Stronger windows/doors, I’m ok with that. Retractable fencing, additional security cameras? OK, there are certainly times when fencing is probably called for; I certainly don’t want the capitol to look like a fortified camp. I remember walking past the presidential palace in Lima, Peru. 12’ wrought iron fencing around the entire perimeter, military controlled entry to the palace, russian .50 caliber machine gun emplacements, snipers on the roof, military QRT just out of sight.
But I draw the line at the creation of yet another federal quick reaction force (QRF) - especially if they are drawn from the National Guard. We already have DOZENS of federal law enforcement and QRT units. We value our freedoms, especially from the government, yet we are one of the most highly policed and surveilled countries in the world. The difference is, the vast majority of it is hidden, unlike other countries that constantly remind their citizens that they are under the watchful eye of the government. The National Guard are under the command and control of the governors of the states of which they are organic. By design, they are only federalized under defined circumstances; the creation of such a force strictly for the capitol undermines the lines that were drawn to insure that they aren’t misused, deployed as pawns for political gain.
I’m sure that there is a ton of pork in this bill as well that has nothing to do with protecting the capitol.
One last thought: I am on board with PROTECTING the capitol. FORTIFYING it is another situation altogether.
No comments:
Post a Comment