I'm guess I'm (genuinely) confused what was your original point? (If you have time to clarify, I'd be grateful.) It seemed to come across as though the wanding measure was weaker and a weapon allowed someone to get decreased security. If I misunderstood, my apologies.
He’s carrying a rifle, but thank you for explaining risk management to me.https://twitter.com/dbthaw/status/1223443825714176001 …
-
-
-
Even if he was wanded... what would they be searching for? What would be ‘more’ dangerous?
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
You see, rifles on
#blockchain are...Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
I fail to get what is the point of metal detectors when people with guns are not only allowed but invited to bypass them. There is crazy, but this is completely absurd.
-
Referring to this:https://twitter.com/Joe_Gerth/status/1223278777045856257?s=20 …
0:32 - Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
You need to understand that defense in depth means it's not the metal detector, but the wand they didn't use would have prevented this.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.