Posted on 09/17/2013 12:14:05 PM PDT by pansgold
It take a gun to stop a crazy with a gun and until someone gets there and locates the killer, the madman will continue to kill.
The FBI is now saying yesterday's shootings were caused by a lone gunman armed with a single shotgun. The murderer armed himself with the handgun from an armed security guard had shot but there was no AR-15 used as incorrectly reported.he s
(Excerpt) Read more at gunsnfreedom.com ...
I carry. Every day. There’s a bunch of us out here that take the issue pretty seriously.
To make matters worse we’re trying to hide our military as if they were something to be ashamed of. Just this spring a Michigan high school was sent into lockdown because a man in military style fatigues was seen walking down the hall.
The man in fatigues turned out to be a recent graduate of the school who happened to be stationed at the nearby Selfridge ANG base. He was stopping to say hi to his old teachers and to show off a little in uniform. He wasn’t even armed and it still caused a panic.
We have 73 Federal armed forces —not just FBI, BATF.
Now it’s Dept of Education, and even the Library of Congress has armed cops —the rise of Warrior Cops.
MEANWHILE NO GUNS ON *MILITARY BASES*..?
See, these two things are part of the SAME problem —guns going to people who do NOT need them, and NOT going to people do DO need them.
“I carry. Every day. There’s a bunch of us out here that take the issue pretty seriously.”
Openly? If so, I offer you my humble thanks. There are very few of us who do.
That would require common sense which is not so common anymore.
There were hundreds of EO's W should have overturned. The first thing Reagan did when he took office was to fix the EO mess that was left behind by Carter.
W signed everything. His veto record is appalling.
Because he agreed that disarming military personnel on base was a good idea.
“Everyone wants to keep people safe – and no one denies Mr. Clinton’s good intentions.”
Damn the liberals and their “good intentions”. Has there EVER been a liberal “good intention” that hasn’t turned out bad? I can’t think of one. That is why it is a good bet to see what the liberals want and do the opposite.
Served from 1967 to 1969.
At Ft. Dix, Ft. Lewis and duty stations in Germany firearms were only carried while on guard duty (with ammo) and Field training exercises with blanks,qualification with live ammo, or checked out of the arms room for cleaning.
Privately owned firearms were kept locked in the arms room and only released to the owner with company commander’s approval for target shooting, hunting, change of duty station, or end of enlistment to take home.
There were 2 incidents at Ft. Lewis where soldiers on guard duty with live ammo 1). shot himself in the head either accidentally while playing with the pistol or committed suicide and 2). a round from an “unloaded” .45 was discharged inside the guard quarters passing through a bunk mattress and lodging in a trooper’s leg.
Not sure that everybody on post should be carrying firearms with live ammo when not in a combat zone is a good solution to on base shootings
No, it went out of business but they believe that they are competent enough to run a national healthcare system.
Probably because:
1. No one asked him (43) to.
2. All the flag officers said not to.
When I was on active duty in the early 1990’s you had to store personal arms and ammunition in the unit arms room if you were in barracks. Do not know about quarters.
When I went back to active duty in 2012, we were told not to bring personal arms. If we did they would be registered and would have to be stored at the Rod and Gun Club. This is one reason many active duty personnel live off post.
Without that, it's doomed.
When I was in Viet Nam, once we came back from a patrol (that could last 15 to 20 days) we would have to leave our weapons in our tents. We could not carry weapons on base.
While in the field, we could not have a round in the chamber (they did random checks and would punish any that they caught).
I always wondered why I could be trusted with a loaded gun in the field but not at the base (which by the way came under attack on a regular basis). Sometimes people in authority are just insane.
Just one of my great disappointments about Bush43 is that he did ZERO to clean up the Clinton mess-—and he could have cleaned up a few of his old Dad’s foofaroos while he was at it. Bush43 owed us a cleanup of all the Clintoon appointees but he didn’t and that huge problem is still with us and getting worse. At some point we need a president with a large broom and the guts to sweep out a whole lot of pre-krap. Recent presidents have all held holy the dumbass stuff of their predecessors and that has got to stop.
Many times the guards have guns but no ammo. Depends on the threat condition and base.
When I was in there were numerous cases of bored guards playing with their guns and having negligent discharges.
While I generally agree with this. You must consider that firearms training is greatly improved, at least in the Army. Privates are issued their rifles early in basic training and blank ammo. They carry the rifles with them everywhere with a blank in the chamber. ND’s are frowned upon.
Then you take this 19 year old private and send him/her to Iraq/Afghanistan, issue them the basic load for their weapon(s) plus grenades, and make them carry the rifle or pistol every where they go (usually without a round in the chamber on the FOB). ND’s receive swift punishment.
After that you bring them back to the States and tell them it is not safe for them to have firearms in their possession.
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.