What’s happening to this heroic Navy officer from the Chattanooga shooting will make your blood BOIL

Allen West ^ | August 1, 2015 | Allen B. West

[wtd]

There are things which make you just upset, like the liberal progressive left and media accomplices’ rage over the shooting of a lion in Africa but abject disregard and disdain reference Planned Parenthood dismembering babies and selling their body parts.

But this story has me dog fighting mad and seriously pissed off.

As reported ten days ago by Western Journalism, “A Navy officer and Marine reportedly returned fire at the shooter who killed five service members in Chattanooga, Tenn., even though current policy does not permit military members to carry firearms on facilities such as those where the attack occurred.

The cold-blooded assault killed four Marines and one active-duty Navy reservist. The center’s commanding officer, Lt. Cmdr. Timothy White, used his personal firearm to engage the shooter during the attack, according to sources quoted in the Navy Times. A report from The Washington Post said that one of the Marines killed in the shooting might have been carrying a 9 mm Glock and possibly returned fire on the shooter.

[rey]

This is why I left the Marine Corps; that patrolling in Beirut with unloaded weapons was nuts.

[jsanders2001]

I get to meet Allen West here in a few weeks...: )

[broken_arrow1]

Democrats would prefer to just send them into battle with one carrying an empty weapon and one with a full magaine like Stalin did in WWII (sarc).

[jagusafr]

Couple of comments here:

As a former Air Force prosecutor, Area Defense Counsel and Circuit Defense Counsel, I see this going one of a couple ways:

1. The Navy cedes jurisdiction to the DOJ and they prosecute him in federal district court. Not likely, as DOD and DOJ don’t work and play that well together in the criminal area.

2. The Navy cedes jurisdiction to the Chattanooga district attorney - again, not likely, because there were no “victims” of his carrying the weapon, and we don’t know whether he had a CHL so that he was in fact LAWFULLY carrying. Oh, and if it’s a “federal facility”, the DA has no jurisdiction. Navy can’t have its cake and eat it too.

3. If he’s prosecuted under Art. 92, disobeying a lawful general regulation, there’s a distinct possibility of a conviction.

4. If they go with Art 134, service-discrediting conduct or good order and discipline, it’s a lot tougher sell. If this hadn’t happened, nobody would ever know he had a weapon, and who the hell did he discredit? And his actions ENHANCE good order and discipline.

5. Courts martial are a bifurcated system: first guilt or innocence, then (if guilty finding) sentencing. The mitigation in sentencing in this case is a defense counsel’s dream: first, the “good soldier” defense - not knowing anything but what I’ve read, he’s a family man, was selected as the “best of the best” to be a recruiter. Next, he saved untold lives by his conduct and by being ready for the fight. Frankly, even if he’s found guilty, I see this as a very likely sentence of “no punishment”.

6. There are probably people just like me lining up to defend this guy at his CM for free.

Many think there’s no justice under the UCMJ - that’s just not so. What impedes justice is Whisky Delta SJAs who won’t tell the commander when a dog case is a dog case.

Colonel, USAFR

[usnavy_cop_retired]

I said when this info first hit that the Marines, and sailors would be subjected to a courts-martial. I am sad to say I was correct.

[NKP_Vet]

Good that someone returned fire on the lunatic, but I’m puzzled. Reports of the attack for days said the shooter rode by the recruiting office, stuck a rifle out the window and sprayed the plate glass door. That the ones killed were hit by bullets that came through the glass door. If that’s the case how did anyone return fire? Did he go through the front door, risking his life to return fire? None of this came out for weeks after the assault. I wonder why? Why did the media try to cover up what really happened?

[zot]

Amazing. Hopefully there will be someone in the chain of command who will realize that the officers did the right thing.

Hopefully.

[marktwain]

There has always been an exception to the rule of discharing a firearm if it is in defense of self or others.

I want to see this prosecution. Better it go forward and clear the air, either show the utter pusillanimous of this administration, or clear the Commander.

[The Great RJ]

Gee if the Muslim terrorist had survived the attack would he have had the book thrown at him because he had a gun in a “gun free zone”? This whole gun free zone is a joke if you believe that terrorists and armed crazies are going to abide by the sign.

[JD_UTDallas]

you are absolutely right, these tyrants call them what they really are will not respond to anything less than naked physical force from as mao said the barrel of a gun period full stop. nothing short of open armed rebellion will stop these people. stop kidding ourselves into believing otherwise. no convention of the states no letters or phone calls. we are in a civil war the sooner the American patriots come to terms with that fact the faster we can get this over with. make no mistake these tyrants are at war with the American people the sooner we the people accepts that the less lives will be lost, but make no mistake lives will be lost either by attacks from our enemies or the deaths of patriots in the face of tyranny. war is here accept it prepare for the next phase and be ready to die if necessary to uphold the constitution.

[Robert A Cook PE]

So, when the US military has orders to push US citizens into the trains (buses now) for removal to “re-education camps” .... who does this administration want in charge of the US troops and their weapons?

[onedoug]

Not in soetro’s chain of command. They’d be out, fast, and probably with loss of benefits.

[marktwain]

“Good that someone returned fire on the lunatic, but I’m puzzled. Reports of the attack for days said the shooter rode by the recruiting office, stuck a rifle out the window and sprayed the plate glass door. That the ones killed were hit by bullets that came through the glass door. If that’s the case how did anyone return fire? Did he go through the front door, risking his life to return fire? None of this came out for weeks after the assault. I wonder why? Why did the media try to cover up what really happened?”

Sorry, you are simply misinformed. The reports said, quite early, that he sprayed fire at the recruiting station, (where no one was even wounded), then drove about six miles to the NOSC (Naval Operations Support Center) where he killed four Marines.

Later a sailor also died, upping the total to five.

We also learned that very likely one Marine returned fire along with the NOSC Commander, both with personal sidearms.

I hope that helps clarify things for you.

It is easy to see how conspiracy stories are started.

[NKP_Vet]

Thanks for clarifying it. Any way the Navy has charged a sailor for returning fire. Welcome to the Twilight Zone, otherwise known as ObamaLand.

[marktwain]

We only have one unconfirmed report on that so far.

I fear that Allen West is being set up.

It is a serious thing. Believable? Unfortunately, with this administration, the charges are believable.

I still want it confirmed.

[Gay State Conservative]

I never ran afoul of the UCMJ during my stellar Army career but now that I have lots of free time I've recently become interested in courts-martial,even having glanced at certain parts of the Manual For Courts-Martial (a fun read for sure).
One thing I've wondered,in general,and wonder particularly in connection with any court martial that might result here is: do panel members,particularly junior ones,ever worry about repercussions from superiors if they take the “wrong” position during deliberations or,worse still,vote the “wrong” way on any of the charges at hand?

Also..any advice you might have would be helpful here:I've tried to attend courts-martial at an Air Force base in Massachusetts and a Navy installation in Connecticut and have been told each time that I cannot attend because I wouldn't be authorized to enter the installation itself.The MCM,issued *after* Fort Hood,clearly states (in Rule 806) that only in the most unusual situations can a civilian be denied permission to attend a court martial.Any thoughts/advice for me on this? Thanks!

[BlueLancer]

We get civilian spectators in our courts here on Fort Hood all of the time. Except for MRE 412 hearings (which are closed sessions held in sex assault-type cases) or for evidence requiring levels of security clearances, our courts-martial are pretty much always open hearings.

The military judge, during the voir dire .. or jury selection .. process, specifically asks each prospective panel member if they are capable of putting aside senior/junior aspects so as to be able to freely deliberate, especially if the questioning indicates that there is a chain-of-command senior/junior relationship between any of the members. Any senior member who would say that they would be likely to hold a junior's opinion as to the findings or sentence would, pretty much on level of certainty, be immediately released from service on the panel and sent back to their duties.

I've worked in military court's since 1978 and, over the years, have come to the conclusion that, if I had to be tried by any system out there, I would prefer to be tried by the military justice system .. with the protections offered by Article 32 and knowing that the panel members .. the jury .. on your case have been through what you have, have a similar background, and are intelligent enough to understand the evidence.

Of course, there is still a chance of wrongful conviction, but I truly believe that there's less chance of it in a court-martial than in your average county or district court. Notably, specifically since the big emphasis on prosecuting sexual assault/rape cases in the military began, most of the he said/she said type of cases that we've been getting have resulted in acquittals. Generally, it seems that military courts take the view that both parties are responsible for their actions and, if there's not some amount of evidence (or reasonable doubt) that there was force or violence involved in the assault/rape, it's not enough to convict. And they pay very close attention to claims of rape/sexual assualt where it takes the alleged victim days, weeks, or months to make the claim of the crime.

[JD_UTDallas]

that is the million dollar question, will the US military of which I am a 9 year veteran obey our oath to the constitution and the American people or do they chose to obey orders from the administration who when you look at the face value of everything they are doing makes sense if they are at war with jalf the American people makes absolutely perfect sense. people keep saying oh they are inept no they are not when you look at it from the point of view that everything they do is an attack on the citizens who they oppose it becomes clear they are at war with those citizens.

[jagusafr]

On the first question: there are different schools of thought, but generally there are instructions the judge reads to the panel before they retire for deliberations, including an admonition against he use of unlawful influence by any panel member.

On the second question, I’m not sure what current policy is, but the UCMJ still says a CM is a public proceeding and is only closed for the taking of classified evidence or highly sensitive testimony,AND must be reopened immediately afterward. I don’t know whether that section would trump a lack of authorization to enter the federal reservation.

[Gay State Conservative]

Thanks much for the info,folks.