How Did The Secret Service Let This Happen Twice?

On Sunday, former President Donald Trump was the subject of a second assassination attempt in just two months, giving way to widespread criticism of the Secret Service's ability to protect important figures. What are the common threads between yesterday's attempt and the July attempt?.What Happened and HowOn Sunday afternoon, September 15, Ryan Routh went to the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida. Upon arrival, he brought his AK-47-style rifle, two backpacks, and a GoPro camera into the shrubbery on the outskirts of the golf course. At this time, he was between 300 and 500 yards away from the former president.At about 2:00 P.M. local time, a Secret Service agent noticed a gun barrel protruding from the bushes. The agent opened fire, and Routh fled the scene. It is unknown whether or not Routh initially fired back but he left the rifle behind upon fleeing. Witnesses saw Routh escape in a black Nissan. After a pursuit, traffic units pulled over and arrested Routh on the I-95.The attempted assassination at Trump's golf property has raised serious concerns about security protocols. Despite extensive monitoring technology and intense training, Routh's ability to reach so close with a weapon demonstrates gaps in perimeter protection. Further, the fact that Routh was only caught because he made the mistake of letting his gun barrel poke out too far implies that he had a real opportunity to assassinate the former President. The inclusion of a GoPro camera implies premeditation and a desire to capture the crime, indicating a severe failure in danger assessment. This incident comes on the heels of another attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, in which identical security weaknesses were discovered. In reference to that attempt, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said that Americans will be "shocked" and "appalled" when lawmakers release their report detailing the security failures that allowed Thomas Crooks to fire at the President."Not The President"The Secret Service has received widespread criticism for security failings surrounding former President Donald Trump, especially due to this being the second time something like this has happened. A major difficulty is that Trump, as a former president, does not have the same amount of security as a sitting president. Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw stated that if Trump had been the current president, the entire golf course would have been shut down and a full perimeter formed. Instead, the security detail was reduced, allowing an armed man to get dangerously near. This discrepancy in protection levels has prompted calls for the Secret Service to review its policies and take threats against Trump more seriously. As a former president and current presidential candidate, Trump's high profile makes him a potential target, demanding strong security precautions. Given the direness of the situation, the Secret Service's existing approach, which includes fewer agents and less extensive coverage than that of a serving president, may be insufficient. Republican leaders and security experts have suggested that Trump's combined role as a former president and active candidate warrants heightened security measures comparable to those of a serving president. To avoid future intrusions, preventive measures could be expanded, including full perimeters and increased interaction with local law enforcement. The recent instances highlight the need for the Secret Service to change its policies and guarantee that all potential risks are effectively addressed in order to protect persons under its care.What's Next?The recent assassination attempts on Donald Trump highlight a worrying increase in political violence in the United States. These incidents mirror greater societal tensions and show a concerning trend in which violence for political ends has become normalized. According to a recent survey conducted by U.C. Davis researchers, more than one-third of Americans agree with the statement that "Our American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it"—a dangerous state of affairs considering recent events. Political violence has undoubtedly become more acceptable, endangering democratic processes and public safety. The attacks on Trump are not isolated incidents; they are part of a larger trend of antagonism toward public personalities across the political spectrum. As political division worsens, leaders must condemn violence categorically and support discussion that bridges rather than exacerbates gaps.The recent occurrences at Trump International Golf Club, as well as the previous incident in Butler, Pennsylvania, serve as sharp reminders of the flaws in current security measures. These breaches not only reveal the gaps in Secret Service protocols but also highlight the critical need for a rethinking of how we secure former presidents, particularly those who are still active in politics. The disparity between the protections granted to sitting and former presidents is a divide that must be bridged, as it exposes high-profile, controversial individuals like Trump to considerable risks. The calls for increased security measures are about more than just protecting one person; they are also about preserving the integrity of our democratic institutions and ensuring that political figures may work without fear of violence. As we face increased political polarization and the normalization of violence, both security agencies and political leaders must take decisive action. By strengthening protective measures and encouraging civil political discourse, we can contribute to a safer environment for all public figures and, by extension, the democratic process itself.