Army:No single action could have prevented Fort Hood killing

Discussion in 'In the News' started by tmoore912, Nov 10, 2010.

  1. tmoore912

    tmoore912 Just a Man

    6,028
    157
    63
    Army: No single action could have prevented Fort Hood killings
    From Charley Keyes, CNN Senior Producer November 9, 2010 8:57 p.m. EST

    Link: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/09/army.f ... index.html


    They left something out.....................Allow all personnel to wear firearms while on base!
     
  2. drtybykr

    drtybykr New Member

    2,823
    1
    0
    I can think of a couple single action that could have stopped the shooting.

    [​IMG]
     

  3. Glocker

    Glocker New Member

    1,841
    0
    0
    Totally agree, tmoore912!

    How is it that our armed forces aren't allowed to carry weapons on base???

    What kind of handicapped thought process was behind that decision??? :screwy:
     
  4. 175FO

    175FO Member

    908
    17
    18
    Not only could carrying guns have prevented the shooting, there are numerous other ways it could have been prevented.

    They had evidence of him communicating with radical Islamists, how about better monitoring and sharing of information.

    but yeah, it doesn't make any sense at all that I can go on post and sign out a gun and go to the range with my unit, but I cannot carry a personally owned firearm on post. I mean Major Hassan could have easily waited for a trip to the range to conduct his attack, but that would have given the advantage to all the other soldiers who would have been shooting back at him.
     
  5. tmoore912

    tmoore912 Just a Man

    6,028
    157
    63
    This is governmental code speak for more BIG Government. A single military member carrying a personal sidearm could have taken care of this. Might not have prevented it, but surely would have caused less loss of life.
     
  6. Fallschirmjäger

    Fallschirmjäger I watch the watchers

    12,835
    62
    48
    Historically, militaries have been a bit ..... reticent, about allowing their press-gangs, shanghaied swabbies, and draftee's to have access to weapons with which they might harm themselves or the officers appointed above them. Although we like to think of our military members as professionals, we have to remember that many are professional typists, file clerks, mortuary assistants, electronics technicians, and truck drivers, not face-shooters. Would that it were otherwise, but militaries are more a cross-section of society than a particular segment.
     
  7. EJR914

    EJR914 Cheezburger Operator

    44,830
    186
    63
    I couldn't agree more. Some "Single Action" 1911's would have done the job, just fine!
     
  8. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,014
    1,419
    113
    Who should be able to carry.
     
  9. Phil1979

    Phil1979 Member Georgia Carry

    11,374
    555
    113
    And of course, those politically correct fools are liars...as usual.

    They could have kicked Nidal Malik Hasan out of the military after he gave a presentation to other psychiatrists, where he said that non-muslims would go to hell, be decapitated, set on fire, etc..., and also defended suicide bombings.

    Kicking him out at that point would have been one thing, wouldn't it?

    But they were afraid to do so! Proof that political correctness literally kills.
     
  10. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    27,331
    612
    113
    If soldiers had been "allowed" (but not required) to carry loaded guns for self-defense on quiet U.S. Army installations in the USA, how many soldiers would?
    Would this terrorist-in-an-Army uniform have faced a hundred armed adversaries, or at most a couple of them?
    Could he have shot a dozen people before being taken down himself? Probably.
    So he could still have gone on a shooting spree.
    The only thing is, he might have racked-up a lower body count of victims.
     
  11. smn

    smn Active Member

    4,106
    10
    38
    And a trial wouldn't be necessary had he died of lead poisoning.
     
  12. 175FO

    175FO Member

    908
    17
    18
    I believe the number would be somewhat proportionate to the number of regular citizens who carry loaded guns for self-defense, perhaps slightly higher in number. So yes you are right he probably could still have gone on a shooting spree, but if there were just one soldier carrying a loaded weapon nearby the body count could have been reduced. To me it makes no sense that some idiot checking IDs at the gate is able to carry a gun but a soldier cannot.
     
  13. CountryGun

    CountryGun New Member

    7,594
    0
    0
    Prior to Clinton, most senior NCO's, and most officers carried or had one in their desk drawer. The Ft Hood massacre would not have been as devastating prior to Clinton.
     
  14. phantoms

    phantoms Senior Mumbler

    6,138
    167
    63
    I tend to agree. Didn't it come to light that the Military had several indications in advance that something was amiss with Hasan and not act on any of them? :screwy: