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

Skip to comments.

Time to revisit firearms policies on military posts
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | November 18, 2009 | Bob Barr

Posted on 11/18/2009 2:34:16 PM PST by neverdem

This month’s tragic — and probably preventable — mass shooting at Ft. Hood, Texas, certainly raises questions about why a lone shooter was able to unload not one but several magazines of ammunition over a several minute period – shooting and wounding more than 30 soldiers and killing 13, at a heavily restricted US Army base. Just as legitimate questions were raised following the mass killings on the Virginia Tech campus in 2007, both military personnel and civilian citizens alike ought now to be asking of themselves and our elected and appointed leaders, not only whether the perpetrators of such carnage could reasonably and appropriately have been identified in advance and prevented from carrying out their obviously well-planned mass murders; but also, whether it makes sense to disarm a captive group of citizens (at Virginia Tech, the student body; at Ft. Hood, the military personnel assigned to the base).

In the case of Ft. Hood, it is important to bear in mind that since 1993, thanks to a policy ordered by then-President Bill Clinton, it has been essentially unlawful for individuals on military bases to carry firearms unless they are military police, or are training in firearms at a firing range. Many of those who support this gun-free military base policy have reacted to calls to review it, by simply echoing the standard refrain of gun-control advocates that, “we don’t want everyone on a military base running around with a gun on their hip.” (Of course, had this been the case at Ft. Hood, it is doubtful Maj. Hasan could have squeezed off more than a couple of rounds before being himself felled by an armed soldier.) It is a false dichotomy that we either allow no one (except MPs) or everyone on military bases to possess firearms. Rather, the debate should center on why is it made virtually impossible for any soldier on a military base to carry arms, even if they have in fact been properly vetted and trained in their use?

Why, after all, should a citizen be forced to surrender his or her right to keep and bear arms, simply because they have entered military service; service expressly supposed to teach the proper and safe use of firearms?

In the case of the students at Virginia Tech two years ago, it was Virginia legislators who decided to disarm them and make them sitting ducks for a single crazed gunman, Seung-Hui Cho. For the military victims at Ft. Hood this Fall, it was three commanders-in-chief (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama), and a series of politically-correct base commanders, who rendered those who serve under them vulnerable to an apparent religious zealot bent on killing as many of his fellow service men and women as he could. Continuing to stick our heads in the sand and refuse to even reconsider amending such policies as those that apply to campuses in Virginia (and other states across the country) and at Ft. Hood (and virtually every other military post across the country), vastly improves the chances that our students and our military personnel will be victims of other deranged individuals in the future.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; forthood; gunfreezones; hasan

1 posted on 11/18/2009 2:34:19 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Time to revisit firearms Muslim policies on military posts
2 posted on 11/18/2009 2:35:19 PM PST by Mac from Cleveland (Dreams from My Father--food, shelter, and education from some typical white folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
What? Start using common sense? That died years ago.
3 posted on 11/18/2009 2:36:21 PM PST by Jerrybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jerrybob

The other part of the Clinton policy that needs reversal is that those allowed to carry guns are seldom allowed ammunition for them.


4 posted on 11/18/2009 2:42:25 PM PST by Ingtar (Asses far Left of me; Rinos to the Left; FReepin' on the Right with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It is very fitting that Bill Clinton leave a legacy of dead US servicemen. He and those of his generation and ilk managed to make life hell for their countrymen in the service while they themselves perfected the art of milking the public tit.


5 posted on 11/18/2009 2:48:34 PM PST by Hans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Why, after all, should a citizen be forced to surrender his or her right to keep and bear arms, simply because they have entered military service;

I had a firearm in my locker in 1957, was stationed on a Nike Missile base. Got the sidearm from a mail order in Chicago.

Times, they have changed for sure.

6 posted on 11/18/2009 2:48:34 PM PST by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Create a rolling roster of soldiers to be armed with their individual weapon and two magazines of ammo. They report to the provost marshal as the post quick reaction force.

Just like guard duty. Post command sergeant major tasks subordinate units down to unit first sergeants. Soldiers draw weapons, report to post HQ, are issued magazines and given their general/special guard orders, and take up their posts. The officer or sergeant of the guard goes around and inspects them at their posts, which they quit only when properly relieved.

Guard posts to be determined by division or post chief of staff. Soldiers protected, terrorists warned.

EST 2000 firing simulator system will prepare soldiers for reaction to variety of situations.

It can be done.


7 posted on 11/18/2009 2:48:54 PM PST by elcid1970 ("O Muslim! My bullets are dipped in pig grease!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I can just see that gun Hasan bought...it jumped out of it's box and slithered its way through the front gate and jumped up and shot all those people...all by itself. /sarc

Here we go again with the "it's the guns fault" theory...try to remember the rosie o'donnel comparison...spoons don't make her fat...SHE makes her fat.

A gun is manufactured from metal, put in a box, and lies in the store until someone buys it. It doesn't get lonesome, it doesn't demand to get out of the box and go shoot someone...that depends on the buyer.

I've owned guns all my life, and I'm 64 now...none of my guns EVER jumped out of the case/holster/box and shot - or even pointed themselves - at anyone.

Liberals seem to be afraid of guns...everytime one is discharged, every journalist wonk in America starts to write the same old articles they did last time one discharged, only changes the dates and circumstances. But, it always ends up leaning toward gun control. It's why the left doesn't like war...they don't like guns.

They think we traded colored beads and trinkets for the peace we've enjoyed for over 200 years in this country. They seem to think that we met our adversaries out in a field of daisys, made daisy-garlands and danced hand in hand in a circle singing Kumbaya.

But, secretly, those same elites who slam the gun have armed guards to keep them safe...so why would they need one?

The point is, they don't want YOU to have one because you're too hard to brainwash and manipulate when you have that weapon. Disarming you is first on the minds of liberals, it's the only thing that stands between them and total world domination.

I think it was Daniel Webster who said, "An armed society is a polite society." Well, it's not too polite right now, but take away our guns, and it will be downright caos, and we'll soon be dead.
8 posted on 11/18/2009 2:51:25 PM PST by FrankR (AMERICA: You'll end up where you're going, if you don't change your direction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

More dodge and fake intellectualizing of distractions to avoid the obvious problem. Islam is bad. Terrorism is Islam. It isn’t guns. It isn’t Israel. It isn’t British imperialism. It isn’t Amreican imperialism, or Hinduism or Buddhism, or Christianity. It is Islam. That doesn’t mean all Muslims are terrorists, or that all Islamic states are terrorist states. It simply means that Islam causes terrorism, and it needs to be watched, controlled, and not ignored or excused. Don’t get sidetracked. Don’t get mushy headed with PCism and Multiculturalism. Don’t be stupid.


9 posted on 11/18/2009 2:52:43 PM PST by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
I think it was Daniel Webster who said, "An armed society is a polite society."

Actually that was a fictional character, Lazarus Long, who was created by the sci-fi writer Robert Heinlein.

10 posted on 11/18/2009 2:58:33 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

It would be sort of additional duty but he only requirement would be that you carry the gun while going about your normal work day.

Some have suggested that ALL personnel be allowed access to guns 24/7/365. This is a terrible idea mainly because while our soldiers, sailors, and Marines are brave, they aren’t angels and often do stupid things (drink until they pass out, DUI, do drugs, fight, steal, run around with other soldier’s wives, etc.) when off duty. I know this for a fact because I WAS a young sailor who did some on the list and saw others do more.


11 posted on 11/18/2009 3:04:01 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Before 1968 you could own ANYTHING that you wanted, up to and including operational field artillery pieces with no government oversight at all.


12 posted on 11/18/2009 3:05:44 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Like all blogs, you need to judge whether the writer has one bit of common sense about this stuff. My answer is no.


13 posted on 11/18/2009 3:24:36 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong,”The ownership of machine guns was first regulated at the federal level by the National Firearms Act of 1934. “


14 posted on 11/18/2009 3:27:16 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

A quater century of Active Duty compels me to endorse your assessment.


15 posted on 11/18/2009 3:35:23 PM PST by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Additional duty, yes. When I was deployed to Uzbekistan, a much safer place than neighboring Afghanistan, a bomb blast in the latter obliged us in the UZ base to carry our M-16 and two magazines. At work, in the mess tent, the shower, chapel, didn’t matter. Went on like this for months.

But IMO those tasked for additional guard duty need to be stationed in & around targets of opportunity like the staging area where the goblin Hasan knew his targets were concentrated and unarmed.

Issue weapons to all? Negatron. The unit first sergeants can best determine who’s most trustworthy.


16 posted on 11/18/2009 3:41:05 PM PST by elcid1970 ("O Muslim! My bullets are dipped in pig grease!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; Joe Brower; Cannoneer No. 4; Criminal Number 18F; Dan from Michigan; Eaker; Jeff Head; ...
Second Amendment Special

Gura's McDonald brief is in comment# 1 of this first link. Comment# 19 excerpts a NY Times' comment from the original 14th Amendment debate. Give me the old NY Times.

Experts square off on 'right to bear arms' (including Alan Gura from D.C. v. Heller)

NRA Files Brief in McDonald v. Chicago

Maersk Alabama crew repels another pirate attack - this time they had guns

State Constitutional Rights to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions N.B. CA, IA, MD, MN, NJ & NY need incorporation badly. IIRC, NY is supposed to cover RKBA in its civil rights law, but I've never come across it.

17 posted on 11/18/2009 3:49:24 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
Here we go again with the "it's the guns fault" theory...try to remember the rosie o'donnel comparison...spoons don't make her fat...SHE makes her fat.

Did you read the article?

I quote:

"Many of those who support this gun-free military base policy have reacted to calls to review it, by simply echoing the standard refrain of gun-control advocates that, 'we don’t want everyone on a military base running around with a gun on their hip." (Of course, had this been the case at Ft. Hood, it is doubtful Maj. Hasan could have squeezed off more than a couple of rounds before being himself felled by an armed soldier.) It is a false dichotomy that we either allow no one (except MPs) or everyone on military bases to possess firearms."

He's against gun free zones.

18 posted on 11/18/2009 4:09:30 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Like all blogs, you need to judge whether the writer has one bit of common sense about this stuff. My answer is no.

What's the difference between his old OpEd columns and his blog? Are you in favor of gun free zones?

19 posted on 11/18/2009 4:12:33 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It’s a damned crying shame when in the name of PC, even our military are rendered helpless cringing sheep in a slaughterhouse.


20 posted on 11/18/2009 4:13:14 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It’s a damned crying shame when in the name of PC, even our military are rendered helpless cringing sheep in a slaughterhouse.


21 posted on 11/18/2009 4:13:17 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
a heavily restricted US Army base.

That is bit of hyperbole. It's not that hard to get on an Army post. Air Force bases are harder, and have been for decades.

During Desert Shield, I took a wrong turn in Junction City Kansas and ended up at some unit's motor pool on a nearly deserted Ft. Riley. I'm told that I could have done the same thing on Ft. Hood at the time, by a coworker whose husband was the senior NCO of the MPs here at the time.

Only after 9-11 did most Army posts become "closed", with gates and gate guards, base registration and ID required. (or easily obtainable one day pass, longer for those with military IDs).

22 posted on 11/18/2009 4:21:41 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
It is a shame. And what does it say if you can't trust US soldiers with weapons? Clear out the PC, then the Jihadists and gang-bangers. Then arm the troops while they are conducting military business.
23 posted on 11/18/2009 4:22:22 PM PST by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Before 1968 you could own ANYTHING that you wanted, up to and including operational field artillery pieces with no government oversight at all.

No. The National Firearms Act was passed in 1934. You could not own so much as a short barrelled shotgun, withou paying a tax and registering it. A tax was several times the worth of the gun. Same with machine guns.

Semi-automatic 20mm cannon, those you could own. :) (An advertisment from the 1950s


24 posted on 11/18/2009 4:33:17 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"Everyone" on a base doesn't need to carry a firearm. However, if Concealed Carry were allowed, it is more than likely at least one more of these soldiers would have been secretly carrying - and ended the carnage quickly.

The idea of having additional assigned and identified soldiers carrying openly is a good idea, though. More attacks are probably being planned as we speak, probably by more numerous and trained fanatics. The little test by Hasan showed how easily this can be done. Expect the bad guys to pick up the ball and run with it.

How would Ft Hood (or any base) have fared withh 20-30 trained killers armed with AKs and RPGs on the loose and with a plan, instead of one poorly trained one with hardly a plan? Does anybody else realize the speed and ease of penetrating the single fenced, sporadically patrolled perimeters most bases have for security? It shouldn't be hard at all to increase the readily available, trained fire power and do it cheaply.

I don't expect it to happen. After all, that would be "jumping to conclusions" about a lone nut-case, right?

25 posted on 11/18/2009 4:36:50 PM PST by Gritty (America has the best troops and firepower, but no strategy for throttling the enemy ideology-M Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

I knew that. I forgot to add the restrictions of machine guns, short barreled rifles, sawed off shotguns and a few other types of firearms.

But the Solothurn was a semi-auto and did not require any type of registration until 1968 and then it had to be registered as a destructive device.


26 posted on 11/18/2009 4:58:19 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
No, I'm in favor of not using the military men and women for a political agenda.
27 posted on 11/18/2009 5:42:06 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
No, I'm in favor of not using the military men and women for a political agenda.

What political agenda do you allude to? Did you read the article?

28 posted on 11/18/2009 5:50:56 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

“Issue weapons to all? Negatron. “

It wasn’t THAT many decades ago that this was exactly what happened in garrison. What happened to the Army?


29 posted on 11/18/2009 6:58:09 PM PST by Favor Center (Targets Up! Hold hard and favor center!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Favor Center

Back in the old days, when soldiers slept in squad bay wood barracks, their rifles were kept in racks at the ready.

On Fort Jackson where I work, the trainees are issued their individual weapons and eat/sleep/train with them and do not turn them back to the arms room until they graduate.

Discharge barrels and amnesty boxes are everywhere. Not like it once was, but similar. Ammo, however, is under unbelievably tight control.


30 posted on 11/18/2009 7:26:30 PM PST by elcid1970 ("O Muslim! My bullets are dipped in pig grease!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

“Ammo, however, is under unbelievably tight control.”

Back in the real old days (SpanAm War), even ammunition wasn’t under such tight control. Where I work, only a handful of MilPo and contractor security are armed. Maybe they should stop calling them “Forts”....


31 posted on 11/18/2009 7:38:25 PM PST by Favor Center (Targets Up! Hold hard and favor center!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Oops...my bad...I just skimmed it...sorry.


32 posted on 11/18/2009 7:42:05 PM PST by FrankR (AMERICA: You'll end up where you're going, if you don't change your direction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Thanks for the ping!


33 posted on 11/18/2009 8:58:24 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I never knew of a firearms policy other than nothing in the barracks. Guns were in the cars. (Guns were in the barracks as well but nobody really cared).


34 posted on 11/18/2009 9:06:02 PM PST by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

There was a guy from west Tennessee that cleaned game in his dorm room. The squuadron commander could care less as long as it was clean.


35 posted on 11/18/2009 9:12:57 PM PST by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mac from Cleveland

What? You can’t hunt them on military posts?


36 posted on 11/18/2009 11:51:00 PM PST by oneolcop (Lead, Follow or Get the hell out of the way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: oneolcop

There’s an idea....

; )


37 posted on 11/19/2009 7:12:12 AM PST by Mac from Cleveland (Dreams from My Father--food, shelter, and education from some typical white folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
An advertisment from the 1950s

Many, many years ago some relatives from Minnesota came to Wyoming for an antelope (pronghorn) hunt with my dad and uncles. The visitors were to use "borrowed" rifles as we more than enough to go around. One of my uncles had one of these rounds, or one very similar, and placed it on the table beside the rifle and told them that is what they were using for the hunt. Lots of laughs all around. The cartridge base was bigger than the receiver of the rifle it was beside.

Did you or anyone you know ever get one of the BB machine guns you could order in Boy's Life? I always wanted one, but had to do with my Red Ryder.

Oh, for the good old days to return!

38 posted on 11/19/2009 9:52:39 AM PST by SLB (Wyoming's Alan Simpson on the Washington press - "all you get is controversy, crap and confusion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

IIRC, the deck guards on the USS Cole had no ammunition.


39 posted on 11/21/2009 7:50:07 PM PST by Sender (It's never too late to be who you could have been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | 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