He makes some good points..thought you'd find it interesting..
Peters is sounding more and more like an MSM outlet. Assault rifle? I never in my 27+ years of military service heard any sergeant say “Get your assault rifles men”
Is he back in the movies where Arnold S or Chuck Norris fires on fully auto with a 20 round mag killing everyone?
I prefer the Heathcock method, one shot, one kill.
I read those comments.
My take-away is that since so many soldiers are PTSD, certifiably muts, and one negative thought away from shooting up the base anyway....
Yeah. Better to keep the bases gun free.
........I saw both Peters and Hunts interviews from beginning to end. I was very surprised to hear them say what they said.
Maybe the solution is to cut it down the middle and allow more senior officers and non coms that pass some sort of psyche evaluation and go through some fairly rigorous training designed around the use of weapons on stateside bases rather than foreign battlefields. To be certain, those differences, particularly in the legal realm, are substantial.
Ironically though, my suggestion would not have helped re the Hidal mass murder. Hell, he was an Officer, and senior and a trained M.D. Psychologist himself.
Nevertheless, I do believe a lot of lives could be saved by increasing the number of responsible and armed people on these bases.
The stupidity of their statements is summed up here:
The soldiers… are not policemen. They are not trained to control a violent situation and de-escalate it.
They are trained to control a violent situation and end it.
All of the other comments these two make are fitting for the anti-gun cranks they are.
1. If our soldiers carry their loaded weapons at all times, that assassin yesterday wouldn’t have had a .45 caliber handgun, he would have had a loaded assault rifle.
Hard to hide an M4 - unlikely this would be the weapon of choice of these killers, else they'd be using them already ( anyone remember Connecticut?)
2. Soldiers wouldn’t want that. It would be an enormous hassle. Most soldiers aren’t steely-eyed killers. Most are clerks, intelligence analysts, truck drivers, mechanics. They’ve got real work to do and, you know? Carrying a loaded weapon around all the time is a burden. How would we like it if people carried assault weapons… in our workplace?
No one said make it mandatory for everyone to be armed - rather those who are qualified and competent should be allowed to be armed
3. Do we really want a soldier to have a loaded M16 on his shoulder if he’s having a marital spat? How about a suicidal soldier or one with suicidal thoughts or tendencies? Should he have a loaded weapon?
One of the worst professions for marriages is that of the police. Do we have policemen and women going postal in their station houses? No - I didn't think so.
And fourth, not least, when you have an incident like this, …you want trained responders who know what they’re doing. You don’t want every finance clerk on Fort Hood firing his M16 on rock and roll in every direction.
And these are military men? They trained their troops to behave in this way?
No - these is anti-gun hysteria on parade. The fact that these men served doesn't change that. Their comments are childish and more like something we'd be likely to hear from M.A.G.
There’s always going to be some a-hole out there claiming that all of our troops are incompetent amoral nut jobs. You shouldn’t be so eager to believe it.