3 ms·

That's a problem with a different solution, though. Loads of people in other countries issue the same threats, but because they don't readily have access to ra

That's a problem with a different solution, though. Loads of people in other countries issue the same threats, but because they don't readily have access to ranged weapons, and specifically firearms (and every legal firearm that they do have are registered with the police), those threats are just that: threats. Of course, we know the problem there, and everyone knows the solution, and everyone knows that solution cannot happen in the US, even if in the past it might have been possible to solve. So by all means, protect the ones who really need it, but in a lot of cases, the solution to someone whose agenda is so controversial that they need secret service protection during elected visits to adversarial places (rather than being compelled to do so because of the office you hold) is to go "we're not going to protect you for personal activities. If you want to walk into a lion's den, expect lions. If you don't like that, maybe consider that you don't need to rile people up"

mschuster91 4y ago
> Loads of people in other countries issue the same threats, but because they don't readily have access to ranged weapons, and specifically firearms (and every legal firearm that they do have are registered with the police), those threats are just that: threats. All my examples were from Germany, a country with very strict gun control. And yet, Drachenlord got haters literally every single day shouting at or vandalizing his property, attacking him physically, swatting him (the first conviction of swatting in Germany was for a Drachenlord hater). LGBT people or people "looking foreign" routinely get beaten up with fists. Gun control is a relevant issue, yes, but it's only a very small part. >If you want to walk into a lion's den, expect lions. If you don't like that, maybe consider that you don't need to rile people up That's pure victim blaming with a healthy dose of "chilling effect" applied and I'm sad to see such a take on this site. Speaking the truth, advocating for democracy must be protected at all costs.
- TheRealPomax 4y ago
  > That's pure victim blaming with a healthy dose of "chilling effect" applied and I'm sad to see such a take on this site. Speaking the truth, advocating for democracy must be protected at all costs. quite the overreach: by all means, have your opinions and spout them, and by all means, request local police protection because that's what police is for, but if you're so divisive that need the US Secret Service to protect you: maybe you don't. There are very few people who should qualify for that. Don't pretend I'm saying no one deserves protection, I'm saying almost no one deserves USSS protection.
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    > and by all means, request local police protection because that's what police is for Local police in the US has been shown often enough to seriously lack training: 21 weeks on average [1] - that is ridiculous, even traffic cops in Germany have to pass through literally two and a half year of training, and another four years and a strict physical training regime for the high rank allowing them into personal protection details. Not to mention many police departments are already overwhelmed with responsibilities, have massive cultural problems on their own, or actually are underfunded - while ridiculous budgets like NYPD are so widely known they're almost a meme, many smaller PDs (and, associated, fire departments and EMTs) seriously struggle with funding to keep the lights on. Adding the workload required to provide somewhat decent amount of protection for exposed persons would completely bust a lot of them. > There are very few people who should qualify for that. IMO, the list is orders of magnitude longer - Members of Congress, members of the government, their publicly known top staff, leaders and deputy leaders of government agencies, on state level at least the governors and their cabinet, and the heads of major parties as well. That's for the US a couple thousand people, protection details shouldn't be that expensive given how large the US federal budget already is. Recent events, not just the events surrounding Jan 6th, but also all the other threats that have happened over the last years (and yes, I include the shooting of Republican Steve Scalise here), warrant it IMO to make sure at least the representatives and the most important people in government get the very best protection there is, independent of the country. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733

mschuster91 4y ago

> Loads of people in other countries issue the same threats, but because they don't readily have access to ranged weapons, and specifically firearms (and every legal firearm that they do have are registered with the police), those threats are just that: threats. All my examples were from Germany, a country with very strict gun control. And yet, Drachenlord got haters literally every single day shouting at or vandalizing his property, attacking him physically, swatting him (the first conviction of swatting in Germany was for a Drachenlord hater). LGBT people or people "looking foreign" routinely get beaten up with fists. Gun control is a relevant issue, yes, but it's only a very small part. >If you want to walk into a lion's den, expect lions. If you don't like that, maybe consider that you don't need to rile people up That's pure victim blaming with a healthy dose of "chilling effect" applied and I'm sad to see such a take on this site. Speaking the truth, advocating for democracy must be protected at all costs.

TheRealPomax 4y ago
> That's pure victim blaming with a healthy dose of "chilling effect" applied and I'm sad to see such a take on this site. Speaking the truth, advocating for democracy must be protected at all costs. quite the overreach: by all means, have your opinions and spout them, and by all means, request local police protection because that's what police is for, but if you're so divisive that need the US Secret Service to protect you: maybe you don't. There are very few people who should qualify for that. Don't pretend I'm saying no one deserves protection, I'm saying almost no one deserves USSS protection.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > and by all means, request local police protection because that's what police is for Local police in the US has been shown often enough to seriously lack training: 21 weeks on average [1] - that is ridiculous, even traffic cops in Germany have to pass through literally two and a half year of training, and another four years and a strict physical training regime for the high rank allowing them into personal protection details. Not to mention many police departments are already overwhelmed with responsibilities, have massive cultural problems on their own, or actually are underfunded - while ridiculous budgets like NYPD are so widely known they're almost a meme, many smaller PDs (and, associated, fire departments and EMTs) seriously struggle with funding to keep the lights on. Adding the workload required to provide somewhat decent amount of protection for exposed persons would completely bust a lot of them. > There are very few people who should qualify for that. IMO, the list is orders of magnitude longer - Members of Congress, members of the government, their publicly known top staff, leaders and deputy leaders of government agencies, on state level at least the governors and their cabinet, and the heads of major parties as well. That's for the US a couple thousand people, protection details shouldn't be that expensive given how large the US federal budget already is. Recent events, not just the events surrounding Jan 6th, but also all the other threats that have happened over the last years (and yes, I include the shooting of Republican Steve Scalise here), warrant it IMO to make sure at least the representatives and the most important people in government get the very best protection there is, independent of the country. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733