I have already addressed most of this.
I want you to consider the dynamics of events like this.
You have a large parade upcoming. People are flocking to the event.
They are walking along the sidewalks before even getting to the event.
There is no way of preventing a determined individual to find a group and drive into them.
Before you even got to the big barriers, this guy could have taken out just as many people.
I appreciate your thoughts on emergency preparedness and protecting the public, but you simply cannot achieve the zero risk you seem to think is attainable.
It isn’t.
Same goes for Olvera Street, the Prominade Mall, or any other public place. There will always be people vulnerable to wanton attack.
You are correct regarding a deliberate act. I did not address that issue as we were discussing an impaired driver or an incidence of driver error.
It appears from your statements you are desirous of attaining the dominant position in this discourse and in my experience you will continue in that vane until you have established that position. Acquiring dominance and exerting control effectively closes the debate. But by exerting that control and closing the debate room for arriving at a solution of the issue at hand is impossible for you have determined it will be “your way or the highway” by continually raising issues of “Oh yeah, well what about this?”. Well, you now have the dominant position as well as not having addressed the underlying issue of providing a mites worth of constructive analysis toward solving the issue of providing safety measures.
I’ve satisfactorily expressed my concerns, attracted attention of the readers to the issue of safety previously, I’ve discussed awareness and offered minimal solutions toward the issue to be considered. As it appears this thread has died my responses are no longer needed except to debate that which is no longer debatable with you.
You have the floor. Good day sir.