When I was at Uni one of our alumni was the Prime Minister of Portugal and he was coming to give a talk. We were all banned from parking our bicycles anywhere near the building he was going to be in. Which happened to be my department as we had the largest lecture hall.
As students we all thought this was overkill as whoever heard of a bike bomb? Car bombs yes, but not a bicycle bomb.
Of course, a few months later the IRA did set off a couple of bicycle bombs in Brighton. It turns out that you can fit quite a bit of C4 inside the frame. So maybe the police and campus security weren’t such paranoid jobsworths after all.
When was that? Alfred Herrhausen, CEO of the Deutsche Bank when it was still a reputable and respected bank, was assasinated with a bike-bomb in 1989:
Concerning the OP question: why are there not more assasinations? I don’t know, and I have pften wondered. I grew up in Spain and remember the '70s and early '80s terrorism plague. ETA, the Basque separatist organisation, blew up prime minister Carrero Blanco in truly spectacular fashion in 1973:
After that they killed a lot of people, but not any high ranking politician anymore. The closest they came was a bomb directed against José María Aznar, later to become president of the Spanish government, 1995, when he was still only head of his party’s Madrid branch.
On June 25, 1979, the Andreas Baader Commando from the RAF carried out a bomb attack on NATO Commander-in-Chief General Alexander Haig. They failed, the car was too well armoured:
I sometimes wonder why so few attacks have been carried out and why so few were successful. Yes, it is much better that way, but considering how man loonies, terrorists and foreign powers with means and without scruples there are, I find it surprising.
And I would consider the president and the vice president of the US to be a case on its own. Nobody is that well protected, it seems.
It’s not always an hours long traffic lockdown for a presidential motorcade. Biden’s motorcade has passed by our vacation home a number of time while I’ve been there, generally when he heads from his beach house to church. Police close the street for maybe ten minutes. Not sure if they close the whole ~2 mile route at once or close the roads as the motorcade approaches. I’m sure they have checked the town thoroughly over the years, and there are always Coast Guard boats just offshore in the ocean and in the canal that separates the town from the mainland. Frequently coast guard and police helicopters overhead. They do seem to make an attempt to minimize the disruption to what can be a very busy beach town.
The one time I saw more extensive traffic control was when he left town via motorcade (he usually helicopters in to a landing spot a few blocks from his house, using the three helicopter shell-game). That time they did close the highway along the mainland in one direction, blocking the lanes with municipal trucks until the motorcade passed. Still a matter on minutes rather than hours.
What I don’t stand (again, not advocating either) is why there aren’t more assassination attempts on supreme court justices. Granted they will just be replaced, but still. The supreme court is more powerful than the president in a lot of ways.
I don’t know if it has been discussed in one the threads on the CEO assassination in NYC, but the younger generation finds that assassination much more acceptable than the older generation:
“While 68% of voters overall reject the killer’s actions, younger voters and Democrats are more split — 41% of voters aged 18-29 find the killer’s actions acceptable (24% somewhat acceptable and 17% completely acceptable), while 40% find them unacceptable; 22% of Democrats find them acceptable, while 59% find them unacceptable, this compares to 12% of Republicans and 16% of independents who find the actions acceptable, underscoring shifting societal attitudes among the youngest electorate and within party lines,” Kimball said.
So they could become much more common in the future.
Because in the modern era the Right is much more likely to engage in violence than the Left, and they don’t need to kill Supreme Court members; they own the court.
Is thst because these particular young people find it more acceptable than these particular old people, or because youth finds it more acceptable than elders? If the latter, that doesn’t mean the overall picture will change.
To start with, there are nine of them, so killing a single justice isn’t going to do the job. Remember, the same justice isn’t always going to be the swing vote on all the issues that come before the Court.