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

Skip to comments.

Fort Hood tightens restrictions on guns--the wrong response, too late?
chicago gun rights examiner ^ | Don Gwinn

Posted on 12/21/2009 3:55:24 AM PST by marktwain

Readers may not have noticed that there was news this week from Fort Hood, the scene of an evil attack in which 13 Americans were killed and 30 wounded by a U.S. Army officer turned traitor less than two months ago. It would be easy not to notice, since there seems to have been no national press reaction so far, but local news outlets are reporting new regulations. According to a story by Amanda Kim Stairrett of the Killeen Daily Herald, the new policy tightens gun regulations in three main areas. Military personnel who live on the installation and own privately-owned firearms must register those arms with their superiors, privately-owned firearms must now be stored in official arms rooms and checked out for use, and anyone who brings a privately-owned firearm onto Fort Hood for any reason must now register each firearm and then declare the firearm to security personnel before entering the base.

Lt. Gen. Robert Cone, who famously pointed out in November that the victims of Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan were unarmed because "we don't carry weapons here, this is our home," signed the order as base commander. No one at Fort Hood or the U.S. Army seems to be admitting officially that the policy is a response to the Nov. 5th attack, but the timing leaves little doubt. The question is, does this response make sense? Does it, in other words, make the next attack easier to stop? Certainly, from the point of view of the U.S. Army, anything that gives the commanders more data and more control over their soldiers will be seen as a good thing. But three important questions remain:

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


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: army; banglist; examiner; fthood; gun
A very stupid policy that should be reversed. They should be encouraging private arms use and encouraging proficient soldiers to carry sidearms continuously, as in Israel.
1 posted on 12/21/2009 3:55:25 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The real reasons for the murders will not be addressed. Ever.


2 posted on 12/21/2009 4:01:01 AM PST by Diogenesis ("Those who go below the surface do so at their peril" - Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I smell a commie liberal rat at the core of this stupid rule.
Military personnel should be required to be armed at all times while on the base.


3 posted on 12/21/2009 4:02:50 AM PST by BuffaloJack (Hoax and Chains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Exactly. Assume X wishes to do harm - does X go somewhere no person is armed or, in the opposite, anyone (everyone) is or can be armed? Eric “I want to destroy the country more than my Kenyan Poseur does” Holder must have imposed this policy. These phuks must be eliminated - politically speaking, of course.


4 posted on 12/21/2009 4:04:13 AM PST by MarkT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

A victory for the enemy indeed. Now more of our troops can be killed on our own soil.


5 posted on 12/21/2009 4:04:42 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I am not commenting of Ft Hood but every post that I know of has had similar rules for years.

If you live on post it has to be registered with the PMO. If you live in the barracks it has to be kept in the Arms Room.

Also there is no concealed carry on post.

The only thing that appears new is the requirement to declair a weapon. I transport weapon and ammo on post whenever I go shooting at the local military range. If asked I would say “Yes, I have a weapon and ammo and am on the way to the range” but to pull up to the guard and say “hey Dude I got a gun”. Hmmm?

6 posted on 12/21/2009 4:04:53 AM PST by PeteB570 (NRA - Life member and Black Rifle owner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeteB570

A major difference is for soldiers who live *off post* to register their personal arms on post. This is a very unusual requirement that has been quite rare in the past.


7 posted on 12/21/2009 4:08:15 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

“We don’t carry weapons here, this is our home”?


Great example of non sequiter!


8 posted on 12/21/2009 4:16:41 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"A major difference is for soldiers who live *off post* to register their personal arms on post. This is a very unusual requirement that has been quite rare in the past."

I read the article to say that such soldiers only have to declare their private weapons if they bring them on post. Is that correct?

9 posted on 12/21/2009 4:19:48 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Unbelievable! Obviously, the only PC solution was to be equally unfair to everyone. However, Islamic Terrorist infiltrators and all others considering mass executions must now check their weapons and ammo at the gate before comming onto Ft. Hood. Any soldier caught protecting himself with a gun in the middle of a murderous terrorist attack will severly delt with and dishonorably discharged. There, we fixed that gapping hole in security.

Why not give the MPs one bullet each to carry in their front pocket too. Oh yeah, I forgot, they had to call a local police station to get some help for the ARMY BASE when the terrorist started shooting, so they don’t have any guns either. MAKE SURE THE MEDIA BROADCASTS THIS NUGGET TO OUR AL QAEDA FRIENDS OVERSEAS — Army bases in the USA are soft targets. Gee, maybe they won’t even have any guns in Thompson, IL!

Pretty soon soldiers will be hugging and skipping hand-in-hand when ‘Don’t Ask -Don’t Tell’ gets repealed by Satan’s Administration in D.C.! Any soldier caught not Butt F*ing his fireteam will be placed on trial in NY.

Bye Bye America. Thanks for the memories!


10 posted on 12/21/2009 4:22:07 AM PST by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

They might as well put a “Rape Me” sign on the installation for tempted terrorists to attack.

Any such attack would have warranted a code red with all soldiers now obligated to walk with rifles lock and loaded on installations.


11 posted on 12/21/2009 4:25:18 AM PST by JudgemAll (control freaks, their world & their problem with my gun and my protecting my private party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Any policy change on stopping the insane political correctness that allowed this Muslim terrorist to get as far as he did in the Army?


12 posted on 12/21/2009 4:28:15 AM PST by Bulldawg Fan (Victory is the last thing Murtha and his fellow Defeatists want.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Is Fort Hood being converted over to a Salvation Army Post?


13 posted on 12/21/2009 4:41:33 AM PST by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
“Military personnel (and Civilians entering the post) who live on the installation and own privately-owned firearms must register those arms with their superiors”

This was in effect BEFORE the *massacre*.

I believe the expanded rules are new especially, in regards to off post housing.

14 posted on 12/21/2009 4:50:16 AM PST by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

You’ve got to be kidding. Yep, that’s right. Good soldiers will be unarmed and terrorists will have free reign to blast their way into any base. Brilliant. Just brilliant. When you’ve lost the military, what do you have.


15 posted on 12/21/2009 4:52:50 AM PST by bgill (The framers of the US Constitution established an entire federal government in 18 pages.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Meanwhile....

Penetration Even At The Pentagon: Muslim Spies Setting Muslim Policy

16 posted on 12/21/2009 4:53:15 AM PST by mewzilla (Rick Santelli for Man of the Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
A major difference is for soldiers who live *off post* to register their personal arms on post.

I'd like to see that enforced at a stateside installation.

17 posted on 12/21/2009 5:34:13 AM PST by Sarajevo (You're jealous because the voices only talk to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

They’re saying guns in the hands of the military stateside is dangerous! I hope so and that they don’t lose that dangerous profile when they get to the battlefield!


18 posted on 12/21/2009 6:01:16 AM PST by Georgia1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
"We don’t carry weapons here, this is our home”? Great example of non sequiter!

This guy is a general. What a cry baby.

Most liberals suffer from similar logic impairment. The things they say are so absurd it defies understanding. And this fellow is in charge of a base. The buck stops there. He's responsible. His failure to address reality resulted in this not hard to foresee mass murder.

19 posted on 12/21/2009 6:09:24 AM PST by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Restrictions on guns? Typical stupid liberal response. Whenever someone whose head is full of liberal mush goes out and shoots innocent people, liberals can only think of restricting guns. If liberals had anything but oatmeal in their heads, they would restrict the fanatics who believe it’s perfectly OK to kill innocents.


20 posted on 12/21/2009 6:14:20 AM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack

But only the police and military should have guns...

Oh, wait.


21 posted on 12/21/2009 6:16:21 AM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The unarmed thing is ridiculous. Here, a 10 minute mini-doc on Ft. Hood. I wonder what the Vietnam Vet that's in it would have to say. LOL.
22 posted on 12/21/2009 6:37:12 AM PST by AnnaZ (I keep 2 magnums in my desk.One's a gun and I keep it loaded.Other's a bottle and it keeps me loaded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
They should be encouraging private arms use and encouraging proficient soldiers to carry sidearms continuously, as in Israel.

Spot on correct. Like all domestic laws this one requires voluntary compliance to be effective. Would a terrorist like Hassan worry about this or would he be gleeful because it just insures more helpless targets for him?

23 posted on 12/21/2009 6:42:39 AM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting

I’m in my home right now but you can be sure it is well protected! There is no absolute sanctuary, as long as madmen exist there will be a need for effective self defense.


24 posted on 12/21/2009 7:25:14 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I hope all our troops in Afghanistan are given the necessary carry permits.


25 posted on 12/21/2009 8:38:30 AM PST by Malesherbes (Sauve Qui Peut)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Caution - Morons At Work.


26 posted on 12/22/2009 5:00:01 AM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Oh so f—king stupid, stupid, stupid!!! How would these new rules prevented Hassan? The brass are so gun shy always. Barf.


27 posted on 12/22/2009 9:07:40 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting

I wasn’t always the biggest Col. Hackworth fan, but his term “Perfumed Prince” is so apt here.


28 posted on 12/22/2009 9:10:40 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
A major difference is for soldiers who live *off post* to register their personal arms on post. This is a very unusual requirement that has been quite rare in the past.

As far as I can tell, this is required only when transporting their personal arms on post.

29 posted on 12/22/2009 9:14:10 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | 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