All parties to the dispute agree that McKinney was not wearing a lapel pin that supposedly identifies her as a member of Congress. She walked by a checkpoint, which congresspeople are allowed to do, assuming that they are wearing the pin. A guard attempted to verbally get her attention three times. When she kept walking, he reportedly put his hand on her, and she hit him.
McKinney claimed that she was defending herself, and that the guard should have recognized her, even though she wasn't wearing her pin. However, she also stated that she recently changed her hairstyle, so she might have been harder to recognize.
Let me first note that racism exists in many places that you wouldn't normally think it would. I have seen racism from people of every race, and from people who I never would have expected to harbor such ideas. Sometimes the racism is blatant; just as frequently, it is subtle.
That said, even if the guard was racist, it is no excuse to violate a well-known security policy and then ignore warnings from the guard. In turn, her actions don't detract from the fact that the policy is itself stupid.
Congressional office buildings are prime terrorist targets. It's actually refreshing to see a security guard notice when people are improperly attempting to bypass a checkpoint and take a measured response of first verbally attempting to stop the person and then escalating the response when the person ignores those warnings.
A similar incident occurred at the Naval Academy when a Marine guard stopped the admiral in charge of the facility and asked to see some identification, as is standard policy for anyone entering academy grounds. The admiral, not in uniform, had a tantrum that the lowly corporal had the nerve to question him. Long story short, the admiral issued a full apology to the corporal and then resigned his post.
The problem McKinney faced that day isn't racism, it's arrogance -- unfortunately, her own. It's ridiculous for anyone to assume that all guards should recognize them on sight. There are 435 representatives and 100 senators. Nobody should be expected to remember so many people on sight, even if there are very few black female members. (Do I know whether white, male members of Congress are in the habit of not wearing their pins? No, I do not.)
From a security perspective, counting on visual recognition is also an extremely bad practice. A change in hairstyle might stump the guards, as it may or may not have at the congressional office building that day. People can resign or be fired, so even if a security guard recognizes them, they might no longer have legitimate rights of access.
Arrogance also dictates the adoption of a ridiculous "security practice" such as the lapel pin, which is an even worse idea than reliance on personal recognition. Congresspeople have shown themselves not to be paragons of virtue, and there is no guarantee that they won't bring in disallowed materials into their buildings. However, they like to believe they are superior to, or at least more recognizable than, the average person, so the security plan apparently provides for a way to be readily recognized. But a lapel pin? So stupid, it's unbelievable. I know this guy in Korea who makes great pins, and I'm sure he can make me a congressional lapel pin for about $5. I'm sure that there are thousands of people around the world with similar skills, and some of them just might be sympathetic to terrorists. All you need to do is put on a suit and a fake lapel pin and act arrogant, and you too can get into congressional office buildings without being checked.
Arrogance has been the cause of countless security failings, usually when the arrogant parties believe they're too important for security practices to apply to them. John Deutsch, the former deputy secretary of defense and CIA director, was found guilty of allowing his children to use classified computers, among other things. Similar cases happen with corporate executives. I have become immune to being surprised after repeatedly seeing arrogance as the cause of security problems even with low-level workers. Arrogance is even a source of poor systems administration passwords. I can't tell you how many times I have seen the easily guessable passwords of 'iamgod' or just plain 'god' on administrator accounts.
Not only does arrogance engender security violations; it also opens people and their organizations up to criminal activity. People begin to think that they are above the law. Hotelier Leona Helmsley was notoriously quoted as saying, 'Only poor people pay taxes.' The downfalls of various large corporations can be similarly attributed to the arrogance of their executives. In probably one of the most ironic twists in McKinney's case, Rep. Tom DeLay accused her of being arrogant. It can easily be argued that his own downfall was the result of his arrogance, and what is most ironic and telling about his comments is that arrogant people can decry arrogance in others and never see it in themselves.
The lack of insight on the part of arrogant people is the reason that organizations must ensure that security policies and procedures are followed. Arrogant people will continue to escalate their behaviors if they are not nipped in the bud. In McKinney's case, we are talking about ignoring, then physically assaulting a security officer protecting a highly prized terrorist target. More frequently, arrogant employees take your information and put it at risk, as Deutsch did. Either way, there's one thing to be said for these people: It's easy to detect when you've got one aboard when an organization follows its own security procedures. Making it clear to the arrogant that policies apply to them -- whether they're top executives or legislators with new hairstyles -- won't be easy, but it's crucial to your program's success.