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