Few GIs tried to stop Fort Hood shooter

San Antonio Express News ^ | 11/05/2010 | By Sig Christenson and Scott Huddleston - Express-News

[Responsibility2nd]

Just Wow.

[hosepipe]

Heads should roll on this muzzie getting advanced..

[E. Pluribus Unum]

It had never happened before, so no one was psychologically prepared, just like no one was psychologically prepared to go after hijackers on 9/11.

They're prepared now.

[macquire]

“Few GI’s tried to stop him”

‘cause GI’s can’t be trusted to wear their side arms when on base according to the liberals that forced the arms ban.... go figure.

[PGR88]

I read that US Soldiers are disarmed, unless they are literally engaged at the front. Is this true?

This is mind-boggling.

[Wee-Weed Up]

If you are not a guard that is on duty at Ft. Hood, then you are not allowed to carry a firearm. It’s a gun-free zone. How were they supposed to fight back?

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

What were they supposed to use against the crazed Jihadi gunman-—harsh language?

[ScottinVA]

They weren’t armed!!! Had they been, they’d have cut down Hassan in a flash.

[Wee-Weed Up]

Yes, it is true. Apparently, Liberals feel that our MP’s cannot be trusted to carry a firearm on a military base.

[ScottinVA]

I read that US Soldiers are disarmed, unless they are literally engaged at the front. Is this true?

Yes. They were sitting ducks.

[Tuscaloosa Goldfinch]

Exactly.

[Never on my watch]

I work on base in a building with more than 100 people, most of whom are active and retire military. All of those are trained in the use of firearms and many are marksmen. And yet we are sitting ducks should a devout Muslim enter the building. It is asinine that our servicemen do not at least the option of wearing a sidearm.

[FES0844]

“Few GI’s tried to stop him”

He was one of them. They probably couldn’t believe what was happening. Hang the traitor.

[TheWriterTX]

Exactly. The disbelief factor kicked in, which can be paralyzing. Read "The Survivor's Club" for a detailed review of survivability in extreme situations.

This, for even combat veterans, was an extraordinary situation.

It certainly didn't help that NONE of these folks had their weapons on them, thanks to ridiculous rules and regs. Made them (like our kids in "gun free zones") walking targets.

[TheWriterTX]

Exactly. The disbelief factor kicked in, which can be paralyzing. Read "The Survivor's Club" for a detailed review of survivability in extreme situations.

This, for even combat veterans, was an extraordinary situation.

It certainly didn't help that NONE of these folks had their weapons on them, thanks to ridiculous rules and regs. Made them (like our kids in "gun free zones") walking targets.

[TheWriterTX]

Exactly. The disbelief factor kicked in, which can be paralyzing. Read "The Survivor's Club" for a detailed review of survivability in extreme situations.

This, for even combat veterans, was an extraordinary situation.

It certainly didn't help that NONE of these folks had their weapons on them, thanks to ridiculous rules and regs. Made them (like our kids in "gun free zones") walking targets.

[Humal]

The soldiers not being armed just floors me. How can soldiers NOT be armed?? Had they been, there would have been a whole different out-come to this horrible situation. If they haven't changed this rule, why not??

[Never on my watch]

That’s worth repeating... Nevermind, you did. ;)

[CharlesWayneCT]

Yes, soldiers are not trained on how to fight without being allowed to have weapons.

If they had been armed, the guy would have been down long before all those people were killed.

But you can’t have weapons on base, because some crazy guy might start shooting people. /sarc

[Never on my watch]

I think it is shameful that our soldiers are force to wait for civilian police to protect them.

Folding chairs, paperweights, and letter openers are not sufficient weapons. (I'll bet letter openers are technically prohibited)