(April 2, 2014 @1718)
Authorities are investigating a shooting at Ft. Hood that left four people dead and 14 others injured, according to a Texas congressman. The sprawling military base was on lockdown as investigators tried to determine whether there was a second gunman.
The shooter was among the four dead soldiers. Count of wounded has not been confirmed yet.
Ft. Hood remains on lockdown and everyone at the Texas Army base is to "shelter in place."That Base Sign is beginning to look like a tombstone.
The 1st Cavalry Division, which is based at Ft. Hood, sent a Twitter alert telling people on base to close doors and stay away from windows.
It only lacks one more shield:
The deaths, injuries, lives interrupted ..... what a total waste. In the last shooting in 2009 (that killer still lives, and only God knows why) people wondered why the military couldn't be armed in their own base. At least they could have protected themselves!
The government in its infinite wisdom deemed the 2009 shooting a one-time thing, and it was easier to keep the soldiers disarmed. To prevent random shootings.
That didn't work, and the Army has much to answer for. An army should be able to defend itself; it should not have to be defended ... especially when that defense has been twice proved to be ineffective.
The blame starts at the Provost Marshall and runs straight up through the Base Commander to the Commander in Chief. Unfortunately, the CIC is no Harry Truman; the buck doesn't stop at the Teflon President.
Fort Hood? It should become an armed camp.
Later: I changed my mind. I re-read the part in the original article which says: "The 1st Cavalry Division, which is based at Ft. Hood, sent a Twitter alert telling people on base to close doors and stay away from windows." I'm still outraged, so I'll add this image to the 'shields' which the Fort Hood entry tomb (and which the entry of every military base in America) should display:
2 comments:
Clinton issued the Executive Order banning common carriage of firearms for those who were not in armed policing or security positions. A man who can sleep with an M4 or an M240 in the Sandbox is not considered mature enough to carry on post in CONUS. Even officers and senior NCO's can no longer be armed.
I believe this continuing garrison disarmament policy is a concerted attempt to neuter the Army, as well as to make guns appear even more dangerous and extraordinary, rather than the mere tools of the trade.
"even though you are a soldier, oath-bound and trained, we cannot trust you with a sidearm because absent the immediate command and control of your superiors in your unit, if you were carrying a sidearm in garrison you might go on a shooting rampage after a fender bender and hurt others..."
It's true government authority does not trust it's own soldiers to be armed. What is so sad, in many cases they need to be armed against their own.
antipoda
Post a Comment