Fort Hood Shooting - who needs a gun onbase?

imported post

DrMark wrote:

GMZ wrote:

...there is still the Title 18 that covers federal property to worry about.

Click to expand...

USC18s930 covers Federal facilities (buildings), not Federal property in general.

If one wasn't military, and stayed out of buildings, I don't know what they could be charged with.

Click to expand...

They could always get you with the Federal governments numerous, "Charge you with whatever we see fit, to protect others." bull crap. :banghead:

imported post

GMZ wrote:

Cracker wrote:

GMZ wrote:

This may or may not get me on some peoples nerves, and I dont really care, but I carry when I go on base.

ETA: I can see the VCDL update now: Who needs a gun on an Army base?

Click to expand...

Don't get caught.... Bad news if that happens. Most are gun free zones. Funny how the constitution gives us the RTK&BA yet you can't on federal property, go figure. Such a sad day, I have worked many days on the Hood, it's pretty easy to get just about anything on that base.

Click to expand...

I know. Im aware of the risks of being caught, but the risks outweigh being a victim. I take adequate precautions, thats all Ill say.

Click to expand...

Publically saying/bragging about breaking the law is not the best thing to do and is also a violation of the TOS on this message board.

imported post

A few questions that the news stories haven't answered; if this Major lived on post, did he live in the BOQ or in officer housing? Apparently, he was single, so odds are he was living in the Q or unaccompanied housing. Generally, on a military base, officers can keep registered firearms in their officer housing, although they are not supposed to carry them around. If staying in the Q, they are supposed to check firearms in at the armory, NOT keep them in their room. So the questions would be, where did he live? Were his guns registered? Since he was being investigated, did they intend to confiscate guns AND his computer?

What I expect to happen is the usual response from today's military; exactly the wrong thing. In short, they will now rescind their policy allowing personnel to keep firearms in on-post housing, and require all personal firearms to be kept off-post or in the armory, thus disarming families on post and even in the new public-private partnership housing areas outside the gates, and leaving those families unguarded. And I expect this policy to spread to the rest of the Army, and the Navy, Air Force, and even the Marines.

imported post

ed wrote:

Publically saying/bragging about breaking the law is not the best thing to do and is also a violation of the TOS on this message board.

Click to expand...

Very true, thanks for reminding us.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Doesn't the base commander already have the authority regarding weapons use on the military installation?

What's this gun free zone stuff? There are plenty of guns at Ft. Hood.

Can't you take your concerns about military regs through some channels or something?

Click to expand...

This was before I started carrying, but I seem to recall at my old guard base CHP holders were allowed to leave their guns locked in the car while on base.

imported post

I have taken guns onto and through a Marine base (Quantico) twice, Both times with an Armalite M15A2 Carbine and a 9mm handgun, both of which were in my trunk and unloaded (the handgun was my carry gun and the ammo was separate and in the trunk). The first time, I was just waved through the gate without a check other than the guard asking what my business was - I was going to Q-Town (Quantico is a town inside of and surrounded by the base).

The second time, I was directed to the side along with other non-DOD cars for an inspection. This was just before the start of the Iraq War in the spring of '03. I was asked if I had any other weapons in my car (the guard saw my small Syderco clip knife in my pocket. I told him there was a rifle and a handgun in my trunk whereby I was directed to stand to the front side of the car while they inspected my firearms. I bet the car behind me thought, "Look Martha... they got one!". After the inspection, they said I could go on in. I asked if I still had my weapons and the guard said, "Yes, you still have your weapons".

I did forget to tell them there was a baby Ka-Bar knife in a sheath in the passenger side map pocket which I always carry in case of an accident (cutting people out of seat belts, etc.).

imported post

Does anyone find it really strange, or is it just me, that the military does not like its personnel to have and carry firearms on bases? I mean, you would think that since firearms - arms - are their mainstay (as in Armed Forces), they would be free to carry at their discretion. Having never been in the military, what am I missing here?

imported post

Evidently, the female civilian officer who shot the dirtbag had Active Shooter Scenario training and was able to place 4 shots on him.

She was shot once and is in stable condition.

God Bless Her.

imported post

Virginiaplanter wrote:

The Shooter was a graduate of Virginia Tech! I guess Virginia Tech must offer a major in murder.

Click to expand...

:uhoh: come on bro, that's rather tasteless.

imported post

Bulldog1967 wrote:

Evidently, the female civilian officer who shot the dirtbag had Active Shooter Scenario training and was able to place 4 shots on him.

She was shot once and is in stable condition.

God Bless Her.

Click to expand...

Its too bad those four shots weren't "stopping" shots. Probably shot from an M9 (Beretta 92FS for you civilians) with FMJ ball ammo. Not exactly a man-stopper round :banghead:...

This scumbag still has a pulse. He should have assumed room temperature by now. His victims deserve better. They're trying to save the life of a scumbag that tried to kill in excess of 50 soldiers. Will wonders never cease? AbsolutelyfluckinAMAZIN if you ask me...

imported post

DrMark wrote:

GMZ wrote:

...there is still the Title 18 that covers federal property to worry about.

Click to expand...

USC18s930 covers Federal facilities (buildings), not Federal property in general.

If one wasn't military, and stayed out of buildings, I don't know what they could be charged with.

Click to expand...

+1 for buildings,

and 930 d (3) does have the lawful purpose exception. Before you try to determine what is a lawful purpose, see what section 101 of the same law states.

Section 101 of the GUn Control Act of 1968 states:

Sec. 101. The Congress hereby declares that the purpose of this title is to provide support to Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials in their fight against crime and violence, and it is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity, and that this title is not intended to discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, or provide for the imposition by Federal regulations of any procedures or requirements other than those reasonably necessary to implement and effectuate the provisions of this title.

Link: http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/gca.htm

imported post

I have a feeling, being that this douchebag is in Texas, that he will be executed. May take a while though.

imported post

Yes, heis in Texas (and they do have a speedline for the death chamber), but this was a FEDERAL crime. When was the last time a FEDERAL criminal was put to death? I don't have time to Google-Fu right now, but it hasn't been recently. We're long past-due, though and if ANYONE deserves it, this guy does...

imported post

SoldierMedic wrote:

Virginiaplanter wrote:

The Shooter was a graduate of Virginia Tech! I guess Virginia Tech must offer a major in murder.

Click to expand...

:uhoh: come on bro, that's rather tasteless.

Click to expand...

Amen to that.

imported post

MSC 45ACP wrote:

Yes, heis in Texas (and they do have a speedline for the death chamber), but this was a FEDERAL crime. When was the last time a FEDERAL criminal was put to death? I don't have time to Google-Fu right now, but it hasn't been recently. We're long past-due, though and if ANYONE deserves it, this guy does...

Click to expand...

I was wondering about this very thing this morning. Wouldn't he be brought before a military court since he was in the military and this happened on a military base?

imported post

Yep. Special Court Martial, I think. I'm no legal type and can't remember the details for Special Court vs. General Court Martial, but its a good bet he's getting one of those before going a bit north to another Army fort called "Leavenworth".

They have a Death Row there. Dunno how many are there or if this guy will getthe head of the line priviliges he deserves...

imported post

EVERYONE who quoted GMZ"s original post, please go back and edit it out of your posts

imported post

MSC 45ACP wrote:

Yep. Special Court Martial, I think. I'm no legal type and can't remember the details for Special Court vs. General Court Martial, but its a good bet he's getting one of those before going a bit north to another Army fort called "Leavenworth".

They have a Death Row there. Dunno how many are there or if this guy will getthe head of the line priviliges he deserves...

Click to expand...

Nope.

A General Courts Martial (GCM) would be appropriate for this case.

(Max penalty for a Special Courts Martial (SpCM) is only 12 months)

GCM is required for either "Life" or "Death Penalty" sentences.

imported post

Thank you, Mt V. I've been in front of the Green Tablecloth a couple times, but never while handcuffed or contemplating brig time. Just small stuff like waterskiing and swimming when I wasn't supposed to.

imported post

Let's hang the bastard.