Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Sisters question fatal shooting in DC police chase [View all]sofa king
(10,857 posts)There were three huge mistakes in that incident. Bereaved family members can say what they want, but that person used her car as a weapon, one which should have been treated as a far, far deadlier weapon than a mere pistol.
The first mistake was that White House security should have assumed that the car held explosives and that the breach was an attempt to get within detonation distance--that is why the anti-vehicle gates exist in the first place. From that assumption, if follows that no matter what, the weapon (the car) must not be allowed to get away to be used against an easier target--which, by accident, is exactly what the driver did, driving past dozens of softer but highly important potential bombing targets and actually making it onto Capitol Hill. I hate to say it, but White House security should have stopped her right there and then, by killing her if necessary.
The possibility that they held fire because they saw an infant in the car is a closely related second mistake, because now every car-bombing asshole in the world has seen how using a baby as a prop can give someone a second chance. So there's that.
But the third mistake was by far the worst of all. The anti-vehicle barriers on Constitution allowed the suspect to pass and spectacularly blocked her pursuers, destroying a police car in the process.
.
The goddamned anti-vehicle system aided the perpetrator, which is simply unforgivable under any circumstances, even very, very lucky circumstances such as these. That should be recognized as a career-ending, contract-ripping, expect-a-refund-for-the-millions-you-blew-on-that-piece-of-shit sort of mistake. But instead I'm sure the defense contractor that built it will get even more money to "improve" it from its worse-than-useless current state.