Proof our airports are still not secure.

At least it was the airport and not the Famer's Market!

(Proof that anyone can get and keep a driver's license in America!)

And the authorities are going to prosecute him. Way to go, law enforcement. Take away his driver's license and his car, but don't prosecute the poor old guy.

You schoolgirls are pretty cute.

The man drove through the gate of a MILITARY AIR BASE without stopping. The chase was on military property. He eventually crossed onto the Des Moines International Airport property which is located adjacent to the Air National Guard base (nothing unusual here, many military airbases are located adjacent to civilian airports).

This does not mean that our airports are not secure. It means that the military security police need to do a better job. I don't know the rules of engagement for that particular air base but would not be surprised if it turns out the gate guard could have and should have used deadly force once the vehicle breached the perimeter.

The man is lucky that deadly force was not used, but I would hope a commander's inquiry is initiated to determine why it was not used. This is the bigger concern to me.

Civilian charges and federal charges are appropriate. It's all about consequences for one's actions. Special considerations may be appropriate to mitigate the punishment, but that's for lawyers to argue in a court room.

Are you seriously suggesting that the gate guard should have shot at the driver?

Yes. It was a military base with an active operational airfield that the driver breached. This is a very serious incident, and the rules of engagement are usually pretty clear. Lethal force is usually authorized.

I don't know all the details, and I don't know what other facts were known to the gate guard or security police as the incident unfolded. Could very well be that the guard immediately recognized that deadly force was not necessary or appropriate. If so, then kudos to that troop for being on the ball. If the guard was confused or hesitant, then I take the opposite stance and would hope that someone pulls this kid aside and straightens out his weak approach towards security.

Security at military air bases and airfields are very strict. Or at least they used to be.

You're pretty funny too, Bucko.

So, if military people are checked at the WTMD at any airport, why isn't there security bordering the military base and the airport?

Oh yeah, I forgot, we don't look at things like that....we're too concerned about the PR show with patting down 70-year old men inside the airport.

Instead, we just let them drive onto the airport grounds unchallenged.

It may be a military base, but it is still in the United States of America, where the rule of law trumps the wartime rules of engagement. You can't just go around shooting people as your first choice of enforcement!

dupe dupe

Yes, but Colonel Jessep would say:

"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have more responsibility here than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. I know deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you don't want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then question the manner in which I provide it. I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."

He'd probably call us school girls, too.

Jack should have won the Academy Award for that speech alone. ^

You haven't been to a military base lately have you. The use of deadly force is authorized peacetime,wartime,anytime.

Never said anything about first choice of enforcement. I said there are specific rules of engagement. I also said I didn't know the specific details of this incident other than what you and I read in the news story. The news story leaves us the impression that the man drove directly onto a military airfield, and yes, in that situation, the rules for use of lethal force are pretty tight and immediate. However, if he drove through a gate onto a military base but not necessarily with immediate access to the airfield, then the use of military force may not have been appropriate. I also said that the guard may have been on the ball and recognized that use of deadly force wasn't necessary.

All of this is quite legal. Any time there is a shooting incident, the military conducts a thorough investigation regardless of circumstances, too. It's pretty anal that way.

Oh yes I have. I was one of the last people to leave an air show at a base last year, and I got stuck on the way out because they closed the exit gate too soon. I'm sure I drove through all kinds of illegal areas, like the officer's parking lot, aircraft approach roads, etc. No one shot me before I finally found an open exit, thank goodness.

I was surprised at the security for a base I visited for work ... sure, they had my visit request in the computer and printed out my badge and all at the checkpoint, but once past that, I could have pretty much gone anywhere on the base (luckily, I knew where I was going, so I didn't surprise any guards driving around or anything!). I figured they would be much more strict, particularly at the facility I was at.