• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

General Patton, We Need You Now!

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
imported post

These are the words of George S.Patton to his men on the eve of D day:

"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his."

http://secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com/search/label/1944


Undoubtedly feeling heat from anti gun groups and the Pentagon, the Fort Hood commander has put a “new” command policy in place that will further make the base appear to be a highly regulated “Gun Free Zone.”

http://secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com/search/label/%22New%22%20Personal%20Firearms%20Regulations%20At%20Fort%20Hood


If these are the kinds of decisions that characterize today's military, we might as well pull the wagons into a circle and wait for another massacre.

My heart goes out to our men and women in uniform who must put their lives at risk in their own country because of ill-conceived policies like this one.
General Patton must be spinning in his grave.

Dave
 

KansasKraut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
116
Location
Verona, WI
imported post

Oh thank God! Surely THESE laws will deter any potential homicidal maniacs and/or gutless terrorists. I feel safer already :).
 

scorpio_vette

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
635
Location
nowhere
imported post

ok, so apparently my english isn't very good. so perhaps somebody could explain this to me in a way that i might understand.

Nadal’s handguns weren’t registered at the Fort as was required for soldiers who want to have private firearms on base. He ignored all base regulations and military and state laws regarding firearms and murder.

how is restricting the victims even more going to prevent future incidents when they clear stated that he did NOT COMPLY with the RULES and LAWS???



clearly my english must be really bad, because i don't understand that. please help me.
 

scorpio_vette

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
635
Location
nowhere
imported post

oh i also have another question that i also don't understand.


so these people are trained to go to war. they are trained in various weapons required for their needs to defend themselves and protect others during war. they are trusted to save this country if the SHTF. but when they're back home on and army base, they can't be trusted with firearms???

so is there some kind of twilight barrier between anyplace overseas and here that soldiers on american soil are a bunch of irresponsible childish twits, and that's why they can't be trusted with firearms or what???


i can't seem to understand that logic.
 

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
imported post

scorpio_vette wrote:
ok, so apparently my english isn't very good. so perhaps somebody could explain this to me in a way that i might understand.

Nadal’s handguns weren’t registered at the Fort as was required for soldiers who want to have private firearms on base. He ignored all base regulations and military and state laws regarding firearms and murder.
how is restricting the victims even more going to prevent future incidents when they clear stated that he did NOT COMPLY with the RULES and LAWS???

clearly my english must be really bad, because i don't understand that. please help me.
scorpio_vette wrote:
oh i also have another question that i also don't understand.


so these people are trained to go to war. they are trained in various weapons required for their needs to defend themselves and protect others during war. they are trusted to save this country if the SHTF. but when they're back home on and army base, they can't be trusted with firearms???

so is there some kind of twilight barrier between anyplace overseas and here that soldiers on american soil are a bunch of irresponsible childish twits, and that's why they can't be trusted with firearms or what???


i can't seem to understand that logic.

While you are pondering those mysteries, take a look at this article, which explains some of the behavior of the anti's in psychological terms... really scary! I got it from the JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS website.

It explains why hoplophobes will never be convinced by truth and logic.

Dave


 

Old Grump

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
387
Location
Blue River, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Lt. Gen. Rick Lynch is held accountable to anti-gun politicians who are the people who gave him his star and will be the ones to detrming if he ever gets another star. He is doing exactly like his masters tell him to do. When he got his rank he stopped being a military man and his resume is now more important than the welfare of his troops.

Besides if any of the medics or soldiers waiting for their examinations had been armed they might have shot Major Nidal Malik Hasan. Then they would have been guilty of assaulting a superior officer and of violating his civil rights as a minority and therefore committing a hate crime.

Guns are bad in the hands of us mere peons, we must be very careful that we do not violate the sensibilities of our betters.

Scuse me while I go throw up.
 
Top