I have read articles about the cost of protecting citizens at the upcoming Pittsburgh Marathon and wonder if all concerned haven't missed the point. I want to ask: Do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers bombed the Boston Marathon because they hated people who were involved in racing, or do you think it was because it was a public gathering in which many people would be in a small area?
We are racing to protect the participants and spectators in marathons as if terrorists would henceforth bomb only marathons. I suggest that terrorists don't give a damn about marathons and only chose that location because it was handy for their purposes, which was to kill and wound as many people as they could. There are plenty of other venues that would serve their purposes just as well, such as all kinds of sporting events, theaters, concerts, malls, firework displays, mega-churches and on and on. Providing protection for marathons and ignoring the fact that all public gatherings are now in danger is a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees.
The truth is that the government simply can't protect everyone every time there is an event because there just isn't enough money in the public coffers to do it. There should be security at all events, but people need to start paying attention to what is happening around them and be trained in how to do it. That might be a project that government could more easily afford.