Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

Fort Hood Tragedy May Spur New Gun Control Debate

November 16, 2009 by  

Fort Hood tragedy may spur new gun control debate This month’s fatal shooting at Fort Hood military base in Texas has once again exposed deep divisions between supporters and opponents of gun control laws.

In the wake of the rampage, Violence Policy Center issued a statement calling it "the latest example of price paid for deadly firepower available to Americans," and suggested easy access to firepower allows "angry" individuals to attack others.

"The answer to gun violence is not more guns," it said, adding that the circumstances of the incident show that all public gathering places are vulnerable to mass shootings.

"[It] also demonstrates the fallacy that mass shooters will avoid venues where people are likely to be armed or that mass shooters can be stopped easily by armed individuals," the center further stresses.

On Nov. 5, 2009, a gunman identified as Major Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire in the Soldier Readiness Center at the base, killing 13 people and wounding 30 others.

According to the Associated Press, at least one of the guns used in the killings, a 5.7-millimeter semi-automatic pistol, was legally purchased by the suspect at a Texas gun shop.

He was repeatedly shot by civilian police officers but survived.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19450902-ADNFCR

Personal Liberty News Desk

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Fort Hood Tragedy May Spur New Gun Control Debate”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • http://yahoo KM

    I think every one who was on the base should have been armed and ready to defend them selves. If they are able to carry a gun to battle, then they should be able to carry a side arm. If they had, this would not have happened because the terrorist would have looked like swiss cheese. He was a coward, a muslim
    terrorist who was afraid to go to a battle. I hope he goes before a firing squad.

    • CB

      If the soldiers were armed , he would have chosen a mall or government build. He would have picked one of the many “gun free zones” in the area!!!

  • James E Bauer MD, MDiv, westen PA

    Armed Law-abiding Citizens are America’s First Line of Defense.

  • Cathy S

    Jane Scroggins… I went to the gun store here in Vegas years ago to qualify for my concealed weapons permit. I was told by the employees there that I could shoot better than most of the cops that come in to shoot. Ever seen those news stories where it states that the police fired 32 rounds and hit the suspect once… or the police fired 18 rounds and missed the suspects? Touche’

    BTW…I’ve never had formal training.

    • Robert

      I’m against guns. I prefer nukes. As long as you aim them in the right direction you have better than a 100% chance of hitting your target. So what’s wrong with a little collateral damage once in a while? Very large attack dogs are also a good substitute for guns. My dad had two dobies when I was growing up. I felt very secure with them around. His preferred defense weapon of choice was a hurling stick. Swung the right way, boom, decapitation. Now that’s what I’m talking about. Clean and fast. Lot of them around if your interested in buying one. Just go to any pub in Gaelic Park, the Bronx. You’ll probably also get a free pint or two if you buy one.

      • denniso

        Lovely, informed comment..My god!! Are you locked up somewhere??

  • Cathy S

    Richard Dobbins…I’m with ya and I’m a Yankee. :)

  • Cathy S

    Yes…it was in fact Clinton who initiated that UTTERLY ridiculous ban. No guns on military bases? They are SOLDIERS. Next thing…why not just disarm all the cops? No guns allowed in the Detective Bureau or the area commands, etc. These anti-gun people are about the stupidest people on this planet.

    THAT is why these 13 people died…the soldiers could not shoot back because they had no guns. And this TERRORIST knew it. Yeah, it was a terrorist act, although the WH wants to be PC and call it a tragedy. I’ve had enough of this crap, haven’t you all too?

    • Marc

      George Bush seemed to have no problem with the ban…..he had eight years to change it and didn’t.

    • Joe H.

      Cathy,
      Died you read my and Jims post above? No one was allowed to go around armed on post at any time,especially in the states. As much as I wish it could be blamed on Clintoon I was in from 68 to 74, when Clintoon was a college student in Cambridge England protesting the war on foreign soil!!!! In RVN when I was there, they even locked the arms up there unless you were on guard duty, on patrol, on flight schedual, or were being attacked!

  • Jim

    Sorry Phil, as much as I would like to blame Bill Clinton for not allowing firearms on military bases…it was not him. It has never been the policy of the Armed Forces to allow weapons on base unless in a theater of combat. I grew up in the military and I have served on several posts in Thailand, all along the “hot zones” of Laos and Cambodian border during Vietnam. At no time, other than MP’s or guards, did anyone go armed or have weapons handy. All weapons were locked in the Armory. Same on other US posts thru out the world. The base must be under immediate threat of aggression to allow weapons outside the armory. More than once I can remember cursing this policy when zappers came thru the wire.

    • Valverde

      Jim, that may be military policy, but it is a stupid policy. Israeli soldiers are armed. Swiss soldiers are armed. Why aren’t ours? I repeat, it is a stupid policy and should be gotten rid of.

    • Joe H.

      Jim,
      that’s not quite true. I know people that had personal weapons in the service stateside. They had to be locked up in the arms room and could only be taken out by permission of the commanding officer. This was 68 to 74 era.

      • http://PersonalLiberty Jeffrey Barker

        Yep, that’s right. I had POW’s and they locked them up. Took a CO’s signature to get them out. Ammo too.

  • Frank

    Gun Control debate does not have any effect on Military bases. Using this as an example of why more control, or restriction is needed is absolutely insane. Its funny how when the American people wanted Less Nuclear weapons the “deterrence against communism” idea was the politicians argument. Funny thing is they were right! By their own process they have proven that deterrence is an absolute effective weapon against agression. Bottom line here is the real issue is that they FEAR the American people having the ability to use the weapons against them. Can there be any other logic for their motives?

  • Richard Dobbins

    Through the midsouth & southern states, we are made up of good ole boys & good ole girls and we each look out for the other persons that surround us no matter what the color of their skin. We do not want a Muslim president or any other left wing person telling us what we must & must not do. We have many guns, ammo & other weapons & we are willing to protect our fellowmen & women from what ever comes our way. May God Bless America & Our Old American Ways!

    • denniso

      Obama is NOT Muslim!! And, you don’t care if a rightwing idiot warmonger draftdodger like Cheny tells you what to do?? Like, ‘give me your kids so they can go get killed in a senseless war’??

      • JeffH

        Obama has admitted his muslim faith! IDIOT!

      • Marc

        Huh ?? And just when did he “admit” that….?

      • Earlw

        I am a conservative gunner too, and I consider Dick Cheney to be one of the WORST things alongside of George Bush to have ever happened to this country…..This right Vs. left crap is old…

        The writer obviously hell-bent in his agenda of liberalism that he can’t see the forest for the trees. Your blindness is plain to see..Pure partisan-ism. Us and them. Whatever happened to we the people? America belongs to ALL of us!!!

  • Jane Scroggins

    I think it is hopeless! Now it is the fault of Americans who legally own guns that the military allowed a Muslim extremist in the military. BTW, shouldn’t the police be given some lessons in marksmanship?

    • Joe H.

      Jane,
      I know you have never been shot or you wouldn’t have said that. That police woman that dropped the guy was shot 3 or 4 times before she shot him! Don’t give her ANY grief. She is a real heroine!!! We need more just like her!!!

  • http://MSN Bob Steele

    All Muslims are not radical terrorist but currently a vast majority of the terrorists are Muslim. The terrorist attack at Fort Hood by Hassan happened because of the liberal Obama administrations movement back to a pre- 9/11 security. This guy had so many red flag indicators, its unbelievable he was not locked up or deported way before he murdered and wounded so many U.S. Military and civilians. The blame falls on Obamas failure to maintain a high level “Patriot Act” security while we are at war. It had absolutely nothing to do with gun control. We must all do what we can to remove the liberal influence in Washington and restore our government to one that holds National security as its top priority.

    • Robert

      We are back to a pre 911 mentality except for us NYers. That’s why this digraceful administration is sending those terrorists for trial to lower Manhattan. It will open up another opportunity for a terrorist attack on New York City. And Rahm Emanuel would have his wish. Another crisis to capitalize on. If Obama comes to New York again during his term, I hope all NYers boycott him by staying home and calling in sick. That includes the NYPD and NYFD. They lost plenty that day and this knucklehead is shoving it up all our you know what.

    • denniso

      Steele…Now your blaming Obama for the killings at FT Hood!!! The shooter has been in the military way longer than Obama has been in office(10 months), His problems developed while Bush was prez..so is Bush to blame?? Where is your non partisan logic??Don’t think beyond your narrow minded partisanship? Pathetic!!

  • jonathan pembroke pines fl

    DO WE FORGET THAT IN 1993 ITS WAS BY ORDER OF BILL CLINTON THAT THE MILITORY CAN NOT BE ARMED ON BASE. AND THAT GUN CONTROL ON A BASE IS TO A POINT THAT EVERY GUN HAS TO BE LOGGED IN AND OUT OF THE ARMORY JUST SO THEIR USE CAN BE CONTROLED!! WHY IS IT THAT THE PERSON OR PEOPLE THAT BREAK THE LAW GO TO VENUES THAT RESTRICT THE PEOPLES ABILITY TO DEFEND THEM SELVES TO DO THERE KILLING!!!! ASK YOUR SELF THIS IF ALL THE SOLDERS THERE WERE ARMED HOW MANY WOULD HAVE REALLY DIED IN VERGINIA TECH IN COLEMBINE GUN FREE ZONES OR KILLING ZONES????
    IN FLA WHEN THE CCW WAS INACTED THE ANTI GUN PEOPLE CRIED OUT THAT THERE WOULD BE GUN FIGHTS IN THE STREETS / YET CRIME WENT DOWN /AND THE GUN FIGHTS NEVER HAPPENED !!

    BUT THEN !!!!!!
    THE CRIMINALS STARTED TO TARGET THOSE THAT COULD NOT CARRY THE RENTAL CARS AT THE AIRPORTS AND PEOPLE FLYING INTO FLA./ WHEN AT NEWS STATION ASKED THE MASTERMIND OF THE RENTAL CAR BANDITS WHY THEY TARGETED THEM SHE SAID FROM JAIL THAT FLORIDAINS CAN CARRY GUNS IN THERE CARS AND THEY DID NOT WANT TO BE SHOT AS THEY COMMITED THERE CRIMES!!! THIS WAS IN THE PAPIER AND ON THE NEWS ALL OF ONE DAY WHY!!!!!!!! COULD IT BE THE ANTI GUN ANTI AMERICAN AGENDA
    SO WHY IS IT THAT OUR ARMEMED FORCES ON BASE AT HOME WERE UNARMED BY BILL CLINTION IN 1993 BY HIS PRESIDENTAL ORDERS WHY ARE THEY SO AFRAID OF THEM OR IS IT THAT THE LIBERIAL GOVERMENT IN ITS BID FOR TOTAL CONTROL AND POWER FEARS THEM !!!! AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE THE GOD FEARING FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE ONE LAST THOUGHT WHERE IN OUR FOUNDING DOCS. ARE THE WORDS ( A SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE ) FOR OVER 230 YEARS WE HAVE PRAYED BEFORE ALL MEATINGS ALL EVENTS AT THE START OF EVERY SCHOOL DAY ( TO GOD ) NOT TO THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND/ OR NOT TO THE CHURCH OF FRANCE / AND NOT TO THE CHURCH OF THE USA BUT TO GOD AS WE SEE HIM TO BE !!!!!!!!!

    • RM

      bill clinton was nothing but a skirt chaser. He should have been impeached. The presidents after him should have lifted that ban and allowed soldiers on the base to arm themselves. We did in the early 1970′s on base and on ship, in or out of port.

      • Valverde

        Just for the record: Clinton was impeached. He just wasn’t removed from office because there were too many wussy RINOs in the government.

      • denniso

        Please use your brain before writing.

      • Joe H.

        too bad you haven’t one to use!!!

    • LT_Prasuhn

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but Clinton did not ‘decree’ that all weapons on base had to be signed (logged) in/out of an armory and the year was not 1993.

      I joined the Army in 1965 and it was a regulation (rule to you civilians) even back then (and before that) that weapons were signed in/out of the ‘Arms Room’ (Armory). Only during Basic Training were ‘our’ assigned weapons stored in a (locked) weapons (gun) rack IN the barracks. This was ONLY to facilitate the issuance of weapons (our rifles – the M14) for when we were going to the range for target practice and weapons training. Otherwise, ALL weapons (except Privately Owned Weapons (POWs) owned by those soldiers — usually higher ranking (Specialist 4/Corporal or higher) living in Post Housing or on the economy)were otherwise REQUIRED (by Regulation) to be kept locked up in an Arms Room or Armory.

      Even still (today) this holds true and when a soldier does carry a weapon (rifle or pistol) while in the conduct of their ‘normal’ daily activities, they are NOT loaded, except when at the range (NO ammunition leaves the range – PERIOD) or if they are assigned as ‘armed escort’ for a prisoner (usually an Military Police activity) or the transportation of highly classified/sensitive documentation or equipment.

      Look at the Israeli army and its ‘citizen soldiers’…They ‘keep’ their assigned ‘military’ weapon with them – at their homes and carry them with them everywhere they go – ‘just in case’. With the exceptions of being bombed by an enemy government (Palestine rings some bells here) or ‘hit’ by a terrorist attack (car bombing, etc.) — which can happen even here, as proven by the 9/11 attacks in 2001 — you don’t hear of ‘loonies’ going ‘postal’ in that country, do you?

      ‘Nuff Said’

    • Marc

      Please…..less YELLING….more spelling…..

  • Bruce Knight

    This is not and will not be the last home grown terrorist. It is however unbeliveable that our goverment would spend 5 million dollars on a loon like this and not take into consideration his loyalty to the muslim faith. The weeks leading up to this incident he was seen repeatedly wearing clothing representative of his faith. This should raise some sort of red flag as to his loyalty to his country of birth. The emails to terrorist over in yemen. Then the point that one person made concering his buying a legal gun in Texas. DUH he was a legal citizen and a major in the U.S. Army. The issue is not with the gun laws and gun control. Had he been an illegal and had access to the base at Fort Hood he would have still been able to get any kind of gun he wanted by other means. If you pay attention to the news and the gangs running the streets of L. A, and Chicago. They all have guns (ILLEGAL) guns stolen or bought from the black market. they are as young as 15 and 16 and braqg about how cheap they are especially if the gun has a kill scored against it. If these idiots who want to ban the 2nd amendment and keep guns out of legal civilians hands and make them easy targets for any thug that comes along; who knows it may be their poor old Grand Mother that gets shot for less than 27 dollars, and believe you me they will think nothing of it. Good luck if you think the local police force is going to protect you. They just show up after the fact and make a report and give condolences.

    The answer is to give our citizens access to legal guns and the proper training and background checks for their firearms. Let them bear arms and respond to loons like this before he is able to kill 13 and injure another 30 unarmed soldiers or civilians. These cowards only attack in situations where they are assured of high casulties and low risk of being killed during their commision of their crimes.

    I had a friend who was sent to Afganistan and bought his on P92 Berretta side arm to carry in the theater of war. The Air Borne took the gun away from him because it was not a military issue and did not reimburse him for the weapon. It was the same weapon of issue but not issued by the military and therefore he lost a $ 400.00 plus gun. I don’t think that is right.

    This country is in serious trouble as long has you have left winged liberals spewing their rhetoric and assuming that all gun owners or vigilantes looking to shoot a nice innocent young man breaking into your home to steal something to sale for drugs and meaning not harm just trying to support a bad habbit he or she cannot help. That is BS. How many of you have been confronted while walking through a bad neighborhood and threatend by young hispanic or young black men in number of 10 to 20 and daring you to disrepect them or they will shoot you or cut you, and they think that they are so cool. Even the police departments want go around without proper back up.

    I don’t advocate going into these neighborhoods armed and looking for a fight because thats a fight you lose either way. Some mother and some father somewhere has failed to do their job and sooner than later they will lose that son or daughter to the gangs and their violence and then they will want to blame the system or some poor sap for trying to defend himself. You see it everyday on the news.

    The bottom line is guns don’t kill people! Sorry people kill other people most of the time innocent people and sometimes other sorry people. Guns have no intent only the people who posses them. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out who is who. When you see a cap turned sideways and a bandanna tied around the head and the smurk or attitude you know what you are dealing with. America wake up!!!

    • RM

      I do not believe in foreigners owning firearms period in this country and when and if they become citizens then they should go through a more severe background check than someone who’s been born and raised in this country.

      • CindyL

        Timothy McVeigh was a home grown terrorist, has killed 168 including babies, and that kinda proves that your theory about foreigners being the only threat is not logical.

      • Joe H.

        CindyL ,
        yup and he didn’t use a single gun!!! he used fertilizer!!!

      • denniso

        JoeH..why can’t you respond to her point?? It wasn’t about the weapon used. And, almost everyday we have good,white, nonforeign american males snapping or freaking and killing their families, kids and all..almost always native born whites. Back off on ‘foreigners’.

      • JeffH

        duh!nniso, firstoff you make another racist referance. Secondly, RM said firearms, CindyL made no mention of firearms. You got no business butting in with your “back off” comment. You back off!

      • denniso

        RM…I don’t believe in idiots owning guns…we should have a written intelligence test before issuing a gun permit to anyone..a lot of people here would be out of luck and we all would be safer!

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        Amen, then I would know some bleeding heart libber like you wouldn’t get a chance to go “LIBERAL”!!!! Oh, and as you said the other day, pay attention to your OWN posts, I’ll post when I want!!!! So There!

    • Valverde

      Amen! I have yet to see a gun jump up and start shooting. Hasn’t happened and never will. Gun control is silly. All citizens should be allowed to carry arms. It worked that way for over 200 years, it can work now.

    • denniso

      Sure you know who you’re dealing with? Could be a millionaire rapper or competitive skater..clothing alone does not make the person…if so, then maddoff was a nice law abiding man,since that’s how he dressed. You’re being way too simplistic!

    • Gisela

      Bruc Knight that is exactly why Muslims have no business in the US Army.When people come from any other country they usually have some kind of christian believe and fit in unlike the Muslims who are being tought that anyone of non muslim faith is an infadell and needs to be eliminated.Just look at the honor killings they do here on their own Kids.I don’t know why they come here other then to infiltrate and spy. They refuse to dress like us and refuse to fit in even if they were born here so I ask why do they come here in the first place.

  • Jerry Bauer

    It seems one of the reasons this guy could kill so many so easy was because on Military bases the military are not to have arms???? how on earth can that be? no 2nd amendment on bases i guess!!!!

    • Joe H.

      Jerry,
      That’s because you are under the UCMJ which governs all you do in service!

  • mbabsit

    I live in a state where citizens can have a CCW, as well as open carry. Citizens SHOULD be able to be PROACTIVE, not REACTIVE (like law enfarcement). Moreover, read Federalist 28: citizens are EXPECTED to not only contain rioters, but bring down excessive government.

  • awad skyhook

    Maybe what is needed is tighter muslim control?

    • DON

      I AGREE I’M 83 AND I’VE SEE THIS COUNTRY TURN 100% AROUND. WE NEED AGET TUFF POLICEY ON THE THE BORDERS AND MAKE SUR THAT ANY BODY HERE FROM FORIGEN COUNTRIES BE CHECKED OUT AND IF THEY ARE NOT A LEAGEL CITISEN KICK THEIR AS OUR.

      • Gisela

        Yes Don I agree 100% I came her as a legal Immigrant from Germany.They counted every bone in my Body checked for crimminal record and decease.No one printed things here in german.I learned the Language became a citizen and went to work and paid taxes, so when I see all the Illegals sponging of our country I see red.Our govenment looks the other way because they are afraid of the ACLU and all the bleeding hearts if they inforce the laws on the books.We need to protect our Borders and be more forcefull who we let in to our country.

      • Marc

        Maybe English as an official language isn’t such a bad idea…..or at least proper spelling….

    • RM

      No! We need to get them and other foreigners out of this country TODAY!

  • alwanderer

    One of the reasons for the second amendment is to protect the citizen FROM government. I don’t understand why this is not said more openly / often. Can it be that clarity would be uncomfortable ?? Good ole uncle SAM…. a threat ? We the middle class are perhaps too trusting of or co travelers, ‘fellow Americans’.

    • denniso

      You state your opinion about the 2nd ammendment like it’s fact..wrong. The 2nd says ‘A well REGULATED militia being necessary for the SECURITY of a free state’,etc… You guys have twisted it to fit your paranoia. It says nothing about citizens taking up arms against the federal gov’t…If you think a handful of citizens are ever going to win a military challenge w/ the various gov’t entities in our country, then you might as well start up another Republic of Texass independence movement and see what happens,again.

      • James E Bauer MD, MDiv, westen PA

        The “militia” was composed of citizens, each of whom was expected to bring his own gun or guns. There was no standing army.

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        and you like to take it out of context. Finish the sentence and the one after!! The freedom to have and bear arms SHALL NOT BE ABRIDGED!!!!

      • denniso

        Joey…that’s not the question..it was whether the 2nd is there to protect citizens from there gov’t…NO!! It says the security of a free state. State means the national gov’t. A militia was equivalent to our national guard that could be called up. Right, there was no standing army. Do you geniuses think that ‘well regulated militia’ could possibly mean untrained, scattered and ragtag individuals armed to the teeth to fight there own gov’t? Come on! Anybody remember the national guard shooting students during the 60′s? The guard didn’t shoot at the gov’t, did they?

      • http://personalliberty.com Jessica

        “Untrained, scattered, ragtag induviduals armed to the teeth” won the War of Independence, remember? They brought the great British Army to its knees. And their descendents are still here, so don’t count them out.

      • denniso

        Aye, aye, aye…Jessica..they used single shot muskets and cannon back then..Gov’t's now have weapons a little more modern.F-16s,tanks, artillery,rockets, etc,etc, not to mention nuclear weapons..dream on.

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        do you possibly think the vets out there that own the guns are “untrained rabble”? Are you really that dense? We vets are some of the best trained troops in the world. I might be older than you sonny but believe me when I say I could teach you a thing or two. There are a lot more vets out there that are younger and even better trained than I am! I would never commit insurrection against my country even though you would relish the thought of me saying so. that of course would give you the chance to report me like a good Maoist!!!

      • Dennis

        Joe H
        Jessica :-) :-) :-)
        I’m with you.Some of My gun’s are old but they are very very true :-)
        And my newer ones are even! well lets just say technology has come along way :-) :-) :-)

      • OldFirefighter

        No. you are wrong. The Militia consists of the citizens, it does not mean the National Guard. You must have been asleep, as the Supreme Court just ruled it is an individual right in the Heller case. If you don’t believe it read the Second Amendment again. It does say it is a right of the people & it is that right because the people are the Militia & would be the ones protecting us against domestic & foreign enemies. I carry concealed all of the time & will continue doing so. I don’t intend to be a victim of a gang member or any other criminal, nor will I let my family be either. Let me ask you a question. If you wanted to kill a lot of people, where would you go to do it? If you need a hint, how about a gun-free zone. There would be nobody to stop you, that is why there are mass killings at schools, colleges & in this case, Fort Hood. Nobody had any guns but the perp., as all of the soldiers weapons were locked up in an Armory. The Perp. did what he intended – he killed a lot of people with no interference from an armed victim. My concealed weapon has never hurt anyone or been a threat to any law abiding citizen. They walk past me every day & never know I am armed & that is the way I want it. I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

      • John

        Den, don’t forget the “etc.” part of your quote of the 2nd amendment.

      • JeffH

        duh!nniso you must be married to James. Go back to your trough and feed. You hate guns, Republicans, conservatives and anything that freedom stands for. Your rhetoric is very old news. Don’t you have an Obamanation posicle to suck on?

      • LT_Prasuhn

        For your information ‘denniso’, when the Second Amendment was written, a ‘well-regulated militia’ WAS the ‘citizenry’ NOT an army of trained troops. That didn’t come until later during the Revolutionary War.

        This ‘meaning’ still holds true today. Who else would be the ‘militia’ when the time would come (and it WILL) when ‘WE – The People’ NEED to defend ourselves from an oppressive government, let alone protect ourselves and others (those who want to disarm law-abiding citizens) from terrorist or others bent on killing many innocent people.

        Granted, the Second Amendment — which guarantees the citizens the RIGHT to BEAR ARMS — does not say we should take up arms against our government (so long as it (the government) doesn’t become ‘OPPRESSIVE’ against it’s citizenry). The JOB of the government is to PROTECT it’s citizens, NOT ‘OPPRESS’ them in the form of higher taxes, ‘though control’, interfering with their ‘personal’ and ‘private’ lives, etc. When this happens, then the citizens have only ONE recourse and that is to ‘take up arms against and OPRESSIVE government…which IS guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States — BACKED by the Second Amendment.

        So, YOU need to get YOU facts straight before spouting ‘idiocy’. ‘Nuff Said’!

      • denniso

        Later, LT.

      • Earlw

        Attention, Denniso……

        The “well regulated militia” in the second amendment refers to the TRAINING of the indicated people. You need to go and read the relevant discussions in the Federalist papers of the framers of the 10 amendments and learn the discussion among them and the reasons for the inclusion in the bill of RIGHTS. Regulated as you see it is a “controlled” militia…Not the intent of the creators at all. Learn your history well and you will understand you error. Furthermore, look at the description of “militia” in 10-USC 310 and 311(That’s United States Code)……I rest my case..

      • JeffH
      • American Citizen

        DennisO, you said the state is the government. I beg to differ, the state is the people. The government serves at the will of the people.

      • denniso

        Earl..later.

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        Is that your new reply when you know we are right? LATER!!!!

      • denniso

        I mean, I’m too busy working now to respond to nonsense right away. In other words, get back to you LATER.

      • denniso

        Earlw…’Well regulated militia’…if that only means ‘trained individuals’, then why didn’t they use those words? There was no standing army at the time and well regulated militia meant an army that could be raised from the public to defend the country from an outside threat…not a so called militia to fight their own gov’t. The founders had just set up what they thought was a shining model for a republic governed by 3 equal branches w/ checks and balances to prevent tyranny from developing. Were these founders so dumb that they couldn’t have said exactly what you think the 2nd means..arming the citizens for insurrection?? You think that ‘well regulated’ means only trained? Why didn’t they say trained? If you’re an originalist w/ the constitution then you can’t change the words. All of you like minded guys want to play w/ guns and revolution, join the guard or army. A gun for defense against crooks is a different story.

  • PATRICK RIDGE

    I wrote in the USA TODAY comment section a few years ago after other gun outrage this is will happen again and again and again until America does something with its’love affair with guns.What’s happened since?? Nothing and nothing will happen so the slaughter will go on.Don’t forget to duck.

    • Jesse

      In countries where private gun ownership is restricted violent crime rates rise. In general would be mass murderers choose venues where they expect to meet the least armed resistance.

      • denniso

        Jesse…another joke of a comment. Get your facts right or stop writing! What a ridiculous ststement. We have some of the absolute weakest restrictions on guns in the world..We have the highest rates of violent crimes among all the civilized world. Look it up!!

      • Earlw

        Please do your research again. there is more than adequate statistical analysis, when done honestly and without agendas of omission to show that armed states DO have lower crime rates… this has been discussed ad nausem and grabbers always take the same line in the face of the multiplicity of research and statistical analysis that has been done. Let’s see what your thinking is like after YOUR loved on or yourself is accosted and mugged (I was, by 8 young men in Philadelphia some years ago). So much for your “in love with guns argument”.

        An armed society is a polite society…..

        God created Man, Sam Colt made them equal…

        Would YOU mug someone if you thought you might be shot and die?

        Think about it………………………….

      • Gisela

        Earl W Here is another one, Society is safer when Crimminals don’t know who is armed

      • denniso

        Earlw..we were talking about different COUNTRIES, not states in this country…the U.S. leads the ‘civilized’ world in violent crime..we also probably have more guns than any other other country in total. The few states in the U.S. that have tough gun laws are surrounded by states w/ lenient laws and a country saturated w/ guns. It’s pointless to look at a few states and draw any conclusion. Look at countries around the world. We’re a disgrace to civilization. If you were right saying,’an armed society is a polite society’, we should be the safest and most polite in the world! Where is your logic??Buried by your blind loyalty to the gun worshipping NRA!!

      • Dennis

        Digital Publisher of the Year | Tuesday 17 November 2009 | Law and order feed
        The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital of Europe and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world.
        Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences in the UK since Labour came to power.
        The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South AfricA.
        The figures combined crime statistics for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
        The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country – 927 – and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
        It also recorded the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU, and the highest absolute number of burglaries, with double the number of offences recorded in Germany and France.
        Overall, 5.4 million crimes were recorded in the UK in 2007 – more than 10 a minute – second only to Sweden
        The figures were sourced from Eurostat, the European Commission’s database of statistics. They are gathered using official sources in the countries concerned such as the national statistics office, the national prison administration, ministries of the interior or justice, and police.
        A breakdown of the statistics, which were compiled into league tables by the Conservatives, revealed that violent crime in the UK had increased from 652,974 offences in 1998 to more than 1.15 million crimes in 2007.
        It means there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe.
        Austria is second, with a rate of 1,677 per 100,000 people, followed by Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Holland.
        By comparison, America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000 population.
        France recorded 324,765 violent crimes in 2007 – a 67 per cent increase in the past decade – at a rate of 504 per 100,000 population.
        But last October it emerged that levels of violent crime in England and Wales had been underestimated for more than a decade because of a blunder in recording methods.

      • denniso

        I don’t believe your numbers..I’ll look them up. The odds are you’re using ones faked or twisted by the NRA, your god.

      • Dennis

        denniso,
        The NRA and there Member’s are my Brother’s and sister’s Not my God. We stand for the freedom of this country, and the Constitution for witch it was built upon, even for your dumb a ss.

        Unlike you and your god obama. Your god is trying to tear it down.

        By the way that report came from a UK Survey, Boy ,9 yr old girl, troll, whatever you are. One thing Your not is an American.

      • John Gardner

        The numbers of importance are these, the British government passed the 1997 Firearms Act severely restricting the public ownership of guns. In 1998/99 there were 13,874 gun related crimes in the UK. In 2002/3 there were 24,070 and it is acknowledged this figure is likely to be significantly LOW because of errors in reporting. This does not take into account the vastly increased numbers of personal assault and burglary.
        So, without guns, crime rocketed. You don’t have to be Albert Einstein to work this out. The bad guys knew they were the only ones carrying. Simple. There will always be nutters but they represent a miniscule percentage of the population. Vastly more people are killed by automobiles every year. What are you going to do, ban cars?
        Keep a sense of perspective and allow honest citizens to defend themselves. What is your choice? Abolish the 2nd Amendment? The founding fathers, for very good reason, thought, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Take that away and you give criminals and government free rein to terrorise at will. Is that what you want?

      • Dennis

        According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports,–

        The violent crime rate decreased 1.4% from 2006 to 2007. From 1998 to 2007 the rate fell 17.7%.

        The property crime rate decreased 2.1% from 2006 to 2007. From 1998 to 2007, the rate fell 19.5%.

        WOW It fell, HMMMMMMM i wonder if thats because we have GUNS I THINK IT IS :0)
        They Attack the unarmed.Not the Armed.

      • Dennis

        Regulatory Issues
        April 13, 2009
        AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN
        It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
        Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

        In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
        Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
        Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
        Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — America’s rate dropped 31.7 percent.
        During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
        Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
        Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
        At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
        Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.
        While this doesn’t prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.

      • Marc

        United Kingdom rates are lower than ours and the have many gun restrictions. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita Anyone care to check what other countries on this list fit that ?

      • eddy james

        Marc, maybe you should move to the UK where you’ll feel safe. I’d rather have a gun and be safe.

      • John Gardner

        I’m Scottish, and finally live near London. Violent crime in Britain is soaring. The politicians use all sorts of devices to ‘manipulate’ the figures but the truth remains.
        I now live in France where burglary and car crime are rife. Rural crime is low because all farmers have at least one shotgun which is generally kept lying around somewhere handy. Criminals know this so they target towns.
        I am a member of a gun club and have the right to own several guns. I have no right to use them in self defence but do you suppose for one moment I would hesitate to use them if I was in a serious situation that I could not talk or walk from? Neither would any sane person.

    • RM

      Patrick I Do Not Duck. I throw lead back and thats just what we need to do in this country. Instead of hiding behind an unamerican agenda!

      • denniso

        Another tough guy who grew up watching too many lousy John Wayne movies. You really think more violence is the answer? Move to Mexico and try it..see how long you last w/actual brutality.

      • Vic Bailey, Auburn, Georgia

        Hey,, the safest city in the United States is Kennesaw, Ga. where everybody has to own a gun, most dangerous cities New York City and Washington D.C. where guns are outlawed.

      • denniso

        Vic…NYC has one of the LOWEST violent crime rates in the world as well as here!!!Look it up!

      • RM

        Look denniso,

        You call me what you like. I’ve been to mexico several times. Violence is the only answer when we have to deal with butt heads like you that just don’t get the point. You want your say but will not let the other side have theres. I’ll back up what I say, what about you? Or do you want to hide behind all the restrictive laws that the socialist liberals have passed inthis country, such as the hate crime law. I have the right to dislike whomever I want, if this adminisration does not like that too bad.

      • JeffH

        RM, one thing I notice about these liberal hacks like duh!nniso is that he constantly talks and accuses the conservatives of using violence to get our way on most things. It’s as if they are asking to be beaten or shot just to prove their point. I once heard it said, that if you wish for something it might come true.
        Just something to think about.

      • Joe H.

        RM,
        I can only think of two types of person that would protest guns as hard as our resident troll. Either a criminal, or a person who has a family member that is one!!! I’m just sayin’………

      • JeffH

        duh!nniso, you really are un-American, ditching John Wayne like that.

      • denniso

        John Wayne was a joke of an actor,never could act..he also did more than probably any other single person in encouraging violence rather than discussing. I can tell that most of you guys take him and Heston to heart..you sure as hell can’t discuss w/o leading to violent talk..lock and load, ammo,traitor,revolution,etc…You’re all like a gaggle of little kid bullies on the playground..grow up!

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        He could sure act better than you can think. of course that wouldn’t be too hard to do. John Wayne HONORED the American soldier as much as any other person I can think of. You on the other hand come as close to defaming them as anybody I can think of. When Viet Nam was so unpopular, he made “Green Beret” and made it one of the best selling movies that year! It portrayed the American soldier as very honorable people after people accosted, insulted, and did every despicable thing they could to defame the troops. So next time check things a little before you spew!!!

      • JeffH

        duh!nniso doesn’t watch anything but Obermann and old Karl Marx reruns.

      • denniso

        Soldiers who put their life on the line and do an honourable job of defending this country are nothing but admirable and deserve the most credit of any Americans. Leaders who put them in illegal wars where we don’t belong, should be tried as traitors and war criminals for the unnecessary destruction of soldiers and innocents lives.

    • Joe H.

      Patrick,
      think back to WW2 and how easy it was to march the Jews to the death camps because they weren’t armed and wouldn’t fight!!! Do you want that to happen here some day? It’s not a love fest per say it’s more of a need! With out them the criminals have free reign. The cops have an ETA through no fault of their own, the property owner has none!!! In the three to as high as 15 minutes it takes the cops to get to your rescue you could already be dead. Yeah, there might be a few that will have the gun taken away, but the majority will respond as needed and drop the intruder!! I assure you if I have an intruder intent on harm to my family or me I can and will respond!! 18months in RVN at least taught me that!

      • John Gardner

        Well said Joe! And what exactly is the purpose of the 38 so far identified, but as yet empty, internment camps located throughout the US? Each is reckoned to be able to hold in excess of 2,000 people. That’s a lot of people. So. who’s destined to enjoy the comforts of these places? Keep the people armed!

  • Bill Hicks

    It is unusual the Army changed it’s story 5 times about the shooting. Used hours to finally come up with the usual “lone gunman” story. Usually the first accounts of these type situations are the more accurate…such as three gunmen. Hard for me to believe one man, using 2 semi-auto pistols, which must be reloaded, could shoot so many people without at least one combat veteran attacking the shooter….and having to depend on civilian police to respond. Incredible or incredulous!

  • KC

    We NEED guns to protect ourselves from the nutjobs-we don’t need them taken away because if these people want a gun to use to kill innocent Americans, they will find one. We, on the other hand,will not have guns legally available to us to protect ourselves against these nutjobs if a law is passed to limit gun purchases or eliminate gun purchase altogether. It’s ridiculus to believe terrorists won’t be able to easily get their hands on guns if they want them.

    • eddy james

      Just remember that is the liberals finally manager to ban guns and ammo, and they try and take yours away…Dial 911, they will deliver a replacement with ammo 24/7.just don’t give a reason for them to come inforce.

  • Got freedom?

    This only goes to show you more people should be armed,so when some lunatic goes postal he can be taken down..Gun control is about control no matter how you look at it..The 2nd amendment is what makes us citizens and not subjects–Never allow the to take your rights with out a fight.Im not sure I want ppl to be unarmed,I mean there are alot of crazy ppl out there–and very bad ppl that want to harm others–More guns in the hands of law abiding citizens is a safer and more honest country-Take away those guns and any thug can take advantage of you–I say arm the ppl we will be safer from all forms of hidden threats and agenda.

  • Got freedom?

    This only goes to show you more people should be armed,so when some lunatic goes postal he can be taken down..Gun control is about control no matter how you look at it..The 2nd amendment is what makes us citizens and not subjects–Never never allow the to take your rights with out a fight.

    • http://Yahoo Scooter Orsburn

      Sure They Sold Him a GUN… He is a > M A J O R < in the United States Military ! The U.S.Government GAVE This IDIOT GUNS ! SOOOOOO
      Lets BAN IDIOTS in our Government ! THAT would Clean out the Whole MESS and OUR 2nd Amendment would be SAFE !

      • Joe H.

        Scooter, A giant AMEN to that!!!

      • American Citizen

        You got that right! Liberals tend to get everything bassakwards.

      • Eddy

        If your going to blame the military put the blame where it belongs.The idiot that calls himself the Commander in chief. Obama…two reasons Muslims shouldn’t be in the armed forces. Since it’s the religion of peace, discharge them as conscientious objectors.And since fanatics are crazy, and crazy people can not legally own guns they can be arrested without violating the 2nd amendment.

  • Norman Childs

    Whats needed is a through investigation of those with a Muslim faith
    and to determine their loyality to the nation not their religion. We have a classification called conscientious objector status for those who cannot claim true faith and aligence to the U.S..

    • Vic Bailey, Auburn, Georgia

      This is what we get for being a country of bleeding hearts. Dual citizenships, this is America, either pledge your loyality to America or GET OUT. If you can’t stand to kill killers then don’t watch the news or read the newspaper. We need to enforce the laws to EVERYBODY, O.J. should have been hung, but because of his status, he got away with murder.
      If you kill in cold blood, you have the right to die! And NOT thirty years later!!!! This allegedly crap when there more than two witnesses, needs to come to an end. Now the taxpayers have to pay for a 6 month trial and find out why he did it, when a bullet to his head would have the SAME end result, without costing the taxpayer but 32 cents.

      • RM

        I agree with you 1000% Vic. This guy is a TERROIST. I say take this butt head out and give him a bullet to the brain. Gun control is just what it says To Contol Law Abiding Legal Citizens that will not agree with this administration.If you do not like our country you have a choice LEAVE. I Will Not surrender my firearms to an obama socialist liberal government with there politically correct BS. They want the guns taken away from law abiding citizens so obama and his crew of unamerican followers can exercise full control over the American People. I say quit handing out aide to other countries and take care of ours first. Pack these foreigners bags and get them out of here, we do not need them. I say come and get some “Lead Poisoining” that is. If you want my guns come and get them. This administration is a disgrace to the American People and those that fought for her liberty I Say IMPEACH HIM and HIS COHORTS!

      • DixieConnie

        I agree: Obama should be impeached.

      • JustThinkin

        Impeachment is not really an option. He/we have to prove that he is really POTUS. Where is his citizenship?

      • Been there

        There are Christians who refuse to recite the “Pledge of Allegiance” because it is against their religion to swear loyalty oaths to any institution besides their God. Let crucify them and light up their crosses so the whole country can see.

        There are Atheists who refuse to recite the “Pledge of Allegiance” because it contains religious statements not compatible with their faith. Let’s crucify them upside down like Peter.

        There are black and native Americans who refuse to recite the “Pledge of Allegiance” because of the abuses that have been thrust upon their people throughout the history of this country. Let’s just lynch them from the highest tree.

        Let’s prove to the world once and for all that Americans are the savages it thinks we are, or…

        Let’s just punish the guilty and let the innocent live their lives in peace.

      • denniso

        I’m not sure some of these people will follow your satire..very good though!

      • Been there

        The call to expel or to insist upon more government scrutiny of people based on their choice of religion comes from the same totalitarian mindset that calls for people to be disarmed against their right to protect themselves. People are being punished for crimes they have never committed but that others believe they might commit one day. It’s called prejudice. For more on this read here:

        http://olgreyghost.blogspot.com/2009/11/fort-hood-gun-control-laws-and-freedom.html

    • Jesse

      The amazing thing about this report is the lie it contains. The victims were unarmed and yet his report says they were carrying guns and uses that lie to say that armed people are not safer. The last time I experienced political rhetoric so allergic to the truth was during the war in Vietnam. Could we first have some dedication to truth, condemn liars, and then pursue our agendas? A lie in support of what you want is still a lie, and if only lies support your view your view must be wrong in the first place. Could we please be rational human beings and not emotional animals.

      • John Gardner

        You have hit the nail on the head. Lying is now endemic but accepted by all and even highly rewarded. All politicians and lawyers lie on a daily basis and are praised for it. If you want a chance at liberty first make a declaration that no lies will be tolerated and severely punish those that continue. The result would be courts will close, government will cease to function and the news media will fall out of the tree. It’s not only America that needs this, the world needs it. Look at Europe: a tortured cross section of corruption whose principle function seems to be to generate yet more lies and have the population believe whatever nonsense is dreamed up – and they do!
        Such changes as truth would bring will be initially be very difficult but with time, patience and common sense America would undergo a transformation that all other nations would think impossible and yet envy. A true republic would be re-born. Fancy giving it a try?

    • Vic Bailey, Auburn, Georgia

      On 07/22/2009 the 111th Congress, 1st session voted on the right to carry law, to amend chapter 44 of title 18, to allow citizens with a permit in one state to carry in any state that had a right to carry law. Just about every Democrat and a few Republicans voted against the amendment. This proves that the librals want to keep the criminal safe and not you. If the American people don’t wake up and vote these people out of office you will get everything you derserve. We patroits
      are on the side of the citizen, we want you safe, we want the criminal
      knowing that we mean business. Send the bleeding hearts home, I want my family safe.

      • RM

        Vic,
        I agree with you again. I unfortunately live in where the liberals like pelosi,feinstein and boxer have the majority support in the big cities. I do not live in nor close to a big city and the folks here do not care for anti-gun, anti-hunting liberals that not only support those issues but gay rights and other obama agendies. Up here we could careless about the liberals and do not welcome them to our area. We had some tree huggers move up here, they did not last long before they moved out, could not stand the hunters shooting the game. I say boo who, glad to see them go. In my 60 years I can’t believe some of the people this country has produced.

      • Gisela

        RM I hope you know that the Ammo Bill that Schwarzenegger sign into law will come before the legislators in Jan.so send a letter stating Repeal AB962 and support AB373 The NRA and the Ca rifle and Pistol Assosiation are collecting the repeals and present them to the Legislators in hope this Ammo Bill will be overturned.You can send your Letter to the :NRA AB373 letters
        3565 La Clotat Way
        Riverside Ca.92501
        We need to do everything we can to keep our ammo right because without ammo what good are the Guns and that is what they are counting on.

      • RM

        Mam, I already have and thank you for the info.

      • Dennis

        Thanks Gisela,
        I have already signed it. I’ll tell you one thing, it’s a good thing that Schwarzenidiot made his movies before he became the Governor of CA., Other wise he would be a broke, flabby, X-body builder needing that joke of a bill OBUMACARE.
        It’s time to terminate the terminater’s career! :-(

      • JeffH

        I did the same as soon as it was announced, and passed it on through email to all my friends. Thanks.

      • Eddy

        I like what the Russians finally did to end their problems with a Czar.goes to show even in a place as screwed up as Russia when it get too bad politically there is a way to fix the problem , even if it’s the wrong way to go now. Buy your ammo now, while you still can. Here in California the liberals are on the attack for your guns. Even before the nut in Texas went off. He should never been here in the first place. AS wacky as he turned out to be, should faced deportation a long time ago. why do we let every nut from the third world come here ? what happened to standards? the oath of allegiance. Back ground checks? who in the hell is watching the door????

      • denniso

        Eddy..Mcveigh was born and raised in this country..so was David Coresh, who molested young girls which led to the disaster at waco..so was Jim Jones,who murdered several hundred.Don’t go berserk w/ paranoia.

    • Gisela

      I think if you take the citizenship of one country one should be required to give up the former citizenship.That said it dos not assure that they have an allegiance to this country.I do not think Muslims should be allowed to be in the Military because they will not kill any of their own but will kill us in a minute because we are the Infadells.

    • denniso

      Norman…Tim Mcveigh blew up 150 or so people, most of them little kids at daycare. A tragedy much more horrific than this. He was a Christian and had been fed anti gov’t crap like what’s on this site by fellow ‘Christians’, Should we have tested all Christians for loyalty to the country?? Maybe we should have. This demonizing of people or the gov’t is what can lead to what he did…all of you are responsible if another kook follows his lead, for the hate you’re spreading.
      The Ft Hood tragedy should not have happened..the killer is to blame and the superiors who let him stay in the military should be fired.

  • Robert

    Remember what Rahm Emanuel preaches. “Never seen a crisis that can’t be used to promote our agenda”.

    • Earlw

      Minor correction here…While what you say is true, the original from Rahm Emmanuel was ” Never let a perfectly good crisis go to waste”. Having said that, this is one evil SOB or worse…Just one more manifestation of the dangers facing our faltering republic (yes, republic, you liberals who think were a democracy).

      Expect renewed effort by the gun-grabbers as they rush to take advantage of the crisis (which they COULD have avoided if there wasn’t an ulterior motive).

      WAKE UP ALL YOU WHO VALUE LIBERTY!!!

      • Robert

        Thanks for the correction. Unlike the liberals in this country, most of us appreciate when someone corrects us on the stated facts. It makes us that more accurately informed.

  • Jim

    http://www.gwumc.edu/hspi/old/PTTF_ProceedingsReport_05.19.09.pdf

    GO HERE AND LOOK ON PAGE 29 – THIS DIPTERRORIST WAS PART OF OBAMA’S “ADVISORY TEAM” FOR HOMELAND SECURITY. NO WONDER THIS MUSLIM POTUS SCUM BAG WANTS CONGRESS TO HOLD OFF ON ANY INVESTIGATION.

    • JeffH

      Wow! Like he was under the radar or something. This is without a doubt an incident of terrorism and not some random guy buying a gun and snapping and killing people. The VPC is just another group of liberal hacks! Once again, political correctness stands in between the seperation of this muslim exremist from muslims.

    • Valverde

      Amazing! Thanks for putting this out there. It will be of great interest to a bunch of people I will send it to.

    • CindyL

      Jim, our paper this Sunday, debunked your comment. It also let us know that the bloggers would be trying to claim this as true. The Major went to a seminar on his own, and was not associated with Obama in any way. We have enough problems without fabricating ones. The military will do an investigation and the rest of us need to have patience and trust in our system to work correctly.

      • denniso

        Thanks CindyL for injecting some sense here. These guys hear or make up some ridiculous story and they all run w/ it…scary non thinking!

      • JeffH

        Geewhiz. Did you even bother to see that his name was listed. Either way, the FBI had this guy on their radar and allowed this to happen. Do other government blunders like Ruby Ridge and Waco that led to deaths of civilians come to mind? Both of these massacres could have been avoided if the G-men hadn’t been overzealous. You would have thought they might use better judgement with Hasan. Not the government way.

      • JeffH

        This isn’t an Obamas advisory board at all.

        The George Washington University Homeland Security Policy Institute (HSPI) is a nonpartisan “think and do” tank whose mission is to build bridges between theory and practice to advance homeland security through an interdisciplinary approach. By convening domestic and international policymakers and practitioners at all levels of government, the private and non-profit sectors, and academia, HSPI creates innovative strategies and solutions to current and future threats to our nation.

    • Marc

      Read the reference you gave…..what indicates this was Obama’s ‘Advisory Team’? It seems to have been prepared to whichever candidate won the election…. Looks to have been created in the Spring (or earlier) of 2008…before the election.

  • Chuck chumbley

    It is amazing that the left’s first responce is that “more guns are not the answer” when it fact it IS the answer. Major Hassan KNEW that there were not guns there because he was posted there. Rabid dogs like Hassan will always exist. It is only through the exercise of superior firepower that we can give check to such dogs. What REALLY irks me is that with enough people carrying, rabid dogs like Hassan would maybe have shot one or 2 before he was shot and not 12 people killed and 30 wounded! It was exactly because there were NO guns that he was able to do that.

    • Phil

      I believe it was Bill Clinton who disarmed our Armed Forces at their bases thereby giving anyone access to a free massacre.

      • Joe H.

        Phil, I beg to differ. I was in from 68 to 74 and we didn’t carry loaded weapons even on guard duty any where on post. I always thought it comforting to think if anything happened at least I could throw the weapon at them!!!

    • Leonard

      The socialist in our government want honest, decent people disarmed. The socialist know that deranged people will take advantage of the situation and massacre innocent people, because they know that they can murder several people in one incident. Our socialist can use this as an excuse for more gun control or NATO troops to occupy our nation.

      • denniso

        What a perversion of rationality!! You need help!

      • JeffH

        …and you need to get back to the trough, here piggy piggy, suey, suey.

      • denniso

        JeffH..I’ve assumed that you’re smarter than that..NO???

      • Joe H.

        denniso,
        and we’ve assumed you aren’t

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom