571
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] silverbax@lemmy.world 109 points 1 year ago

FTA:

Secret Service agents protecting President Joe Biden’s granddaughter opened fire after three people tried to break into an unmarked Secret Service vehicle in the nation’s capital, a law enforcement official told The Associated Press.

Awesome that they were trying to break into a car, and it turned out to be an unmarked Secret Service vehicle.

[-] HuddaBudda@kbin.social 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is some seriously bad situational awareness combined with some terribly bad luck for those thieves.

One of the agents opened fire, but no one was struck by the gunfire, the Secret Service said in a statement. The three people were seen fleeing in a red car

Then there is the fortune that they were allowed to flee the scene.... unharmed....

[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago

Would they be dare to open another chest, knowing it may become a mimic really fast?

[-] buddhabound@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If they're anything like my Pathfinder group, yes. They might even be more likely to try cuz you get loot and XP.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Just use mage hand and ready actions. Mimics are easy to deal with.

I plan to run a campaign one day with mimics that look like dead bodies. That will mess the players up.

[-] enki@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Not gonna lie, you had me in the first half.

[-] enki@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Are we not acknowledging that an agent opened fire on people for breaking into a vehicle? There's no danger to anyone's life yet a Secret Service agent just opens fire in public where, based on the article, there were likely hundreds of other citizens around shopping.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

By itself, you are absolutely correct. It's a property crime and nothing more. When local cops shoot these people, you are right to be upset.

But the secret service (etc) deals in situations where these things may not be isolated. It's easy to imagine a scenario where step 1 is to isolate/strand the target, while step 2 is much more sinister. Part of their standard operations is going to be ensuring they always have an exit strategy, should the need arise.

Beyond that, there is also the very real danger of terrorism. In this case, it seems that the would-be thieves had no idea who they were targeting. But there are plenty of people who could've been following them, waiting for an opportunity.

Also, you're making a very bold assumption about how many potential bystanders there were. I don't know the area where it happened, but very little of my shopping has more than a handful of people at a time anywhere near my vehicle.

[-] enki@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Bullets, even from small handguns, travel a very long distance very fast until they hit something. This is exceptionally negligent. It doesn't matter how many bystanders there were. The most common round used in handguns is a 9mm, and it travels at upwards of 1300 feet per second and can travel for miles. No one's life was in immediate danger, there was no reason to discharge a firearm in public. I've owned guns all my life and it's negligent things like this that make responsible owners and competent police look bad.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Breaking into a vehicle being guarded by the Secret Service is absolutely a threat to would-be occupants.

Bombs, tracking devices, exotic methods, even just searching the car is all a tangible threat to the occupant

[-] enki@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago

But their charge was WITH them. There was no immediate danger. If you're worried about the vehicle being tampered with, you call in another one. You don't open fire in the vicinity of a market on a Sunday. Unless something inside that vehicle is a matter of national security or someone was in it, there is zero justification for opening fire. I say this as a lifelong gun owner, this is exceptionally negligent. You do not discharge your weapon at someone, especially in public, unless there are lives in danger, especially in a populated area where you do not know who or what are further down range.

[-] Archer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Also missed. That’s somewhat worrying

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Secret Services have the accuracy of a stormtrooper

this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
571 points (94.3% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2945 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS