I agree that this was a bad call on the Secret Service agent's part and an overreaction. I also agree that the agent probably wasn't acting solely on his own judgment. After all, the fact that he asked Mr. Howards "Did you assault the Vice President?" five or ten minutes after the event indicates to me that he didn't see it and had to be alerted by someone else (whether that person was a concerned citizen or Mr. Cheney himself, we don't know). And, I understand, and agree with, the suspicion that this type of overreaction is probably encouraged by the higher-ups, or at least not discouraged.
But, I also think that Mr. Howards was a bit out of line. Even in the source article it sounds like the V.P. was talking with people and Mr. Howards just walked by and expressed his opinion, which is kind of rude in my book. If he was in a hurry to get his kid to the piano lesson he could have done that, come back, and waited his turn to bring up his concerns. Also, while it's clear that his arrest was unwarranted (rudeness not being a criminal offence), his lawyer's insinuation that they're going to include the agent's trainers and Mr. Cheney in the lawsuit is extreme. The trainers had nothing to do with this, as should be clear, and even if Mr. Cheney had instructed his Secret Service agents to be over cautious there's no evidence that he said "arrest that man."
I suspect that the lawsuit is less about "whether we in fact live in a free nation," as Howards claims, and more about him getting his 15 minutes of fame and proclaiming his political views while making some who think differently from him look bad, which is what he's accusing the Secret Service of doing, after all.
Republican Bash? - Comments
Posted by Toby, Maine on July 15, 2008:
I agree that this was a bad call on the Secret Service agent's part and an overreaction. I also agree that the agent probably wasn't acting solely on his own judgment. After all, the fact that he asked Mr. Howards "Did you assault the Vice President?" five or ten minutes after the event indicates to me that he didn't see it and had to be alerted by someone else (whether that person was a concerned citizen or Mr. Cheney himself, we don't know). And, I understand, and agree with, the suspicion that this type of overreaction is probably encouraged by the higher-ups, or at least not discouraged.
But, I also think that Mr. Howards was a bit out of line. Even in the source article it sounds like the V.P. was talking with people and Mr. Howards just walked by and expressed his opinion, which is kind of rude in my book. If he was in a hurry to get his kid to the piano lesson he could have done that, come back, and waited his turn to bring up his concerns. Also, while it's clear that his arrest was unwarranted (rudeness not being a criminal offence), his lawyer's insinuation that they're going to include the agent's trainers and Mr. Cheney in the lawsuit is extreme. The trainers had nothing to do with this, as should be clear, and even if Mr. Cheney had instructed his Secret Service agents to be over cautious there's no evidence that he said "arrest that man."
I suspect that the lawsuit is less about "whether we in fact live in a free nation," as Howards claims, and more about him getting his 15 minutes of fame and proclaiming his political views while making some who think differently from him look bad, which is what he's accusing the Secret Service of doing, after all.
Read the article that everyone's commenting on, or post a comment about it.