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

Skip to comments.

How many at Fort Hood died because of the Army's gun ban?
American Thinker ^ | November 14, 2009 | Kyle-Anne Shiver

Posted on 11/14/2009 12:36:48 PM PST by libstripper

If I were the parent or spouse of one of those killed in the terrorist attack at Fort Hood last week, I would begin raising utter hell in the public arena the minute my loved one was buried and my tears dried up. Not only did outrageous political correctness convince otherwise rational people in authority to put our soldiers in unnecessary danger, but since 1993, there has been a gun-ban in place on our army bases.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fthood; gunban; obama; rtkba
Gun free zone = terrorist free fire zone.
1 posted on 11/14/2009 12:36:49 PM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: libstripper
What is the military record of Kyle-Anne Shiver ????
2 posted on 11/14/2009 12:41:34 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Why, perchance, does that have anything to do with the price of eggs?


3 posted on 11/14/2009 12:44:34 PM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Bill O’Reilly claims that this terrorist attack too place because Nidal “had access to guns”. IOW, O’Reilly is an idiot.


4 posted on 11/14/2009 12:47:31 PM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

I’m at work but someone sent me a email last night saying that the little young woman did not bring him down but another cop did? I don’t have the names in front of me...


5 posted on 11/14/2009 12:50:18 PM PST by tubebender (jr on the pole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
I have elsewhere posted my view that one has to think carefully before deciding who on a military base should really be allowed to carry a sidearm, and I can well sympathize with any CO wanting to keep weapons under very strict control. Soldiers and sailors are just ordinary men and women, young men and women by the majority often with no better judgment on these kinds of matters than their civilian counterparts.

At the same time, if Clinton really did turn our bases into totally gun free zones, then this is likewise stupid. A reasonable level of security and a reasonable level of responsiveness, under the control of the CO is more than appropriate.

Those who want to turn our bases into armed free-for-alls, like this article seems to advocate, know nothing about the military. The use of deadly force is a serious issue, and you cannot advocate the notion that off duty soldiers and sailors are that off-duty that the military will not bear criminal and civil culpability for any mistakes.

6 posted on 11/14/2009 12:55:06 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Texas CCP owners have NO RIGHTS at Fort Hood.


7 posted on 11/14/2009 12:57:08 PM PST by Prole (Please pray for the families of Chris and Channon. May God always watch over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
outrageous political correctness

Isn't that what killed 'em?

8 posted on 11/14/2009 12:57:15 PM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus

Bill O’Reilly claims that this terrorist attack too place because Nidal “had access to guns”. IOW, O’Reilly is an idiot.
::::::
It is difficult to tell what country O’Reilly belongs in. He is weak on Obama and his thugs — never takes a strong stand against what is tearing America apart now and rationalizes every thing that, in any way, could be considered controversial. Case in point, what he said above....I don’t watch his show any more and wonder why it gets such high ratings.


9 posted on 11/14/2009 12:57:22 PM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Probably not as many. One thing you need to realize is that personnel in uniform are not allowed to carry personal firearms. They should be allowed to have them in their personal vehicles in my opinion. I’d carry my .45 on base if I was allowed, but I have to leave it at home or face arrest when I go to work.


10 posted on 11/14/2009 12:57:35 PM PST by ChuckHam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Bill O’Reilly claims that this terrorist attack too place because Nidal “had access to guns”. IOW, O’Reilly is an idiot.

I give up.Who's Bill O'Reilly?

11 posted on 11/14/2009 12:58:47 PM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
IOW, O’Reilly is an idiot.

Absolutely. All BOR would have to do is spend 10 minutes reading Hasan's carefully assembled 50 slide presentation on Islam and jihad that he gave at Walter Reed in 2007. It shows a careful, thoughtful development of Islamic thought where Hasan was gradually moving in the direction of becoming a full fledged Jihadi. Included in it is a remarkably concise precis of the Koran showing how Islam evolved into a bloodthirsty political/military cult. Thereafter he simply struggled with his religion until he concluded it compelled him to the murderous, terroristic act of treason he perpetrated. In many ways, it was every bit as sane as someone choosing to enter the clergy after a great moral struggle, the difference being that this was to do absolute evil in the service of a fake god and prophet, instead of to do good.

12 posted on 11/14/2009 12:58:55 PM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
Nidal Hasan was on Obama’s Transition Homeland Security Team:

Look on page 29 of the Homeland Security Institute link below.

Homeland Security Policy Institute link

Holy Krap!

Let Hannity know!!!

13 posted on 11/14/2009 1:09:33 PM PST by moovova (More coffee please...make it a double.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

I believe any military person who has passed their gun quals or has worked in security should be allowed to carry on any base they are stationed.


14 posted on 11/14/2009 1:29:14 PM PST by My hearts in London - Everett (So the writer who breeds more words than he needs, is making a chore for the reader who reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
You just cant have people on military bases, other than CID, MP’s, base security, or people on the range involved in training or qualifying running around with loaded weapons. It's a recipe for disaster. Heck if you want everyone running around with guns why not hand grenades. Now the last thing I am is a gun control freak but you have to understand the dynamics of a military instillation.
15 posted on 11/14/2009 1:45:46 PM PST by skimask
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Who would have thought that the safest place for an enemy soldier to be would be inside an American Army base.


16 posted on 11/14/2009 1:49:04 PM PST by jmcenanly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

“Soldiers and sailors are just ordinary men and women, young men and women by the majority often with no better judgment on these kinds of matters than their civilian counterparts.”

OK, they are ordinary people, so lets just enforce their second amendment rights.


17 posted on 11/14/2009 2:06:20 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: skimask

“Now the last thing I am is a gun control freak but you have to understand the dynamics of a military instillation.”

You sound like every other gun-control freak I’ve run into. There’s always some “special” reason why people in their locale simply can’t be trusted with firearms.


18 posted on 11/14/2009 2:10:34 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

14. (Yes, I’m counting the unborn child onme ofthe victim was carrying. If Scott Peterson can be convicted of murdering unborn Conor Peterson, tehn Maj. Hasan should be charged with 14 counts of murder, not 13 — as well as terrorism adn treason — and sedition.)


19 posted on 11/14/2009 2:59:55 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

The gun grabbers needs a certain level of violence in this country. They are willing to accept a certain level of killing to further their political agenda.


20 posted on 11/14/2009 3:01:59 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skimask

What the hell are you talking about? Military people are no different from civilians when it comes to trusting them to carry loaded weapons. As a matter of fact I trust military more than your average civilian.


21 posted on 11/14/2009 3:09:09 PM PST by ChuckHam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: skimask

So you’re comparing carrying a gun to walking around with a hand grenade? I don’t understand why our military personnel’s second amendment rights should stop at the gates of our military bases.


22 posted on 11/14/2009 3:30:27 PM PST by My hearts in London - Everett (So the writer who breeds more words than he needs, is making a chore for the reader who reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
Those who want to turn our bases into armed free-for-alls, like this article seems to advocate, know nothing about the military. The use of deadly force is a serious issue, and you cannot advocate the notion that off duty soldiers and sailors are that off-duty that the military will not bear criminal and civil culpability for any mistakes.

You are correct!

23 posted on 11/14/2009 3:42:41 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

I was just wonder if the dunce had ever been in a free for all at the military club. I have!!!


24 posted on 11/14/2009 3:44:26 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: devere
Well, well well a mister know-it-all. You must be a shrink but then again probably not, you are much smarter than a shrink. Put it where the sun don't shine.
25 posted on 11/14/2009 3:55:24 PM PST by skimask
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: skimask

Great! Now explain to me how it took the local police to bring him down, not the MP, or any security unit on the base.


26 posted on 11/14/2009 4:06:13 PM PST by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: skimask

“Well, well well a mister know-it-all. You must be a shrink but then again probably not, you are much smarter than a shrink. Put it where the sun don’t shine.”

I’d like to shrink but I eat too much.

And nowadays the sun don’t shine on America ‘cause that alien muslim marxist sits in the Oval Office.


27 posted on 11/14/2009 4:39:27 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: devere
"You sound like every other gun-control freak I’ve run into. There’s always some “special” reason why people in their locale simply can’t be trusted with firearms." 

And, in opposition...you sound just like any other ignorant civilian who never served on in the military.

You can spout all your "2nd Amendment" rights all you want but in the military you have to be realistic also.

We have to deal with ex-gangbangers and personnel who don't have but should have an IQ three points more than a fork....but occasionally don't.

Just like in the civilian world...not everyone should be able to carry.  I'm not opposed to military bases running comprehensive courses for concealed and carry and the individual being signed off by his/her chain of command, but we have the same freaks you have out there on the streets as you see daily.  We don't need some AH popping caps on his 1st SGT because he doesn't want to do police call.....

Cure your ignorance....join the military and War Against Terror.....

28 posted on 11/14/2009 5:20:57 PM PST by Shamrock-DW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Shamrock-DW

“Just like in the civilian world...not everyone should be able to carry.”

Right now no body but the military police can carry. And 13 soldiers just paid with their lives for that Clinton-initiated stupidity.

But I suppose that actual results don’t matter to you.


29 posted on 11/14/2009 6:50:23 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Shamrock-DW

“We have to deal with ex-gangbangers and personnel who don’t have but should have an IQ three points more than a fork....but occasionally don’t.”

Golly, I thought you were America’s best, and you think your fellow soldiers are the dregs of society ... I think not.

In the whole State of Vermont, chock full of Liberal morons and other disreputable types, any non-felon can carry a gun without any permit or training. And the crime rate is 47th out of the 50 states.

Gun control enthusiasts always have a reason why the people THEY know shouldn’t be eligible to carry. So far Vermont has survived allowing self-defense, and so would the US military.

“join the military and War Against Terror.....”

Haven’t you heard? The “War on Terror” has been cancelled.


30 posted on 11/14/2009 7:16:34 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: skimask; All
You just cant [sic] have people on military bases, other than CID, MP’s, base security, or people on the range involved in training or qualifying running around with loaded weapons. It's a recipe for disaster. Heck if you want everyone running around with guns why not hand grenades. Now the last thing I am is a gun control freak but you have to understand the dynamics of a military instillation [sic].

What makes a military base different from a shopping mall here in Tennessee where about 5.5% of all people over 21 have CCW permits, basically carry when and as they choose, and where we have had have had no mass shootouts? You're making the same argument that's always been made against shall issue CCW, one that's been shot down in practice every time. There's no reason to believe that military personnel, if allowed to carry personal firearms on the same basis civilians with CCW permits are allowed to carry them, would be any less responsible than their civilian counterparts. Indeed, in terms of what people actually did on military bases before Clinton's ban, there was no basis for the ban in the fist place.

31 posted on 11/15/2009 5:45:51 AM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tubebender
’m at work but someone sent me a email last night saying that the little young woman did not bring him down but another cop did? I don’t have the names in front of me...

Police Sgt. Munley at minimum exposed herself to his fire and fired at him, she probably got at least some hits. Her partner, Police Senior Sgt. Todd, then came around an opposite corner of the building (the two police had been under cover behind the same vehicle and coordinated their subsequent movements), he saw Hasan still standing and Munley on the ground. He then ordered Hasan to drop the weapon, (At that point I would not have bothered) and when he did not, but rather pointed his weapon towards Todd, he shot him, at least twice.

Regardless of whose bullets took down the terrorist, they acted as a team, and brought him down as a team.

32 posted on 11/15/2009 12:22:32 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ChuckHam
One thing you need to realize is that personnel in uniform are not allowed to carry personal firearms.

But that's because of rules instituted starting in the mid '90s. There were rules before then as well, but they were not a "absolute.

Rules are not written in stone, They can be changed. They aren't even law, just regulations, which are easier to change than the law.

I too would like to be able to have my .45 either on my person or at least in my vehicle, while at work. My employer would allow that, but since I work on Ft. Hood at the current time, I'm SOL.

33 posted on 11/15/2009 12:29:01 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ChuckHam
One thing you need to realize is that personnel in uniform are not allowed to carry personal firearms.

But that's because of rules instituted starting in the mid '90s. There were rules before then as well, but they were not a "absolute.

Rules are not written in stone, They can be changed. They aren't even law, just regulations, which are easier to change than the law.

I too would like to be able to have my .45 either on my person or at least in my vehicle, while at work. My employer would allow that, but since I work on Ft. Hood at the current time, I'm SOL.

34 posted on 11/15/2009 12:29:08 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Logical me
Now explain to me how it took the local police to bring him down, not the MP, or any security unit on the base.

It was the Ft. Hood Department of Emergency Services police, not town cops. They are DA civilian employees, federal civil servants IOW. They act serve pretty much interchangeably with the MPs, although typically they have more training and experience, especially in law enforcement. Less in convoy protection or as guards for enemy POWs.

35 posted on 11/15/2009 12:32:11 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Shamrock-DW
My proposal would to be let anyone with state issued CHL/CHP carry concealed. Otherwise anyone over say E-4 or 5, W-2, or O-1 respectively could carry openly, no license required or special permission required. If those folks can't be trusted, they shouldn't be wearing the uniform either. That would eliminate all the young hot bloods, they wouldn't' be old enough for the CHL, nor would the have enough rank.

There would still be sufficient armed "good guys" in most situations to handle these sorts of events, even with multiple assailants.

But that said, Joe Snuffy gangbanger isn't any more likely to obey the "no guns" rules than he is the rules against assaulting his 1st Sgt, or his platoon LT.

Therein lies the fallacy of gun control. It doesn't control the ones who need controlling, while providing them with unarmed victims.

Captain El Gato USAFR(ret).

36 posted on 11/15/2009 12:40:58 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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