Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: 'Protecting The Force', DoD final report on Hasan - Fort Hood shooting. Defense.gov

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    'Protecting The Force', DoD final report on Hasan - Fort Hood shooting. Defense.gov


  2. #2
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342

    From CalGuns: SecDef Memo of the Fort Hood Shooting

    "Final Recommendations of the Ft Hood Follow-on Review"
    I am x-posting the link to this report since not everybody is on the Cal Guns site;
    http://calgunlaws.com/images/stories...%208.18.10.pdf
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    154
    So, instead of a short and sweet answer of allowing soldiers (who are trained in the use and care of) to carry arms while on base (not just MPs), they write a long-winded recommendation of further tightening regulations and control (not to mention spending more $$ we ain't got)?

    Seriously...

    Maybe my understanding is naive and incomplete, but is it illogical to recommend allowing our fighting men and women the equipment (again, that they are trained to be able to use) to fight back?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    58
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY MODERATOR: Bashing of military gun owners

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lancaster County, PA
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by XDUser View Post
    Generally speaking the US Military is the most anti right to carry group in the world.
    The hypocrisy of such is absolutely disgusting.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by XDUser View Post
    [I won't repeat the message.]
    Message deleted. There is no longer a need for my comment.
    Last edited by eye95; 08-24-2010 at 11:03 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    I think it's fairly obvious that he meant that it is the military as an institution and not individual personnel.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    I think it's fairly obvious that he meant that it is the military as an institution and not individual personnel.
    It wasn't obvious to me, especially in the light of the general comments he made about the intelligence of military members following his comment that I questioned.

    No matter, the comment is gone. I'll just move on.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    Some of the provisions such as having to register every firearm of family members if you live off base are nuts. I am sorry as ex Air Force I remember swearing an oath. I don't remember spouses having to do the same. Having to register property that is in someone else s name is a little crazy. When I got out and while still married to my ex if we were living off base and they said you need to register my gun I would have told them to kiss my grits.

    I always thought that part of the uniform should be at least a sidearm. When I was in I was stationed at Andrews and there were cases of shootings right outside the base were the SPs were the first to respond to it. The irony that we trust 18 year old to go overseas give them a mini-gun and no one questions if they are responsible enough to handle it yet we could have an E-9 who can not carry on base.

    Another great irony is for Air Force at least you don't get basic pistol training unless your job requires it. Flight crew,Security etc. I was medical and kept thinking if I am having to run around a field hospital help with litters etc I can carry a pistol a hell of a lot easier then an M-16. Heck with a 4 man litter carry I could actually use the pistol if I needed to at the same time. I could probably do that with a M-16 but a few people I know could barely do it with two hands.

    So sad when the people protecting our rights have to give up so many of theirs in the process.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •