Posted on 04/03/2014 6:53:51 AM PDT by Biggirl
Rep. Mike McCaul said Wednesday’s tragedy at Fort Hood is another reminder that members of the military should be able to carry concealed weapons on base. “I personally think, if you’re trained for combat, you ought to be able to carry a weapon,” the Texas Republican said on Fox News’s “The Kelly File” on Wednesday night in the wake of the shooting that left four dead and more than a dozen injure at the Texas military base.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
He’s wrong about “concealed” weapons on base. A standard issue .45 should be part of the required uniform of the day while on a Military base.
About time.
Might be hard for guys working on vehicles/aircraft to carry but at least maybe allow E-4/E-5 and above. Something...
A rather glaring fact about this incident, that is being overlooked by the media is this: Ivan did not ‘snap’ as many are concluding, he brought a firearm to his appointed place of duty and with pre-meditation, murdered his fellow soldiers.
ANYONE with a firearm would have given this person pause, either to not bring his firearm in the first place, or at the very least to have not drawn.
The law and base regulation prohibiting personal carry is both unconstitutional and, more importantly, immoral.
Great idea! Turn every base into 1880 Dodge or Tombstone? Get into a dispute, see me outside at noon. ;o) s/
All I can say is NSS!
The Bill Clinton law that allows all these soldiers to die should be removed.
You mean like all those bases in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are required to be armed.
If all it takes is a weapon to make people into murderers then why are so many knives sitting unused?
Most current military officers have been thoroughly indoctrinated that military members couldn’t handle being armed.
Also, how an a military base with unarmed soldiers defend itself from certain types of invasions.
Next, fire trucks with no access to water or ladders.
Police with no guns and only a flag to throw to cry foul.
Politically correct less smart or tiny people being used in emergency services for being the right sex or color instead of best for the job.
Perhaps a change in your insurance were you get bad insurance for 300% more.
All brought to you by Democrats.
You mean like all those bases in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are required to be armed............................................... Are we comparing an active war zone to a stateside base?? We have armed personnel on the base, they are called MPs. Its interesting to note that when there is any kind of a shooting on the base, the local “Police” arrive. Increase armed MP presence would be more appropriate. BTW, seen many knife fight victims as a 67H, they just don’t have the impact effect to be used by the MSM. They are out there but not news worthy.
Every mass shooting has happened in a gun free zone. There might just be a connection there.
Liberals hate to face the fact that Gun-Free Zones are always the target of these domestic terrorists, regardless of their motive.
Soldiers have not been allowed to carry on base long before Clinton; on an earlier thread on this topic many other former soldiers chimed in and we found it went back to at least before the Korean war. When I served (1983-1990) carry of personal was strictly prohibited at all duty stations, even the DMZ in Korea, which I thought was stupid at the time, given the immienent threat and numerous incidents on the Z. Issued weapons were kept under lock and key in the armory and issued to soldiers only upon order of the company commander. Live ammo was not issued except under very specialized circumstances.
There are thousands of civilian government employees, contractors and military spouses on Fort Hood - As a very first step, I think all of these people should be allowed to carry on post as long as they are permitted by state law to carry off post. I would also permit all off-duty soldiers to carry and I would leave the issue of carrying on duty to the discretion of commanders. That is just my humble ex-Army opinion!
Blunt fact: None of this crap was happening back when soldiers routinely carried weapons around on bases.
We used to carry a pistol when we pulled Staff Duty Officer at night and on weekends. That put one armed Officer in each battalion area.
Carrying a weapon on duty on a post is more of a hassle than people think. It isn’t like a policeman who brings his pistol from home to work. And you don’t just grab a weapon off the rack. You have to sign out a weapon from a secure arms room. You and the Armorer have to check the function of the weapon and agree on the serial number of the weapon. And don’t try to bring back a pistol with a different serial number or even different ammunition than what was issued. That’s a go-to-jail offense. And Lord help you if you get some dirt on the pistol and try to turn it back in. Unit Armorers don’t want to have to clean a weapon they didn’t use, so they are obligated to check the cleanliness of every weapon brought back. It has to be cleaned to their satisfaction. And if you tick off an Armorer, you can spend all day cleaning one pistol. And the Battalion Commander isn’t going to excuse you from your other duties just because “you don’t know how to take care of your weapon.” And invariably, some one will misplace a pistol, and then the real fun starts. The fear is that someone grabbed the pistol and is headed off post with it. So, the unit gets locked down. Everyone has to freeze in place until the pistol is found. No one can go home. This makes the person misplacing a pistol a pariah.
Carrying a government weapon on post can be a real hassle. And would Joe shoot his fellow Soldier on post if they got into an argument? Maybe. There is no good answer for this.
Not to be picky, but the current issue weapon is the 9mm. The military is thinking about going back to the M1911 .45 cal.
islamist CIC says, “No way”.
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.