bag up a ladder onto the roof? Shoot?
EDIT: Along similar lines, here’s a story that sounds plausible to me. I doubt Trump himself wants secret service telling him what to do all the time.
Surely it wouldn't be too much trouble to send an agent over to ask the guy who he is and what he is doing? Maybe check out the tool bag to verify that it does in fact contain tools and not a gun?
I had heard that they did send someone from local PD to check it out, he peeked his head up on the roof, the shooter aimed the rifle at him and he dropped down, then the shooter started shooting at trump.
We are to believe that he 180 noscoped Trump right after scaring off a cop?
I doubt it was that fast, if it did happen. The AP is currently vague on what exactly happened, writing "Outside, a local officer climbed up to the roof to investigate. The gunman turned and pointed his rifle at him. The officer did not — or could not — fire a single shot. But Crooks did, firing into the crowd toward the former president and sending panicked spectators ducking for cover as Secret Service agents shielded Trump and pulled him from the stage. "
The BBC has more detail: "A local officer with the Butler Township Police Department attempted to check the roof. He was hoisted up by another officer when he "made visual contact with an individual who pointed a rifle at him", Butler Township Manager Tom Knights told CBS. The officer was in a "defenceless position" and couldn't engage the suspect, Mr Knights said. The officer "let go and fell to the ground" then immediately alerted others to the armed suspect's location. Moments later the shooting began."
Seems like the shooter was getting ready, possibly building up his nerve, when a cop's head popped up over the side of the roof. He pointed the rifle, the cop dropped in fear, and then the shooter likely (and quite reasonably) thought "The jig is up, it's now or never" and went for it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If the SS can’t do basic communications and planning then it tells me that our enemies can assassinate the US POTUS at any time assuming they can find one competent guy willing to die for the cause.
Just show up as a plain clothes guy with a gun or sniper rifle. Print up a couple badges one for the local police and one for the SS. If the local police ask you question tell them your SS and vice versa. Basic Michael Weston spy craft but dumbed down a lot to a guy with 6 months training level. That was suppose to be a tv show.
The one thing I do love about all of this is Project 2025 has credibility now. Our institutions are failing. The Fed took 18 months to figure out inflation was too much money. The military bungled leaving Afghanistan. Universities are led by Hamas (half joking but leadership has sympathies), the SS is incompetent, Fauci told America cloth masks stop viruses. I could rant forever but it’s increasingly clear that the top 10-40k of our beauracracy needs replaced. It’s not just that they are anti-Trump. They are not good at their jobs and need replaced.
Biden hasn’t even fired the head of the SS which would make him look good.
They kind of can? Reagan got shot by a lone nut, it's not actually that hard to shoot at the president if you don't worry about your own personal safety.
I mentioned this previously, but the typical threat model is basically just three things: guy up close with pistol or other concealed weapon, guy far away with sniper, and a bomb. The USSS is always skittish about #1 and can almost never but fully dealt with as you mention (usually it's metal detectors and searches in controlled environments, and luck plus avoiding unplanned mingling otherwise, plus a little bit of distance to give some reaction time in the worst case), #2 and #3 are supposed to be mitigated with careful prep work beforehand. Which, clearly, was not done properly. Also, I pointed out above that the sitting president probably has both higher protection than any given candidate, and furthermore that local-level deterrence is not what any head of state not currently at war relies on. Iran is only considering an assassination because they know we would bomb the hell out of them if they did and we found out, the level of USSS protection is a factor but never the main factor.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link