Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EDITORIAL: End Clinton-era military base gun ban
The Washington Times ^ | November 11, 2009 | John R. Lott, Jr.

Posted on 11/11/2009 7:19:53 AM PST by R4Roger05

Time after time, public murder sprees occur in "gun-free zones" - public places where citizens are not legally able to carry guns. The list is long, including massacres at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School along with many less deadly attacks. Last week's slaughter at Fort Hood Army base in Texas was no different - except that one man bears responsibility for the ugly reality that the men and women charged with defending America were deliberately left defenseless when a terrorist opened fire.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ban; banglist; forthood; gunfreezone; guns; johnlott; militarybase; soldiers; x42

1 posted on 11/11/2009 7:19:55 AM PST by R4Roger05
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

Liberals Have Consequences



2 posted on 11/11/2009 7:25:30 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (:: The government will do for health care what it did for real estate. ::)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

Yes, yes, let’s BAN GUNS from our military on the base.

(I’m being sarastic)

How insane!


3 posted on 11/11/2009 7:28:21 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

bookmark


4 posted on 11/11/2009 7:29:22 AM PST by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

Police - Only minutes away when seconds count!


5 posted on 11/11/2009 7:29:45 AM PST by G Larry (DNC is comprised of REGRESSIVES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
I was in the Air Force during the Peanut Farmer years, and even then it was forbidden to carry personal weapons on base. If you lived in base housing and had personal firearms, you had to store them at the base armory, and check them in and out.

Back then Idaho only had an open carry law, with the exception of the city of Boise, but you could not open carry on base.

Heck, even during the 1983 Marine Baracks Bombing, the sentries were not allowed to carry a loaded weapon, due to the insane rules of engagement.

6 posted on 11/11/2009 7:30:57 AM PST by Yo-Yo (Joe Wilson speaks for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

I did not remember this from the Clinton years. I was shocked to hear that it was a ‘gun free’ zone. How appalling!


7 posted on 11/11/2009 7:31:49 AM PST by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
In an interview on CNN Monday night, Anchor John Roberts asked Mandy Foster how she felt about her husband's upcoming deployment to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: "At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?"

Nothing like getting right to the point. Nice job 'Ms. Foster'.

8 posted on 11/11/2009 7:33:09 AM PST by LearnsFromMistakes (Yes, I am happy to see you. But that IS a gun in my pocket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05; Yo-Yo
Pure BS!!! The Military has been anti-gun long before Willy came around. You can't hang this on Clinton.
9 posted on 11/11/2009 7:36:58 AM PST by BBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
Yes, yes, let's BAN GUNS from our military on the base.

(I'm being sarcastic)

How insane!

Ah, maybe they should PUNISH the military person that SHOT THE TERRORIST too! If it were not for Officer Kim Munley, who was shot herself and BROUGHT THIS TERRORIST DOWN, there would be more deaths. These men and women risk their lives for you and me and people they don't know. Now their own, with the support of political correctness is allowed to MURDER THEM. Now we want to make the defenseless? This is so insane!

If guns are banned on military bases this will demoralize and confuse our military - all for the sake of political correctness and coddling our enemy within.

I would also bet this terrorist is getting the ULTIMATE in health care and attention as they try to just make him look like he "cracked under pressure" - BULL!

10 posted on 11/11/2009 7:37:33 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearnsFromMistakes
"At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?"

Only if there is no chance that a civilian is within a 1000 mile radius of the terrorist shooting at him.

11 posted on 11/11/2009 7:39:14 AM PST by Just A Nobody ( (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

J. Carter, E. Kennedy, B. Clinton, B. Obama. The list of politician losers just grows and grows. It is disgusting how the malignant thoughts of their disturbed brains became policy for the USA. God save us all!


12 posted on 11/11/2009 7:44:47 AM PST by hal ogen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye

It’s true.

...

Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood, home of the heavily armed and feared 1st Cavalry Division. That’s why a civilian policewoman from off base was the one whose marksmanship ended Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s rampage

...

The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Fort Hood understands all too well. In an interview on CNN Monday night, Anchor John Roberts asked Mandy Foster how she felt about her husband’s upcoming deployment to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: “At least he’s safe there and he can fire back, right?”

...

Most people understand that guns deter criminals. Research also shows that the presence of more guns limits the damage mass murderers can unleash. A major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the time that elapses between the launch of an attack and when someone - soldier, civilian or law enforcement - arrives on the scene with a gun to end the attack. All the public shootings in the United States in which more than three people have been killed have occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned.

Thirteen dead bodies in a Texas morgue are the ultimate fruit of gun-control illogic - in which guns are so feared that government regulation even tries to keep them out of the hands of trained soldiers. With the stroke of a pen, President Obama can end Mr. Clinton’s folly and allow U.S. soldiers to protect themselves. Because we clearly cannot protect our soldiers from harm, the least we owe them is the right to protect themselves.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/

It’s true!

It was an OFF BASE police woman that shot the TERRORIST.


13 posted on 11/11/2009 7:45:37 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BBell

It’s true. It’s not “B.S..”

...

Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood, home of the heavily armed and feared 1st Cavalry Division. That’s why a civilian policewoman from off base was the one whose marksmanship ended Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s rampage

...

The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Fort Hood understands all too well. In an interview on CNN Monday night, Anchor John Roberts asked Mandy Foster how she felt about her husband’s upcoming deployment to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: “At least he’s safe there and he can fire back, right?”

...

Most people understand that guns deter criminals. Research also shows that the presence of more guns limits the damage mass murderers can unleash. A major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the time that elapses between the launch of an attack and when someone - soldier, civilian or law enforcement - arrives on the scene with a gun to end the attack. All the public shootings in the United States in which more than three people have been killed have occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned.

Thirteen dead bodies in a Texas morgue are the ultimate fruit of gun-control illogic - in which guns are so feared that government regulation even tries to keep them out of the hands of trained soldiers. With the stroke of a pen, President Obama can end Mr. Clinton’s folly and allow U.S. soldiers to protect themselves. Because we clearly cannot protect our soldiers from harm, the least we owe them is the right to protect themselves.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/

It’s true!

It was an OFF BASE police woman that shot the TERRORIST.


14 posted on 11/11/2009 7:46:16 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

I have to leave my weapon at home all day if I need to swing by the base for something, and I have a Texas Judge CHL that permits me to carry anywhere at any time. Oh, and I put about 600 rounds a year through my weapon, just to make sure I’m not more dangerous to myself than to the bad guys.

It’s a completely ridiculous prohibition, IMHO.

Colonel, USAFR


15 posted on 11/11/2009 7:53:20 AM PST by jagusafr (Kill the red lizard, Lord! - nod to C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
Where guns are banned is where the shooting begins. Schools,
churches, restaurants and now military bases.

If soldiers were allowed their side arms that were assigned them by the military at Fort Hood I doubt that the major would have gotten off so many shots before being taken out but the way it was he was able to reload and continue firing
because only he and a civilian police officer had a weapon.
The military should be able to have armed military police anywhere large groups of personnel will be forming or this will be repeated.

Thank God the police officer was close and able to respond or more lives would have been lost.

16 posted on 11/11/2009 7:53:38 AM PST by Macgedos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

I’m sorry, Mr. Lott is just wrong about this. The noted criminologist and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has weighed in and let us all know that it was the gun’s fault, not the terrorist. I’ll take his opinion over John Lott’s any day, especially given his outstanding record of expunging crime from Chicago by banning and regulating guns. The man knows of which he speaks.


17 posted on 11/11/2009 7:54:45 AM PST by Hardastarboard (Maureen Dowd is right. I DON'T like our President's color. He's a Red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
"Mr. Clinton's deadly rules even disarmed officers, the most trusted members of the military charged with leading enlisted soldiers in combat."

Clinton was another despiser of our military. Electing men like him & Bozo to be CICs is the fault of the American people who vote for them. It is something that should be seriously considered at election time.

Liberals are responsible for all the political correctness that is poisoning our country & our military. All of us know that national security is not safe in the hands of a democrat. They talk a good game to get elected & the first thing they do is tear down our military & our national defense.

I am in favor of our military being armed - but at this time, with the people we have in command, it could be another disaster, like the one that happened at Fort Hood. They can't or won't recognize a jihadist.

Until this PC mentality is stopped - arming the troops on base would be deliberately arming the enemy within the ranks.

18 posted on 11/11/2009 7:55:11 AM PST by LADY J (Change your thoughts and you change your world. - Norman Vincent Peale)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

Yes, please end the ban. These people are targets. Arming them will discourage more attacks.


19 posted on 11/11/2009 8:07:22 AM PST by popdonnelly (Yes, we disagree - no, we won't shut up - no, we won't quit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
John Lott is completely correct, but there's a "fat chance" the idiotic policy will change.

Instead, they'll just pass more restrictive regulations and maybe buy some metal detectors.

20 posted on 11/11/2009 8:12:30 AM PST by Gritty (Bottom line: Anti-gunners would rather see you dead than armed - David Codrea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hal ogen; nmh
It is disgusting how the malignant thoughts of their disturbed brains became policy for the USA.

It certainly is!

It is not just military bases that are unarmed. The recruiters stations follow the same rules. That is why it took a SWAT team, and a hand full of FReepers, to thwart another attack on the recruiting station in DC in March 2008. The week before this photo, the commies stormed them and trashed the place.

Police line in DC

21 posted on 11/11/2009 8:15:10 AM PST by Just A Nobody ( (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LADY J
Until this PC mentality is stopped - arming the troops on base would be deliberately arming the enemy within the ranks.

"Lt. Col. Les Melnyck, a Defense Department spokesman, said that as of August, 3,557 active duty troops of roughly 1.4 million identified themselves as being Muslim."(Fox News)

1.4 million to 3,557. I'll take those odds. Arm our soldiers. (It sounds crazy to even have to say it!)

22 posted on 11/11/2009 8:22:16 AM PST by 6SJ7 (atlasShruggedInd: ON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nmh
With the stroke of a pen, President Obama can end Mr. Clinton’s folly and allow U.S. soldiers to protect themselves.

This needs to be posted large, and often.

Obama has the power to restore a basic self-defense capability to our military people. If he does not use the executive power of his office to do this, then he is leaving our military open to more attacks by deranged jihadists - BY CHOICE.

23 posted on 11/11/2009 8:49:06 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
Where they have gun-free areas on military bases, they must
have armed guards to prevent such massacres.
24 posted on 11/11/2009 10:29:14 AM PST by upcountryhorseman (An old fashioned conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05
[Because of Mr. Clinton] terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood.

That's a keeper.

25 posted on 11/11/2009 12:18:46 PM PST by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Yes, yes, let’s BAN GUNS from our military on the base.

It's like not allowing fighting in the war room.

26 posted on 11/11/2009 12:22:22 PM PST by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nmh
I did read the article. One comment I made to my coworkers after the most recent shooting is that a gunman could go farther on a military base than in my neighborhood before being shot. I explained to them why.

The military was anti-gun before Clinton. I guess he just made it official. My father retired from the Navy in 76 and they were anti-gun back then. When I was in during the Reagan/Bush years they were anti-gun. If you were caught with a weapon or ammunition in your car or barracks room you would face charges. You were treated like a criminal for exercising your second amendment right. I can go on but I won't.

27 posted on 11/11/2009 12:50:26 PM PST by BBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nmh

The military does no like big knives either.


28 posted on 11/11/2009 12:52:15 PM PST by BBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

Realistically how many soldiers would of brought their sidearms to a deployment screening if allowed before this?

I am thinking that knowing you would have to take off the sidearm for medical exams and such and that everybody there is either military or DOD civilians so what’s the risk?


29 posted on 11/11/2009 1:24:54 PM PST by Swiss (Reality don't seem real anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

So everyone in Texas has a gun EXCEPT those people in the military base.

BRILLIANT!


30 posted on 11/11/2009 2:37:05 PM PST by HonestConservative (http://www.doughoffmanforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BBell

Thanks - thats totally NUTS.


31 posted on 11/11/2009 2:45:54 PM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BBell
It seems pretty crazy when you look at the policy in the context of knowing there IS, in fact, an enemy within.

I can maybe understand a distinction between issued and personal weapons and following certain protocols, but what is the underlying rationale for almost nobody being allowed to carry any type of weapon on post? If it is that the facility is supposed to be "base" and therefore a zone of safety, well here's a news flash - the giant wooden horse rolled in a long time ago.

Anything about it that makes sense just isn't apparent to me.

Hopefully is has just been inertia which is, unfortunately, a fact of life. And hopefully it has just been overcome. We'll see I reckon.

32 posted on 11/11/2009 4:58:00 PM PST by Clinging Bitterly (MMM MMM MM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HonestConservative

I am retired Army, live in Copperas Cove, Tx, just west of Ft. Hood. I have a TX CHL and this rule is why you see me on Ft. Hood maybe once every 6 months. They give 18-19 year old kids a couple of months training as MPs and give them guns, but I can’t be trusted to carry and defend myself and possibly others? Does the Army take FULL responsibility for the safety and well being on everyone on base? They can’t and won’t.
I am sorry, but my safety and the safety of my loved ones is best left to me, not those the military says can be trusted with a gun. I still cling to the idea of personal responsibility for my actions.


33 posted on 11/11/2009 6:27:22 PM PST by rustyboots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: R4Roger05

BTTT!


34 posted on 11/12/2009 11:54:52 AM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rustyboots

Go to http://www.blogtalkradio.com/freedom and you will hear me speak with Uncle Jimbo of BlackFive on this very subject.

Page in about a quarter of the way and you will hear Uncle Jimbo and I going over this very thing!


35 posted on 11/12/2009 12:55:27 PM PST by HonestConservative (http://www.doughoffmanforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: nmh
It was an OFF BASE police woman that shot the TERRORIST.

That was an early confused report. But she was not from off base, she was a civilian Police Sgt working for the post's Department of Emergency services. An Army employee, not a civilian contractor (like the gate guards, who are also armed), nor a police officer from any of the jurisdictions around the post. The Senior Sgt, who also shot the terrorist after she did, was her partner and also a Civilian police officer from DES.

36 posted on 11/12/2009 4:05:44 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Macgedos
The military should be able to have armed military police anywhere large groups of personnel will be forming or this will be repeated.

MPs do carry firearms routinely when on duty. They could provide such guards, if there were enough of them. Most are deployed guarding terrorists, protecting convoys and such as that.

But the argument that somehow the solders (and our own civilian Allegra) are safe to be armed while on a base in Iraq or Afghanistan but somehow become irresponsible and too dangerous to be armed because they are walking around a US post/base rather than an overseas one, is just..stupid.

37 posted on 11/12/2009 4:10:22 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LADY J
Until this PC mentality is stopped - arming the troops on base would be deliberately arming the enemy within the ranks.

But as we have seen, they are armed if they choose to be. Like all gun bans, this only affects those who follow the rules, not the homicidal few who do not.

38 posted on 11/12/2009 4:12:24 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7
as of August, 3,557 active duty troops of roughly 1.4 million identified themselves as being Muslim."

Major Hasan was not one of them. His records show "No religious preferance.

39 posted on 11/12/2009 4:14:23 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson