Thursday, November 05, 2009

Gunmen Only Target Gun Free Zones!

From CNN 11/5/09:

Officials: 11 killed, plus gunman, in Fort Hood shootings

Wait, how could this be? From Columbine, Virginia Tech and Salt Lake City all we hear from the gun nuts is how the only reason schools and malls are targeted is because they are gun free zones. They say that the only reason crazed fucking psychopaths who are going to kill themselves after the shooting anyway, target these places is because they "know" other people (their victims) won't be armed. The consensus from that side is that the more guns you have, the safer you will be. Any moron with a brain knows that isn't true because all you have to do is look at the gun fatality rates in all different countries around the world to see that the ones with the higher death rates are the ones with the most guns. Let's forget for a moment what kind of chaos a responding officer would stumble upon if every time there was a public shooting spree, 30 armed citizens all pulled out their guns looking for the guy with a gun. I know all of those things are far too practical for the over zealous gun nuts to think through but at least now we have an obvious example of how crazed gunmen don't just target gun free zones. In this instance, they targeted the largest U.S. military base in the world which is home to:Army's 1st Cavalry Division and elements of the 4th Infantry Division, the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment and the 13th Corps Support Command and the gunmen was able to kill at least 13 people before he was finally shot.

13 comments:

Beth said...

You think they all walk around armed? Think again. I think they should now!

Toad734 said...

I think a lot of them do...at least with a side arm. There are always MPs and guards with guns at the gates and entrances...not to mention the rampant availability of guns on the base.

People are even allowed to transport and own non-military weapons on base as well.

Beth said...

I think the guards are posted to watch for trouble from outsiders, not from someone within their ranks! I don't think much is being said about security because quite frankly I don't think we need the terrorists to know about that, do you? But I am sure this situation will change their policies with regards to that. Why do we have to learn the hard way?

Satyavati devi dasi said...

"Guards" should be trained to watch for trouble, period, wherever it comes from.

This is the military. If military security forces aren't paranoid and suspicious, they should be. There's no excuse. They should be watching everything.

On the other hand, Toad, it appears that the biggest military installation on the planet contracts with local police to provide security. I haven't been able to come up with a logical reason that the military would need to hire security, but then again, it's the military. Maybe they need to rethink that approach?

Toad734 said...

MPs are there to watch for trouble from the inside. I assume there were plenty of armed MP's on the base and I would assume its one them that finally shot this guy.

Saty:

Its the same reason the Military has to hire other paramilitaries like Blackwater I suppose...which again, makes no sense.

James' Muse said...

Toad, most military are unarmed on base unless they are MPs. It was a civilian cop that took down the shooter.

Had they all been armed (since they are all trained) the shooter might've been taken out after the first shot.

Toad734 said...

Most people may be unarmed sure, but this is not a place with a lack of guns and as you pointed out, there are armed guards and MP's on base. Certainly not a gun free zone and besides perhaps an NRA convention, its just the opposite.

James' Muse said...

But had they all been armed, it would have been over sooner.

It took three minutes for the nearest cop to get there. That was three minutes of it being a gun free zone.

And she was only three minutes away due to a traffic incident nearby. Otherwise it would've been longer.

There's a reason he didn't target the MP station. They would've shot back. The other weapons on base are locked up, fyi.

Toad734 said...

With that rationale, there would never be any wars because soldiers would never enter a battle if the other sides soldiers were armed.

James' Muse said...

Not true at all, Toad. They go in, all armed, expecting to kill each other, following orders. This shooter was not acting as a warrior, he was acting as a terrorist, going where he knew people would be unarmed.

But if they had been armed, that shooter would have gone down a whole lot sooner, because the nearest armed person was a cop who (luckily) happened to be nearby. Otherwise the carnage may have continued.

Your argument fails here. The shooter did enter a "gun free zone" knowing, as he did, that these soldiers would have their guns locked away.

We will always have wars, Toad, as long as we have leaders willing to order men to go and die for their country or whatever cause.

But had the Ft Hood Soldiers been armed, it would be like trying to go into a police station to kill everyone. Won't happen. The cops'll take you down first.

Toad734 said...

So what you are saying is that there are no guns and the largest military base in the country???Really?

And ya, no one has ever shot up a police station and if they did, they would be killed immediately:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-05-08-va-police-shooting_x.htm

James' Muse said...

Toad: The shooting you referenced happened outside of a police station, in a shootout. Not inside. No massacre, just two officers ambushed. But he didn't go into the station and kill 13 people. It isn't possible.

And yes, at Ft Hood, there are weapons, but they are stored at home or in lockers when the soldiers are not actively training:

Lt. General Cone stated the on-base firearm policy: "As a matter of practice, we do not carry weapons on Fort Hood. This is our home."[94] Military weapons are only used for training or by base security, and personal weapons must be kept locked away by the provost marshal.[95] Specialist Jerry Richard, a soldier working at the Readiness Center, expressed the opinion that this policy had left them unnecessarily vulnerable to violent assaults: "Overseas you are ready for it. But here you can't even defend yourself."[96]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

123 123 said...

Interesting post as for me. It would be great to read a bit more concerning that topic. Thanks for giving that info.
Joan Stepsen
Tech and gadgets