The Smithsonian is probably, legitimately, more concerned with people taking things out of the museums.

Every facility can't be Fort Knox or have the security of the White House, and shouldn't.

It typical wasteful fashion, every federal building in DC has spent a fortune on bollards and other security measures, as if the Department of Health and Human Services is as likely a target as the Department of Justice, DHS or State.

There's a relatively small federal building near me that houses administrative support functions for an extremely obscure entity unrelated to national security (nor a hate target like the IRS) and of no conceivable interest to anyone who doesn't work there. They are in the process of a multi-million dollar perimeter security project that has all of us in the neighborhood rolling our eyes -- because it will primarily have the effect of protecting the front lawn (which for years has been an inordinate preoccupation with the building management) and an additional few feet on one side of the building.

If they ever were attacked, it'd be because the terrorists put the wrong address in their GPS.

We're certainly not inclined to be dismissive of security needs but a lot of us think it's gotten ridiculous around here. Tons of taxpayer dollars, lots of inconvenience, and not feeling much safer.

The feds should disperse far more of their personnel and infrastructure around the country. Foolish in this era of security threats and communications ability, to have the federal government concentrated so much in one place.

Not a little thread drift there.... ;-)