Im baaaack wrote: FOR DISCUSSION: Mark Levin asked a prescient question tonight on his show:
Why do we equip and train our military to use our weaponry, yet only trust them with it in some other place than their base?
What is the danger in having military men (*& women) armed on a base? If you think your men/*women are dangerous, why would you train them on the best weaponry there is?
That's a good question and it would be good to hear your thoughts on this.
Ahhh...because it's politically incorrect???
*women added by IB.
Nobody has a problem with a cop carrying off duty, but the military can't carry while on the job on their own base. Why is a cop somehow more trustworthy than a soldier who's probably had more training than the cop? Even someone who isn't in their right mind would probably avoid a mass murder plan when surrounded by armed and trained military... there's plenty of easier targets like movie theaters and shopping malls.
Now turn on MSNBC and watch them blame the gun, again, as usual.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
Back in the Cold War Days, there were big fears of Soviet special forces infiltrating NATO bases and the US wanted to arm the troops with something better than just pistols since the Russians would have body armor.
I guess that concern went away, time to worry again with Putin rising?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
FredHayek wrote: Back in the Cold War Days, there were big fears of Soviet special forces infiltrating NATO bases and the US wanted to arm the troops with something better than just pistols since the Russians would have body armor.
I guess that concern went away, time to worry again with Putin rising?
This incident and story has nothing to do with the Cold War, Russia or Putin... geeesh... sometimes I think you comment just for the sake of commenting... no matter if your comment has anything to do with the price of beans.
Another question...can active military get or do they need a CCW? If so, why could they not carry at work? This shooter knew he was entering a gun-free zone. Isn't this why we never hear of shooters at police stations?
FredHayek wrote: Back in the Cold War Days, there were big fears of Soviet special forces infiltrating NATO bases and the US wanted to arm the troops with something better than just pistols since the Russians would have body armor.
I guess that concern went away, time to worry again with Putin rising?
This incident and story has nothing to do with the Cold War, Russia or Putin... geeesh... sometimes I think you comment just for the sake of commenting... no matter if your comment has anything to do with the price of beans.
Actually it does. Gun free zones like schools and military bases have seen shootings in the past couple years, Newton, Fort Hood, etc. In all 50 states, Americans can carry concealed weapons while doing their daily activities. But you can't on military bases, even if you are a trained infantryman. Some bases even make soldiers store their private weapons in a central location. Think the shooters don't consider this when planning their massacres? I know I don't hear of many massacres at gun stores where both the customers and employees are armed.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
FredHayek wrote: Back in the Cold War Days, there were big fears of Soviet special forces infiltrating NATO bases and the US wanted to arm the troops with something better than just pistols since the Russians would have body armor.
I guess that concern went away, time to worry again with Putin rising?
This incident and story has nothing to do with the Cold War, Russia or Putin... geeesh... sometimes I think you comment just for the sake of commenting... no matter if your comment has anything to do with the price of beans.
Actually it does. Gun free zones like schools and military bases have seen shootings in the past couple years, Newton, Fort Hood, etc. In all 50 states, Americans can carry concealed weapons while doing their daily activities. But you can't on military bases, even if you are a trained infantryman. Some bases even make soldiers store their private weapons in a central location. Think the shooters don't consider this when planning their massacres? I know I don't hear of many massacres at gun stores where both the customers and employees are armed.
This story has to do with a mentally unstable person, who was undergoing treatment, the Navy and his contract employer never made the proper security connections about his history of anger problems and his family and friends ignore all of the apparent signs.
He was shooting at CIVILIAN employees of the Navy... not a bunch of Navy or other military personal. The proper security details were armed.
Get the story straight before you start commenting on it.
Civvie contractors and military personnel were not permitted to carry concealed on base.
The storyline that this guy was a loon and should have been shut down sooner is eerily like the Aurora theatre shooting. They had both sought out mental help.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
FredHayek wrote: Civvie contractors and military personnel were not permitted to carry concealed on base.
The storyline that this guy was a loon and should have been shut down sooner is eerily like the Aurora theatre shooting. They had both sought out mental help.
Since when are "civvie" contractors allowed to carry period? And yes... they should have been shut down sooner. This is the 4th situation we have seen this year that involved faulty security checks in our government... Snowden, Fort Hood, this incident and so on.
It's about time our government stops with the PC bullshite, stop being so lazy and properly run these agencies.
I have nothing against gun ownership, but the way this crappy-assed regime of ours are running things, the only option will be if we ALL are packing, exposed carry to work and play.
The shooter was a reservist......no active duty.....just like National Guard members.....that are now airlifting citizens from floodwaters. He is not entitled to VA help in that he had no service related disability....PTSD is BS for sheep consumption in this case.
Security at the Navy Yard was typical for a mostly civilian installations....about the same as Buckley FYI...this nutcase was a civilian with minimal military exposure.
Navy moved to the yard several years ago (from Crystal City) to reduce costs associated with the leases at Crystal City and pump up the yard area to help the DC poor with marginal jobs(another DC workfare exercise). Most of the real design and tech work is not conducted there.
Veterans chime in please. It appears the shooter got a general discharge and have a record of insubordination and other discipline problems. I thought a general discharge was pretty bad news and make it unlikley that they would hire you for the reserves or as a contractor? Was I wrong about this?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
