My brother in law is there right now. Infact he keeps calling my mother inlaw and her calling us to keep us up to date I guess. Right now, they arnt sure how many there are. But he thinks theres one or two in custody
Hes been told there is 7 dead and arounr 20-30 wounded.
I'm watching the coverage on CNN now, and they're scrambling for anything to say, and not doing a very good job of it. They just said one of the shooters is in custody.
Odd, they hit the deployment readyness area, and the site of a graduation. Who ever it was, they had an intimate knowlege of the base and times of events.
Frazzled wrote:Yep. Lets see what it is first. Could be jilted boytoy went berserk, could be terrorists. Lets wait a bit.
Im not pointing fingers, I totally that we will have to wait to get the full story.
I cant help but feel that no matter the out-come little to none will be done on the issue, eg. tightening of military checking [if it is the military] or gun control or anything along those lines.
Squig_herder wrote:
I cant help but feel that no matter the out-come little to none will be done on the issue, eg. tightening of military checking [if it is the military] or gun control or anything along those lines.
Honestly, unless this is a case of a civilian sneaking in, I doubt there's much that could be done.
Given the stress of combat, especially given the current rigors of repeated deployment, this has to be taken as something of a tragic reality; barring any glaring breaches of conduct, of course.
The one shot dead was named:Maj. Malik Hassan
No name yet on the captured shooter.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Yea calling it now. It will be hushed up (again) but this isn't domestic relations gone bad. This was planned.
ABC reports
12 Soldiers Killed and 31 Wounded in Fort Hood Shooting
Suspected Gunman Is Identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan
By EMILY FRIEDMAN
Nov. 5, 2009 —
Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base by what officials believe was possibly carried out by an Army officer.
The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.
The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.
The gunman used two handguns, Cone said. He wasn't sure if the shooter reloaded the weapons during the attack.
The general called the attack "a terrible tragedy, stunning." He said the community was "absolutely devastated."
The extent of the injuries of victims "varies significantly," according to Cone.
President Obama called the Fort Hood shootings a "horrific outburst of violence."
"It if difficult enough to lose" soldiers overseas, but said it is "horrifying that they should lose their lives at an Army base in the U.S.," he said.
The president said "my prayers are with the wounded and the families of the fallen."
Cone said the motive for the attack, which took place just after 1:30 p.m. CT, is unclear.
Fort Hood, located just 60 miles north from Austin, is the largest U.S. military installation in the world, and has suffered the greatest number of casualities of all American bases in the war on Iraq.
The base is a 340 sq. mile facility located in Killeen, Texas and is home to the 1st Cavalry Division, which was one of the first groups of soldiers deployed to Iraq.
The military said today that "more than one shooter" opened fire in the Soldiers Readiness Processing Center and the Howze Theater on the base.
The processing center is where soldiers go to get last minute dental and medical clearance before going to war.
The Howze Theater was scheduled to hold a college graduation service this afternoon. According to a base newspaper, the Fort Hood newspaper, the ceremony was supposed to recognized soldiers and family members who had missed commencement ceremonies due to deployments.
Schools on the base has also been placed on lockdown. A message on Fort Hood's public affairs office Web site reads, "Organizations/units are instructed to execute a 100 percent accountability of all personnel. This is not a Drill. It is an Emergency Situation."
According to a source on the base, it is rare for firearms to be on the base because they are locked up.
Homeland Security said it is still gathering information and that the "Army is taking the lead" as of now. FBI agents from Waco and Austin, Texas, are being deployed to the scene.
An army spokesman said that unit commanders have been instructed to account for all of their personnel.
"The immediate concern is to make sure that all of our soldiers and family members are safe and that's what commanders have been instructed to do," said Jay Adams of First Army, Division West, located at Fort Hood.
The CounterTerrorist Unit said they have "no word" yet on whether this incident was terrorism-related. At least six victims are being treated at the Metroplex Hospital five miles away.
I heard one shooter was killed and two other suspects are in custody, but I have not heard confirmation of whether or not the other two are also shooters.
He had been ordered to be deplyed, and was a medical doctor and V.Tech Grad. (why do shooters come from there)
-MY PERSONAL GUESS- He was fed up with the war and being deployed in a war he felt was against his culture/beliefs, Texas has a lor of extreme blowhards who rant on the radio and on post. (I'm in the military I've heard the rants first hand) Who knows when or what turned a doctor who spent his whole life learning to save people, into a horrible mass murderer. I think he may have heard something that ate him up till he snapped.
Twelve people have been killed and at least 31 injured after a soldier went on a shooting rampage at the Fort Hood military base in Texas.
Base commander Lieutenant-General Bob Cone says the gunman was killed during the incident at the facility, while two other soldiers were apprehended as suspects. The base is locked down.
* One shooter is dead and two suspects have been apprehended
* President Obama calls shooting a "horrific outburst of violence"
* Shooting took place before graduation ceremony
US media reports have named the dead gunman as Army Major Malik Nadal Hasan. It is understood the soldier, believed to be about 40 years old, was about to be deployed to Iraq. US media also identified him as an army pyschiatrist.
President Barack Obama, speaking during an event at the Department of the Interior in Washington, described the incident as a "horrific outburst of violence".
"It's difficult enough when we lose these brave Americans in battles overseas. It is horrifying that they should come under fire at an army base on American soil," he said.
Mr Obama offered his "thoughts and prayers" to the families of the victims.
"We are working with the Pentagon, FBI, Department of Homeland Security to ensure that Fort Hood is secure," he said.
"I would ask all Americans to keep the men and women of Fort Hood in our prayers."
The US Senate held a moment of silence in sombre acknowledgement of the shooting rampage.
Motive unclear
Lieutenant General Cone said the shooting took place about 1.30pm local time at a Soldier Readiness Facility, where troops preparing for overseas deployment were getting last-minute medical checkups.
"The shooter was killed. He was a soldier," he said.
"We since then have apprehended two additional soldiers who are suspects.
"They tracked the suspected individuals to an adjacent facility and they were apprehended. They are soldiers, but they are suspects at this time, and we are looking at that.
"There were eyewitness accounts that there may have been more than one shooter."
Christopher Hogue, chief of media at Fort Hood, told reporters: "The only one we know who was shooting was killed and he had two handguns."
The shooter was included in the total of 12 killed.
Pentagon officials said it was unclear what triggered the shooting.
"I don't know how anybody can speculate about motives at this time given how few facts we have," Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said.
A US Army official in Washington said the incident took place shortly before a scheduled graduation event at the base.
Foot Hood is the biggest military base in the world and a prime point of deployment for US operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is home to about 50,000 troops, although Texas US Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison said there were about 35,000 troops at the base at the time.
Fort Hood is halfway between Austin and Waco, about 100 kilometres from each city.
The US Army is suffering a record high suicide rate and there has been plenty of other signs of stress from fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Hmmm.... I can't imagine this being a group of civilians, or terrorists, so the facts sound pretty solid.
The psychiatrist may have been the sole reason any of this happened. PTSD is some very complicated stuff, and being in Iraq for a long time, probably comes with an enormous amount of stress for everyone. I would be interested in knowing what the history of these guys was. In all honesty, that may be part of the reason that this happened.
At any rate, the psychiatrist probably had a heavy dose of way too much reality, causing whatever issues were already present, to become that much worse.
Yeah, the fact that he was supposed to be, in a sense, above this kind of thing, analysing it, recommending help for others and such, may have made it harder for him to deal with himself.
Still don't know a whole lot about the situation at the moment, though.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Yeah, the fact that he was supposed to be, in a sense, above this kind of thing, analysing it, recommending help for others and such, may have made it harder for him to deal with himself.
Still don't know a whole lot about the situation at the moment, though.
It's ironic in a very grimdark and unfunny manner, isn't it?
This happened a walk across the street from my old unit buildings. While all of my friends and colleagues are off doing other things (new duty stations, units are deployed), it really hits home as I still do have some friends in that area.
Speculation is running rampant on the airwaves and it's really starting to piss me off. So I've decided I'll wait until the Army and the Feds put out their info instead of listening to morons who know nothing talk out of their asses.
grey_death wrote:Speculation is running rampant on the airwaves and it's really starting to piss me off. So I've decided I'll wait until the Army and the Feds put out their info instead of listening to morons who know nothing talk out of their asses.
This is just another shining example of how speed is far more more important to the media than accuracy.
grey_death wrote:Speculation is running rampant on the airwaves and it's really starting to piss me off. So I've decided I'll wait until the Army and the Feds put out their info instead of listening to morons who know nothing talk out of their asses.
This is just another shining example of how speed is far more more important to the media than accuracy.
sexiest_hero wrote:He had been ordered to be deplyed, and was a medical doctor and V.Tech Grad. (why do shooters come from there)
-MY PERSONAL GUESS- He was fed up with the war and being deployed in a war he felt was against his culture/beliefs, Texas has a lor of extreme blowhards who rant on the radio and on post. (I'm in the military I've heard the rants first hand) Who knows when or what turned a doctor who spent his whole life learning to save people, into a horrible mass murderer. I think he may have heard something that ate him up till he snapped.
He was never deployed. He was going to be deployed to deal with people there (noncombat).
It's very sad. My friend's uncle was at Ft. Hood when it happened. If it weren't for the court-martial he was guarding the prisioners for, he would have been in the guman's path. For once, someone else's stupidity saved his life.
FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.
Well I guess we have most of the motive at this point...
This should set back Western/Islamic relations significantly.
A little heads up as to the guys rank after talking it over some with my wife:
He likely went in as an O3 and was promoted to O4 automatically after his residency. The medical field tends to do this to get Doctors and other professionals to a suitable pay grade for retainment.
This might help some understand how someone like this might make ranks in the military.
First off, my thoughs and prayers go out to the victims and their families.
Grey_death is right about how he became a major. I'm an officer in the army myself and medical service corp personnel along with JAG personnel often are directly commissioned at a higher grade as incentive and compensation for their level of expertise. Neurosurgeons, for example, are directly commissioned to either Lt. Colonel or Colonel.
I think we know his true motivations. As soon as I heard about this shooting, I pretty much assumed it was a Muslim. I know that's stereotypical and unbecoming, but in the post 9/11 world, I'm fairly sure most of us had the same thoughts.
I'm not saying that Islamic fanaticism was his only motivation, but it seems to definitely have been a contributing factor. It appears he may have been mentally unstable and drifted into extremism in search of comfort or a sense of belonging.
This brings me to another topic. Muslim extremism and it's stranglehold on the religion seems to global. Whether it is in Ft Hood, the Middle East, Europe, or Indonesia; the fanatics seem to have the reigns of the religion. I'm not accusing all muslims of supporting terrorism or stereoyping at all, but there seems to be al lack of real opposition to these extremists from within the ranks of the faithful.
Christianity and most major religions have skeletons in their closets of which they are not proud so I know this isn't just Islam. Where are the moderates? Where are the clerics stepping up and pointing these fanatics out?
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
Christianity and most major religions have skeletons in their closets of which they are not proud so I know this isn't just Islam. Where are the moderates? Where are the clerics stepping up and pointing these fanatics out?
They, and most likely their families, are dead. Terrorists and insurgents have a nasty habit of taking out any moderates who stand in their way and their families besides, as incentive for others to stay out of their way.
From what I'm hearing through the grapevine this major was indeed a Muslim, and a fairly radical one at that. I heard some stuff about him catching flak in the workplace for being Muslim and that he had some pretty extreme things written on his website about killing infidels. It's sad that this is going to set back the Western view on Islam 20 years, and it's a tragedy that we lost so many good, badly needed soldiers.
There are lots of Muslims serving honorably in the US armed forces presently.
Prayers and best wishes to the families of all the personnel stationed at Fort Hood. Even apart from the victims, everyone who has a family member there (which is a huge number of people) knew fear yesterday.
Frazzled wrote:FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:I think we know his true motivations. As soon as I heard about this shooting, I pretty much assumed it was a Muslim. I know that's stereotypical and unbecoming, but in the post 9/11 world, I'm fairly sure most of us had the same thoughts.
I'm not saying that Islamic fanaticism was his only motivation, but it seems to definitely have been a contributing factor. It appears he may have been mentally unstable and drifted into extremism in search of comfort or a sense of belonging.
This is all idle, baseless, and somewhat tasteless, speculation.
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:My thoughs go out to the victims and their families.
Agreed.
BTW: Thanks for the rank clarification, my only point of reference was characters from M*A*S*H.
Frazzled wrote:FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:I think we know his true motivations. As soon as I heard about this shooting, I pretty much assumed it was a Muslim. I know that's stereotypical and unbecoming, but in the post 9/11 world, I'm fairly sure most of us had the same thoughts.
I'm not saying that Islamic fanaticism was his only motivation, but it seems to definitely have been a contributing factor. It appears he may have been mentally unstable and drifted into extremism in search of comfort or a sense of belonging.
This is all idle, baseless, and somewhat tasteless, speculation.
"Lt. Gen. Robert Cone said officials had not yet confirmed that the suspected shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, made the comment before the rampage Thursday. Hasan was among 30 people wounded in the shooting spree"
"An imam from a mosque Hasan regularly attended said Hasan, a lifelong Muslim, was a committed soldier, gave no sign of extremist beliefs and regularly wore his uniform at prayers."
Of course its not going to be confirmed. This has occurred before. The government doesn't want the Joe Sixpack to get worried that home grown stuff occurs here on a small, unorganized scale. Thats all I'll say about that on this board.
In the UK we have plenty of moderate Muslim clerics who work against extremism, and a few extremists, some of whom we've kicked out of the country.
The key point is that extremism doesn't suck people in unless they are vulnerable in some way.
An extremist could come into my office now and harangue us all for an hour and he wouldn't get any converts because we all have decent jobs, security, respect, supportive families, a purpose in life and all that good stuff. (One of my guys is a Muslim already, FWIW.)
It looks like this major had a number of mental pressures in his life. He was unmarried and unhappy about that. He wasn't successful in his professional life. He disagreed with the war in Iraq. He probably felt some degree of pressure from intolerant people just because of being a Muslim.
Lots of people flip out and start mass killings without being provoked to do so by Muslim extremism.
Cheese Elemental wrote:That's horrible. Are military personnel permitted to carry firearms inside the base when not training or on parade?
If not maybe they should have been.
Seriously though, this might just be one of those things where no one really made a mistake, but everything goes wrong.
This happened on a military base, and the answer mooted is still "More Guns!" Seriously, how many guns would be enough?
The scary thing is that in this case I almost agree with you. At least they would have been in the hands of people who knew how to use them and it would have been less likely to descend into a free-for-all.
I also wonder, what is it about VT? I spent time there myself back at the turn of the millenium and it seemed lovely. Is this just bad luck that he happens to have studied there, or is it a highly weaponised and tense place and I just never noticed?
I probably wouldn't call any U.S. college campus that I know of "highly weaponized." Why would you even suggest such a ridiculous thing?
Even on a military base, depending on what's going on at the time, soldiers aren't necessarily going around with weapons 24/7.
Also, I realize that guns probably seem like some really arcane, dangerous thing to a lot of people in the U.S. (and in my experience this is even more so the case in Europe), but you don't have to be in the military or be a police officer to know how to safely use a firearm, and even be very proficient in their use.
Fifty wrote:This happened on a military base, and the answer mooted is still "More Guns!" Seriously, how many guns would be enough?
Every day should be like the end of Hot Fuzz.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.
Sorry for my poor wording. I meant does VT have a high incidence of gun-ownership, NRA membership, or large numbers of militias in the area of anything? Does it have a history of social tension? For example, is student activism with regards to race, religion, nuclear armament or anything similar a particularly big issue there? Is it home to a large number of military scholarships or anything like that?
I was there myself for a short while (weeks, not months), I even vaguely knew one of the professors killed in the shootings there, and it seemed a perfectly normal place.
In the UK, I would know what to expect on any university campus. From my limited personal experience, I think I know what to expect on America ones, but I am not certain.
Anyway, it seems from the replies in general that there is nothing unusual about VT and my own impressions about it being a perfectly normal place were correct. (Apart from bad luck, that is.)
Fifty wrote:Sorry for my poor wording. I meant does VT have a high incidence of gun-ownership, NRA membership, or large numbers of militias in the area of anything? Does it have a history of social tension? For example, is student activism with regards to race, religion, nuclear armament or anything similar a particularly big issue there? Is it home to a large number of military scholarships or anything like that?
I was there myself for a short while (weeks, not months), I even vaguely knew one of the professors killed in the shootings there, and it seemed a perfectly normal place.
In the UK, I would know what to expect on any university campus. From my limited personal experience, I think I know what to expect on America ones, but I am not certain.
Anyway, it seems from the replies in general that there is nothing unusual about VT and my own impressions about it being a perfectly normal place were correct. (Apart from bad luck, that is.)
Two unrelated coincidences really. VT is a HUGE school, but after the VT-shooting, anything correlated with VT is going to be tainted as such. I am sure if one were to draw connections between crimes, any outlet could find an educational facility in common.
It should be borne in mind that although there are a lot of random mass shootings in the USA compared to most other countries, the number of incidents is still tiny compared to the population.
Two shooters coming from Virginia Tech is just a co-incidence. It's just bad luck.
As to guns on base, normally soldiers are not permitted to just walk around randomly with full gear and guns on. During drills and if you get "lucky" enough to draw guard detail do you have a gun. Other than that guns and gear are normally stored in the soldiers barracks/lockers until needed.
Yeah and even if you are "lucky" and have a gun for guard, that doesnt mean that you will have live ammo to go with it.
Seriously, America isnt the friggin wild west you overseas .... People.
Why is it that every time someone with a non US flag talks about us on dakka dakka its always blah blah US bash this or blah blah everyone has a trunk full of Mac 10's like they somehow 10,000 miles away knows wtf they are talking about.
So far KK is the only one here that is showing any level headed thinking.
I, for one, and getting FED UP with the Anti US bull**** that so many people on the OT forum spread on an almost daily basis.
Don't like the US and the way we handle thing? Great! However, don't come here and spread your hate. How would you like it if I started a thread called (Insert country here) sucks donkey sack!!
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
I think we know his true motivations. As soon as I heard about this shooting, I pretty much assumed it was a Muslim. I know that's stereotypical and unbecoming, but in the post 9/11 world, I'm fairly sure most of us had the same thoughts.
To be honest, I assumed it was a PTSD case. The idea that it could have been a Muslim didn't cross my mind until I noticed the word 'harassment' in a TV crawl.
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
This brings me to another topic. Muslim extremism and it's stranglehold on the religion seems to global. Whether it is in Ft Hood, the Middle East, Europe, or Indonesia; the fanatics seem to have the reigns of the religion. I'm not accusing all muslims of supporting terrorism or stereoyping at all, but there seems to be al lack of real opposition to these extremists from within the ranks of the faithful.
Part of this stems from the fact that Islam doesn't really deal in sects, which, for the most part, are categories introduced by outsiders. You're either a Muslim, or you're not. The extent to which any given Muslim cares about the Islamic belief of his fellows is really the only variable.
Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
Christianity and most major religions have skeletons in their closets of which they are not proud so I know this isn't just Islam. Where are the moderates? Where are the clerics stepping up and pointing these fanatics out?
Another thing to understand about Islam is that it has no formal structure like Christianity, or even Judaism. The majority of Muslims pray at home, or work. The few who attend mosques are not attending an institution like a church, but a public gathering place that may, or may not, be attended by a cleric who very likely does it out of nothing more than a sense of personal piety. These guys literally just show up, and start fixing things or leading prayers if the attendees will have them. The only real barrier to entry would be provided by the previous cleric, if there happened to be one.
The people that set up new mosques can only do so by generating a concerted following, and they can only do that by offering services which traditional mosques do not. That is to say, they emulate the communal aspect of Christian churches; including educational facilities, charity, and other community functions. They can only do this provided they have funding and, given the relative poverty of the Muslim world, any significant funding is likely to come either from illicit, or extremist sources. This naturally constrains the younger, more vibrant mosque activity to those sects that have an extremist bend. Everyone else remains functionally indifferent insofar as that extremism doesn't interfere with their daily lives. A fact which is compounded by a lack of real, national identity. In those nations where the people are culturally uniform (Egypt is a good example) you see a lot more opposition to Muslim extremism.
jp400 wrote:Yeah and even if you are "lucky" and have a gun for guard, that doesnt mean that you will have live ammo to go with it.
Seriously, America isnt the friggin wild west you overseas .... People.
Modqusiition
All righty lets calm it down people.
Why is it that every time someone with a non US flag talks about us on dakka dakka its always blah blah US bash this or blah blah everyone has a trunk full of Mac 10's
See thats just nuts, everyone knows we all have trunks full of six shooters and winchester lever actions, and backyards with oil wells. What? you don't? Jeez who let the yankees on the board
Fifty wrote:Sorry for my poor wording. I meant does VT have a high incidence of gun-ownership, NRA membership, or large numbers of militias in the area of anything? Does it have a history of social tension? For example, is student activism with regards to race, religion, nuclear armament or anything similar a particularly big issue there? Is it home to a large number of military scholarships or anything like that?
I was there myself for a short while (weeks, not months), I even vaguely knew one of the professors killed in the shootings there, and it seemed a perfectly normal place.
In the UK, I would know what to expect on any university campus. From my limited personal experience, I think I know what to expect on America ones, but I am not certain.
Anyway, it seems from the replies in general that there is nothing unusual about VT and my own impressions about it being a perfectly normal place were correct. (Apart from bad luck, that is.)
Ah, well I recall the VT shooter having gone kind of nuts for other reasons. Something along the lines of being socially isolated, sexually/romantically frustrated, hating everyone for what he considered moral depravity, that kind of thing.
I read this at 2:40 this morning on the bbc. I hoped to high hell that it wasn't religiously motivated.
The fallout from this is going to be horrific. I can't wait for every news outlet to pick up on the muslim infiltration of our military when before they couldn't even be bothered to report on the repeated gang violence there.
My thoughts go out to the families, and to the nation as a whole. It's about to go through a shitstorm of reactionary rhetoric and ridiculous clampdowns.
Ah, well I recall the VT shooter having gone kind of nuts for other reasons. Something along the lines of being socially isolated, sexually/romantically frustrated, hating everyone for what he considered moral depravity, that kind of thing.
Yeah, he was a nutjob with a history of psychological issues and a very strained life.
Fifty wrote:This happened on a military base, and the answer mooted is still "More Guns!" Seriously, how many guns would be enough?
More guns would've been nice for the victims as most of them were unarmed at the time of the attack.
Too bad we are starting to hear reports that some of the casualties might have been inflicted by friendly fire.
Regardless, I can't help but send all my heart out to Fort Worth today, I have nothing but respect for our men and women in uniform of all kinds, and I hope the victims families can come together to overcome the tragedy.
Copperas Cove ( the city that Boarders Ft. Hood ) is my Home town, I grew up there off and on over several tours there with my Dad during his 22 years in the Army. My Parents and my Brother still live there. My bother works on Hood and had just driving off the base as they were locking it down. Hood is an enormously sprawling base. It speaks to Strength and power, to courage and dedication and service by the US military to the people of America. I was in High school in Oct of 91 when a man drove a pickup truck into a Lubbys cafeteria in Killeen (my birth place and the other city that boarders Ft Hood) and killed 23 people, a few of which were parents of friends of mine. I went to a few funerals that week. No one had a gun with them that day but the shooter. We got countless stories of people escape from the shooting as well as accounts of the senseless execution of people unfortunate enough to be in his line of fire.
I was an Army Brat till I was 18, My wife is in the US Air Force. So to say I have an attachment to the men and woman who server in the US Military is a bit of an understatement. As others have mentioned, our soldiers do not bare arms unless they are training or in combat. With the exception of the law enforcement. During training the majority of times their weapons are the lazer training type with bank ammo and muzzle blockers installed. When they are in a live fire training at the range the ammo and weapons are fairly well controlled, but that's it. Our soldiers don't carry guns on base at home. I have know a few spec ops guys over the years who carry a pistol with them in uniform or in their vehicles at all time regardless of the laws in the states where they are stationed or base rules ( as far as I know its against military law for any one to carry a concealed weapon on base and such out side of military law enforcement) not condoning this just saying it happens.
I listened to the phone call with the shooters cousin, who claimed he did not even like going to the range to qualify with his weapon. Look everyone has to know how to shoot the weapons that they would be issued during combat every one is trained how to shoot. But for a lot on non-combat style jobs in the military that is the ONLY time a lot of these people ever touch a weapon. A shrink isn't going to be doing patrols with ground pounders, yes he may be at their base but not in a squad clearing homes and buildings. SO he doesn't get the same specialized training with a weapon that and infantry men does. SO to say he did not like going to the range has to be crap or he was getting training else where to hit the amount of people he did with the reloading he had to do regardless of the crowded environment. The apparent accuracy he had, seems to speak to some decent level of pistol training to reload and reacquire and successfully engage targets.
The shooter killed 13 and wounded 30. That's 43 bullets! The news said he had 2 pistols one of which was a semi-auto leaving the other as a revolver, 5-6 shots from that depending on what type of revolver. Between 7-15 or so in a standard pistol mag ( assuming he wasn't using an extended mag or 20 or so) all of that aside, Even IF he hit each person with a single round that is at least emptying the revolver and reloading the semi at least twice! I watched accounts on the news stating some people were shot several times. So that probably makes him reloading the semi 3 or more times minimum. What I am getting at is that this wasn't some spur of the moment snap buy a trained mental health professional who happened to be carrying a had gun. As he had 2 handguns and several mags of ammo. This was a premeditated,calculated act. Regardless of his religious or racial background as all of that has been rendered mute buy his cowardly actions. No way this gets whited out as a stress related brake or a fall out from harassment. You don't load up on ammo and go into a room full of people who are about to go off to war to get some payback for some one calling you a name or slurring your religion. My only guess to any rational explanation ( we are long pat rational here but) is that he was trying to symbolically "kill" the mechanism that was to deploy him to the war effort.
My heart goes out to the spouses and children of the fallen. You only go to these types of centers a short time before you leave your family. My hope is those that lost there lives took the time out, due to the knowledge they were leaving down range, to tell their loved ones what they felt and did some of the things that they wanted to do for that lasting memory. The family's were already emotionally stressed about the em pending deployment of their loved ones with the knowledge that they may not come home, but for them to be laid low at home in the "safe" place is devastating. I am sure there are civilian contractors ( some probably spouse of military members) among the dead all serving the military men and woman. Currently it appears a 19 year old civilian contracted police woman is responsible for putting the madman down. Good show young lady, I hope she recovers from her wounds and goes on to server the public and the military community for a good long time. We need good hardworking dedicated Americans like her to protect our country.
The military does have the death penalty, I sure as hell hope they use it!
@Altered: They just said they're open to the possibility. They haven't said anything about it being likely yet.
An abundance of guns, in the hands of the people caught in the situation, almost certainly would have saved lives. It was an officer with a gun that stopped the rampage.
On the other hand, rare incidents can not be the only thing dictating the base's policy. The concept of "rampage defense" seems really important right after it happens, but probably isn't very important all things considered.
Captain Vyper wrote:
You don't load up on ammo and go into a room full of people who are about to go off to war to get some payback for some one calling you a name or slurring your religion.
Its happened before. There's no reason to assume that wasn't the case here.
Orkeosaurus wrote:@Altered: They just said they're open to the possibility. They haven't said anything about it being likely yet.
Um... that's what I said?
An abundance of guns, in the hands of the people caught in the situation, almost certainly would have saved lives. It was an officer with a gun that stopped the rampage.
Yes, a civilian officer with a firearm stopped the rampage. Nobody is psychic though, and even with a room full of armed soldiers, none of them would be 100% on watch, all the time, in an auditorium, for a graduation. Its not like the murderer would wear a giant "I AM THE GUY THAT YOU SHOULD KILL" sign on him. Honestly, there is no argument for more/less guns, the scenario could go either way with either concept.
Let's be clear, I am not for more or less guns, I am questioning the funtrain that revs up for both sides when it logically wouldn't matter, or is relevant. Murder happens, friendly fire happens, an abundance of guns, or the lack thereof, wouldn't change that. Whether or not it happened here, as you so succinctly echoed me, is being investigated.
My hope is that none of that happened, because thats a hard pill to swallow for someone trying to make sense of it all.
Fifty wrote:This happened on a military base, and the answer mooted is still "More Guns!" Seriously, how many guns would be enough?
More guns would've been nice for the victims as most of them were unarmed at the time of the attack.
Accidental gun injury and death goes up hand in hand with the prevalence of guns. Give everyone a gun and you MAY lower shooting crime (Or it will rise due to the prevalence of sidearms in crimes of passion and more general emotionally charged crimes such as assault which are typically far less damaging or fatal without the presence of firearms) but you will definitely experience more accidental deaths. Likely more so than you save as the cavalier idea of a self policing populace has never in mankind's history worked. Likely considerably more so than you save due to the greatly increased number of likely shootouts between multiple parties untrained in armed combat in civilian areas (all that police training has a purpose). It's statistically a net negative.
Though I'm surprised that there were seemingly few armed and able responders in a military base, though it being the largest of its kind in america it's more of a large town.
It seemed like you were putting more weight on the statement than I would have. Sorry if I got the wrong impression.
Yes, a civilian officer with a firearm stopped the rampage. Nobody is psychic though, and even with a room full of armed soldiers, none of them would be 100% on watch, all the time, in an auditorium, for a graduation. Its not like the murderer would wear a giant "I AM THE GUY THAT YOU SHOULD KILL" sign on him. Honestly, there is no argument for more/less guns, the scenario could go either way with either concept.
I thought it was for a medical examination? But either way, it's the kind of thing where everyone being armed wasn't really likely simply on account of most people not wanting to carry a gun everywhere. So it would have been great if everyone had a gun, just like it would have been great if everyone caught in the rain had brought an umbrella, when it looked like it was going to be sunny. (In reality, it was good one person brought an umbrella that a lot of people were able to huddle under.)
Let's be clear, I am not for more or less guns, I am questioning the funtrain that revs up for both sides when it logically wouldn't matter, or is relevant. Murder happens, friendly fire happens, an abundance of guns, or the lack thereof, wouldn't change that. Whether or not it happened here, as you so succinctly echoed me, is being investigated.
I agree with you in a sense, but only looking at things over all; I think this is a situation where more guns would have helped and there are situations where it would have hurt. I'm not so familiar with the policies of a military base to say that they were flawed; after all, you hedge your bets on this sort of thing, and the best policy will still fail some of the time.
(Also, I edited my original post as you responded, for those wondering.)
No problem Orkeo, I figured, but what's the point of being on the internet if I can't douche it up a bit.
As for the topic at hand, I might be getting a little BS here by saying this discussion is exactly what I think should have been avoided, hence the comment on the arrival of the gun rights funtrain.
Its the whole fable of putting ten skilled swordsmen in a room who don't know each other, but one of them is the enemy. The blade is blind, but the wielder blinder.
Altered_Soul wrote:Its the whole fable of putting ten skilled swordsmen in a room who don't know each other, but one of them is the enemy. The blade is blind, but the wielder blinder.
r3n3g8b0y wrote:RIP guys, and the US should check their troops regurlary( because of PTS and similar)
Yeah, Trust me when I say we get checked so much that ive considered beating the face in on the next guy that shows up for a re-evaluation cause they are worse then the bible beaters that show up every saturday.
Army Motto:
"If it ain't broke, Fix it till it is!"
Fifty wrote:This happened on a military base, and the answer mooted is still "More Guns!" Seriously, how many guns would be enough?
More guns would've been nice for the victims as most of them were unarmed at the time of the attack.
Accidental gun injury and death goes up hand in hand with the prevalence of guns. Give everyone a gun and you MAY lower shooting crime (Or it will rise due to the prevalence of sidearms in crimes of passion and more general emotionally charged crimes such as assault which are typically far less damaging or fatal without the presence of firearms) but you will definitely experience more accidental deaths. Likely more so than you save as the cavalier idea of a self policing populace has never in mankind's history worked. Likely considerably more so than you save due to the greatly increased number of likely shootouts between multiple parties untrained in armed combat in civilian areas (all that police training has a purpose). It's statistically a net negative.
Though I'm surprised that there were seemingly few armed and able responders in a military base, though it being the largest of its kind in america it's more of a large town.
Giving everyone a gun will weed a large majority of the stupid out of the world. Just because you are able to use something you probably shouldn't without first hand knowledge of how it works. If someone gave me some weapons-grade plutonium and the necessary components to make a nuclear missile but didn't tell me how it all goes together I'm not going to be dumb as to try to just "wing" it. Guns are not toys and yet I see a lot of idiots in videos posted up on youtube (and even at gun ranges) who should not be allowed within 100ft of a gun.
As to why there were so few unarmed responders it was explained earlier. Only the MP's and certain ranks of Officer are allowed to carry firearms on their person while on a military base. He opened fire on soldiers awaiting flu vaccinations, hence by military code of conduct there would have been nobody in the room or anywhere nearby that would have had a firearm. I imagine once the shooting started it took minutes for officers and mp to figure out who was shooting and where it came from. Obviously he was a good shot and fast reloader so when seconds counted the MP's were only minutes away.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jp400 wrote:
r3n3g8b0y wrote:RIP guys, and the US should check their troops regurlary( because of PTS and similar)
Yeah, Trust me when I say we get checked so much that ive considered beating the face in on the next guy that shows up for a re-evaluation cause they are worse then the bible beaters that show up every saturday.
Army Motto:
"If it ain't broke, Fix it till it is!"
I thought Army (and every other branch) motto was:
Well, as I've said before Natural Selection works wonders in nature. The stupid die, the smart survive. Giving everyone a gun will weed a large majority of the stupid out of the world. Just because you are able to use something you probably shouldn't without first hand knowledge of how it works. If someone gave me some weapons-grade plutonium and the necessary components to make a nuclear missile but didn't tell me how it all goes together I'm not going to be dumb as to try to just "wing" it. Guns are not toys and yet I see a lot of idiots in videos posted up on youtube (and even at gun ranges) who should not be allowed within 100ft of a gun.
I think i've said this in reference to your posts before but..
ShumaGorath wrote:Accidental gun injury and death goes up hand in hand with the prevalence of guns.
]Generally those who have little or no training on proper gun safety and handling, then to be the ones to shoot themselves and any one else in the general vicinity. Those with the proper training rarely make a mistake resulting in an accidental gun injury or death.
Likely more so than you save as the cavalier idea of a self policing populace has never in mankind's history worked. /quote]It worked the past and it is working now in the U.S. (in states allowing conceal carry) and especially now in Israel.
Self policing would conclude that the majority of people carry concealed fire-arms (or firearms in general). Neither of these are true for Israel, or any state in the U.S.
A minority of people carrying guns does not make me imagine some sort of self policed society; it just makes me imagine a group of people that like their guns.
This is a thread approaching a rather touchy subject, so keeping it as civil as earthly possible, would be advisable.
Self-policing has always existed to a degree, and it has always worked to a degree. The justice system we currently have needs regular citizens to act as jury members, witnesses, the people who report crimes, etc. It's also pretty universally accepted that people have a right to inflict violence on a criminal to avoid being the victim of, at the very least, harm equal to what you inflict on them. Plus there's private security, and private investigations of criminal activity, and things like that.
And on the other hand, I don't think there are very many people advocating unsupervised lynching as a substitute for criminal trial and sentencing, so it's clear that policing ability outside of the government's authority must be (significantly) more limited.
So really, I would say gun control has little to do with the concept of a self-policing populace either being a valid one or an invalid one. More to do with what ability should be given to the civilian population to provide policing without the government present (at least when looking at gun ownership from a purely criminological standpoint).
.