I'm sitting in the terminal at Houston Hobby listening to the CNN broadcast on the TV. The liberals, both MSM and their guests are wringing their hands over what to do to stop these "mass shootings." Solutions recommended so far are to review the mental health records of the 10,000 people that come and go each day, in and out of Ft. hood. Another says to stop and search every vehicle and person for weapons. Another questions whether the gun used in the crime by Specialist Lopez was purchased legally. Yet another questions the lessons learned from the last Islamo-fascist attack at Ft. Hood and whether the Army post commander did an adequate job of providing security for every one on the post. Surprisingly (not), not a single MSM anchor or guest questioned the policy of forbidding individual exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to life on the post.

Personal responsibility for one's own protection is as foreign to a liberal's thought process as is the idea that intentional abortion (in every case and situation) is the murder of an unborn child.

It's astounding that US Military SOLDIERS on a military base, have to call for help when there's an active shooter. There are literally thousands of individuals qualified to carry a weapon, and no one to respond.

I can understand them not allowing folks to carry their service weapon around full time - been there and understand it. What I can't understand is that they won't allow soldiers who have qualified for concealed carry on the civilian side as well as qualified in weapons on the military side to carry concealed on base.

For heaven's sake, at least let guys licensed for concealed carry in the state the base is in carry ON THE BASE!!


And the big thing I note again, is that yet another mass shooting occurred where the shooter has been on anti-depressants. And the media is silent. Not even talk about looking for a link. Is it the anti-depressants causing it, or is it just very likely that folks who do this crap will already be on them?

Anti- depressants involved in most mass shootings. Don't hear about it much at all.
I see no reason to watch network news. Sometimes I have it on with no sound.

anti gun libs will call for a ban on personal guns on base. No wait, that is already in effect. Hmmmmmmmm

Yes, this! ^

We need more gun free zones dammit!

Ding,ding,ding. Winner!

Yeah, and see how well it worked

When will they learn that when it comes to active shooters, the ONLY response is another shooter going active on his arse????

I heard one guy reply that making all soldiers turn in their weapons upon entering a military base, is about the same making all police turn in their weapons upon entering a police station.

All bases have MP's or SP's yet they are used like security guards instead of enforcement! Dependent upon the base commander and at his discretion he can and will limit their authority as they see fit. This can mean not doing checks, not carrying firearms, ect. I recently visited a base where the soldiers who are on "disciplinary" are not armed and merely check a person's ID! Yes they are usually working with fellow soldiers who are armed but in the vicinity making them useless. Not ideal at all!

What advantage is there for a soldier or Marine to have to have a CCW before they can carry their service handgun on base?

None, to the lawful and the just. Plenty to the unlawful and the government.

These MP were armed. In fact reports are that an MP came up to the shooter and that's when he shot himself.
Took a while to get to his location but the MP were the ones to stop this act.

Their answer will be for more enhanced background checks and more accessibility to medical records. Expect every doctor visit to include 'Do you ever feel sad or depressed'?

Yep.

Troops come home from a war zone and someone decides "you came from a combat zone, you must need these", hands them a bag of pills and says we will check on you soon.

It's because the notion of self-determinism, or self defense, and a solution to anything without dependency on government, or some rule, or procedure,is completely foreign to them.This is the sort of thing,in their misguided minds, for which government must find a solution. It cannot be left to the individual,they think.

If they expect the government to feed them if they are hungry,take care of them for free when they are sick, give them money when they don't work,how can we expect them to ever take responsibility for something as unpleasant and fundamental as defending themselves?

They are uncomfortable in the presence of those capable of doing so themselves.This exposes their own insecurities and fears.... So they discredit those people and the institutions that enable them, like the 2nd amendment.

Bullseye.

Time to Repeal Gun-Free Zones!
�It really doesn�t matter, when somebody shows up at a place, why they�re trying to kill people,� Erich Pratt, the group�s director of communications, told MSNBC. �The important thing is that people be able to protect themselves.�

Yesterday�s tragic shooting at Ft. Hood raises the question once again: How many more lives must perish before Congress repeals the ban on service members carrying guns?

We now know that Ivan Lopez, an Iraq War veteran, brought a .45 caliber semi-automatic handgun onto Ft. Hood yesterday and killed three other people, before killing himself.

Fox News reports that the rampage ended when a female MP drew her weapon, causing Lopez to take his own life.

It was previous base shootings like this one that prompted Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) to introduce H.R. 3199 last year, a bill to repeal the ban on carrying firearms on military bases.

Rep. Stockman blasted the glaring double-standard that keeps our servicemen disarmed.

�Why are civilians at a restaurant allowed to defend themselves but soldiers trained in firearms aren�t?� Stockman asked. �Why can�t we extend common sense gun laws like open carry to our soldiers?�

Ret. Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford -- who survived the 2009 Ft. Hood shooting, despite being shot 7 times by Nidal Hasan -- shocked an MSNBC host today when he said �I think more guns� is the answer.

�Had it been where other service members [had] guns or weapons on them at that time,� Sgt. Lunsford said, �I don�t think [Lopez] would have reacted the way that he was reacting.�

It is imperative that gun owners urge their Representatives to cosponsor H.R. 3199. Every time we repeal another gun-free zone, we take away another killing zone that the Left can use to clamor for gun control.

Click here to send a message to your Representative and insist that he cosponsor H.R. 3199!

To be sure, the political Left has spent the entire day trying to exploit this tragedy in hopes of resurrecting calls for gun control.

Should we ban those on anxiety meds? How about servicemen with PTSD? What about just anyone who is seeking psychiatric counseling?

These are the questions that MSNBC hosts have raised today. But over and over again, even their own liberal guests continue to shoot down the idea that society can accurately predict which non-violent individuals are likely to commit violence in the future:

* Former FBI agent and criminal profiler, Clint Van Zandt: �There is no real litmus test for who�s going to commit violence.�

* NBC reporter Jim Miklaszewski: �[Psychologists] saw no sign of likely violence or suicidal tendencies from [Ivan] Lopez.�

* Dr. Devi Nampiaparampil, a NYU professor: �PTSD by itself, it doesn�t make people violent.�

So even though gun grabbers are trying to use tragedies like this to expand gun laws -- making them even more draconian -- the dirty little secret among the �intelligencia� is that background checks are doomed to fail:

* Remember Adam Lanza at Newtown, Connecticut? He stole his firearms from his mother, whom he murdered.

* Or how about the Clackamas Mall shooter? He stole his AR-15, just as Lanza (one week later) would steal his firearms.

* Then there was the James Holmes at the Aurora theater in Colorado. He passed two background checks.

* Or how about Jared Loughner in Tucson, Arizona? He passed a background check.

No wonder that America�s police officers, by a 2-to-1 margin, support concealed carry as the answer to large scale shootings -- as compared to expanding mental health checks for gun buyers. See pg 6

�Saving lives by allowing trained soldiers to carry firearms should be an easy fix,� said Rep. Stockman. �No reasonable person can oppose that.�

ACTION: Urge your Representative to cosponsor H.R. 3199, the Safe Military Bases Act; and thank those who already have. By using the GOA Engage feature -- and inputting your address -- the appropriate message will be selected, based on whether your Rep. has cosponsored the bill.

REPS. TO THANK FOR ALREADY COSPONSORING H.R. 3199:

Rep Bentivolio, Kerry L. [MI-11]

Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1]

Rep Burgess, Michael C. [TX-26]

Rep Farenthold, Blake [TX-27]

Rep Gohmert, Louie [TX-1]

Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4]

Rep LaMalfa, Doug [CA-1]

Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1]

Rep Olson, Pete [TX-22]

Rep Posey, Bill [FL-8]

Rep Stockman, Steve [chief sponsor]

Rep Stutzman, Marlin A. [IN-3]

Rep Weber, Randy K. Sr. [TX-14]

P.S. It's time to put an end to the dangerous gun ban on military bases. Click here to help GOA reach out to more gun owners so we can increase the pressure on politicians in Washington.

When I was active duty that was a standard question for every doc visit. I retired 3 years ago.

Astounding is right. Shameful, even.

I didn't state my position well. If a base commander wants to allow certain personnel to carry, that's obvious to me that it should be allowed. On the other hand, he should also have the right to ban the carry of service weapons by anybody he wants to. But anybody who is licensed to carry concealed off base should as a matter of policy be allowed to carry concealed on base, barring special circumstances.

I haven't looked it up myself, but news reports here in Oklahoma state it is DOD policy that makes our bases gun-free zones. Also said that servicemen my own firearms on base, but they must register them.

Amazing. The very lads who protect and defend the Constitution can't even exercise their Constitutional rights.

10-4 Okie! I agree 100%.
Our service personnel are being denied a RIGHT they are working to defend - can anyone say "infringed"?

Mark

Like the last time it happened in a so-called gun-free zone.

This is spot on! Thank you

Yep....

I don't understand it at all. If someone in the military doesn't know how to safely handle a firearm, then he or she should receive additional training. If they are to stupid to train, or too careless to trust, then they should get a discharge.

Why not issue them firearms (rifle and a pistol) when they complete basic and make them keep them until they are discharged. Tell them that they have to have one or the other on them at all times. They would be a lot more familiar with the firearms and likely would have less "unexpected discharges" when they get shipped to a combat zone. Heck, give them the option to keep it after they are discharged, they have earned it.

It is not feasible for each and every member to have a weapon at all times. Imagine trying to load bombs, 14 ft up a ladder, inside a already tight bomb bay.

Everyone is qualified, and maintains qualification, that does not mean we all need to carry service weapons at all times. Now, if one chose to carry a personal weapon, it should be allowed.

Dorm/barracks residents are not even allowed to keep them in their rooms. They must be kept at the armory. And families on base must register their private firearms with the armory, after a brief from the CC and Shirt!




It is asked for each and every visit.

I'm guessing the Military will now form a ARMY SWAT TEAM , and call them Army Rangers .

I wouldn't want the majority of enlisted folks walking around with a gun on base; too many hotheads.

Probably not any officers that are hot heads.

If the base commander thought he just had to limit carry on base, then limit it to SNCOs and above.

I knew quite a few OFFICERS that were just goofy and would not want to be within 2 miles of them with a firearm on their person.

Yup. I wouldn't want some of the characters I served with carrying. Not just for the malcontents but the idiots. One guy I knew caught a ricochet in the butt when a fellow MP got bored on duty and started playing with his pistol. (Not his gun at least. )

Well here in Wyoming we can carry concealed without a ccw license. The media was wring their hands saying with all the armed people it would not be safe anywhere. There would be gun fights in the grocery stores, eating joints, on the streets. A blood bath. Hasn't happened. I think there needs to be more CCW carriers on bases and advertised there are armed people on base.

The military (army is my first hand experience) isn't about training somebody how to safely handle a firearm.

It's about teaching people to kill other people.

Preferably without killing anybody on your own side, but that part isn't emphasized as much. Gun safety beyond clearing your weapon (and you'd be amazed how often THAT can't be done properly) isn't a major topic.
Don't put your finger on the trigger until you're ready to fire? Yeah, right.
Don't aim at something you don't plan on killing? They plan on killing anything threatening.
Don't fire unless you know what's behind your target? Not so much...

Folks on bases have jobs. Long arms for everybody are a silly idea. And what do you do when somebody you issue a sidearm to goes wandering off base for lunch or an errand in a non-open carry city or state?

Easy solution with no unintended consequences is to allow concealed carry for any who have a concealed carry license in the state they are based in. And to allow the base commander to do whatever he wants for the rest. Want to set up roving patrols with M4's? Fine. Want to allow officers to carry side arms on base? Fine. Want to set up machinegun nests with SAW's? Fine. Heck, I remember walking the M60 gauntlet during payday in Basic and AIT.

Why do you suppose security was tighter than at your local bank where the big money is?

I've been on armed details on posts in the interest of crime prevention so there are alternatives. On one occasion a guy I was paired with pulled out a joint. Really kept my eye on him the next two hours. And the post commander is god, we had enough crap roll downhill from command through him to make our lives uncomfortable. One reason for all those fairly pointless details.

Makes me remember a bunch of Obama Look-a-Likes outside the NCO club on Campbell one night in 1972 messing around with a M-79 40 mm Grenada one had swiped of the range . One of the brilliant ones decided to rap it against the loading ramp killing himself and a couple of others and it Fragged the whole bunch of ten or more blowing off a couple of arms, putting the survivors in the hospital and knocking out bunch of windows in the part cars. I heard it go off and walked to the parking lot bodies laying every where . I couldn't help but laugh . Us white boys called the NCO Club Little Africa, nothing but Black there 90% of the time and nothing but Black downs in the blast area.

The easy solution would be to disbanded the Army then when with have a none resolvable problem with someone we just nuke them.

The easy solution would be to disbanded the Army then when with have a none resolvable problem with someone we just nuke them.