reclegend22;1600541 wrote:This sounds more like a case of a disgruntled employee to me. Just saw a story where CNN interviewed an anonymous soldier on the base who called Fort Hood "a black hole" that sucks the life out of you. The soldier added that the leadership on the base is in disarray and the general mood within the barracks is devoid of hope. Sounds like the first thing Fort Hood should do moving forward is monitor that soldier.

You can probably say this about any command or any base. There is a good percentage of people who bitch about everything no matter how good or bad the command is.

Ytowngirlinfla;1600994 wrote:You can probably say this about any command or any base. There is a good percentage of people who bitch about everything no matter how good or bad the command is.

Yeah....I wonder how many people CNN had to talk to before they got that comment (assuming said "anonymous" soldier actually exists).

HighRoller74;1600733 wrote:So it can be easier for this type of thing to happen?

Voted for Obama. Twice I'm guessing.

Illogical bullshit

bases_loaded;1601122 wrote:Voted for Obama. Twice I'm guessing.

Illogical bullshit

False. Good try though.

What's illogical about it?

If all members of the military were able to carry weapons on base, you can be assured there would be 5-6 of these type things happening every year. Maybe the shootings wouldn't last as long, but would be greater numbers.

You get teenagers, or young adults who can be highly emotional, (and that's not even counting the soldiers who've been deployed) walking around fully armed is a recipe for disaster.

As I said in another post, all for MPs and Higher ranked members to be armed, but not every member.

So how is that different than your every day citizen who is allowed to carry on a daily basis? Why am I, a civilian, allowed and trusted to carry in my home, in my town, in my grocery, at my work, while trained military aren't capable of handling the responsibility of carrying on their base?

Your argument makes no sense.

TedSheckler;1601132 wrote:So how is that different than your every day citizen who is allowed to carry on a daily basis? Why am I, a civilian, allowed and trusted to carry in my home, in my town, in my grocery, at my work, while trained military aren't capable of handling the responsibility of carrying on their base?
.

While that's a really good argument, how hard would it be for, say, the Boston bomber to join the military and then walk onto the base and commit a mass shooting?

DeyDurkie5;1600933 wrote:I pay taxes like everyone else. I have never been arrested. I'd say I'm doing just fine old man.




I don't dog anything. I just don't like the sucking off of the military. I respect them but don't jerk them off. Simple as that

Ingratitude is a disgusting personal characteristic. All your tax paying and staying out of jail would mean nothing for our society if the men and some women of our military had not have laid their lives on the line.

TedSheckler;1601132 wrote:So how is that different than your every day citizen who is allowed to carry on a daily basis? Why am I, a civilian, allowed and trusted to carry in my home, in my town, in my grocery, at my work, while trained military aren't capable of handling the responsibility of carrying on their base?

Your argument makes no sense.

Gosh a ruddies I know this probably comes as a surprise to you but when you are in the military you do not have the same civil liberties as a civilian. You can not tell your sergeant to take this job and shove it. There is a true hierarchy of command.

gut;1601133 wrote:While that's a really good argument, how hard would it be for, say, the Boston bomber to join the military and then walk onto the base and commit a mass shooting?

You mean like Hasan did a few years ago? If someone wants to shoot up the place bad enough, they're going to find a way. It's a shame that it takes 15-20 minutes for someone with a firearm to get to the scene and force him to kill himself.

isadore;1601138 wrote:Gosh a ruddies I know this probably comes as a surprise to you but when you are in the military you do not have the same civil liberties as a civilian. You can not tell your sergeant to take this job and shove it. There is a true hierarchy of command.

WTF are you even talking about? I must have missed the post where I said they should disobey orders. My argument is to change the rules.

isadore;1601134 wrote:Ingratitude is a disgusting personal characteristic. All your tax paying and staying out of jail would mean nothing for our society if the men and some women of our military had not have laid their lives on the line.

Gosh a ruddies go fuck yourself!

isadore;1601134 wrote:...

Thread ruined.

http://www.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=22995&content=103115529&pageNum=-1

Linking the Fort Hood shooting to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder only hurts American service members struggling to process their war experiences and make their way back in the civilian world, Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer told FoxNews.com.

Meyer, a Marine who battled PTSD after coming home from Afghanistan, where he risked his life to recover the remains of four fallen brothers in arms, winced when he heard some reports attributing Army Spec. Ivan Lopez's Wednesday rampage to the condition. Lopez gunned down three fellow soldiers, wounded 16 and then killed himself when a military cop confronted him.


"Going out and shooting your own friends, your own people, that's not PTSD," Meyer, the youngest Medal of Honor recipient in history, told FoxNews.com. "I don't know what the word is for it. It's close to psychotic.


"PTSD does not put you in the mind set to go out and kill innocent people," Meyer, 25, added. "The media label this shooting PTSD, but if what that man did is PTSD, then I don't have it."

DeyDurkie5;1601165 wrote:Gosh a ruddies go fuck yourself!

obviously you can not handle the truth.

TedSheckler;1601149 wrote:You mean like Hasan did a few years ago? If someone wants to shoot up the place bad enough, they're going to find a way. It's a shame that it takes 15-20 minutes for someone with a firearm to get to the scene and force him to kill himself.



WTF are you even talking about? I must have missed the post where I said they should disobey orders. My argument is to change the rules.

The reason you " I, a civilian, allowed and trusted to carry in my home, in my town, in my grocery, at my work," is because of the 2nd amendment which is not applicable to them. Militaries through out the world have found it best not to have the bulk of their troops carry around weapons in non combat situations.

HighRoller74;1601127 wrote:False. Good try though.

What's illogical about it?

If all members of the military were able to carry weapons on base, you can be assured there would be 5-6 of these type things happening every year. Maybe the shootings wouldn't last as long, but would be greater numbers.

You get teenagers, or young adults who can be highly emotional, (and that's not even counting the soldiers who've been deployed) walking around fully armed is a recipe for disaster.

As I said in another post, all for MPs and Higher ranked members to be armed, but not every member.

This is what I had thought would happen when CCW was enacted widespread across the US. I thought that it may be a bad idea and we would see alot more spur of the moment shootings and that they would skyrocket because more people would have immediate access to a weapon. Without CCW there is a "cooling" off period where someone would ahve to go get the gun from home or whatever and would stop shootings.


but it hasnt happend that way.

CCW has been good, and proven lots of people wrong.


As for bases.........one would think it would work the same as CCW has and been pretty much a positive experience. I can see it going both ways.

I wonder what the avg age is for CCW across America. I am thinking it is a bit older than the avg age of people on a base.

I really dont know what would happen if soldiers on bases would be allowed with CCW. I would like to think it wouldnt increase shootings.