Entire Army, including Fort Huachuca, is reeling from Texas rampage
Fri, 11/06/2009 - 01:08
Monica Cain, 44, tries to get in touch with her husband, Sgt. Darren Cain, who was stationed at Fort Hood, on Thursday.
(Associated Press)
Printer-friendly version
Send to friendFORT HUACHUCA — Thursday’s shooting deaths and wounding of so many soldiers on Fort Hood, Texas, is difficult to comprehend, Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Roberts said.
Having served on the sprawling Texas post from June 2005 to June 2008, where he was the command sergeant major with the 504th Military Intelligence Brigade, Roberts said the Texas post is one of the Army’s main installations where thousands of soldiers and their families live.
If you find a correction for this story, please contact our editorial department
Related Terms:
Family Fun This Week
|
Tue, 02/14/2012 - 05:30 - 07:00
|
|
Sat, 02/18/2012 - 09:00 - 12:00
|
|
Sun, 03/11/2012 - 04:30 - 07:00
|
|
Fri, 03/16/2012 (All day) - Sun, 05/06/2012 (All day)
|
|
Thu, 03/29/2012 - 10:00 - 12:00
|
|
Mon, 04/23/2012 - 09:00 - 16:00
|
|
Fri, 04/27/2012 - 10:30 - Fri, 05/01/2015 - 10:30
|
The media has successfully blamed this on guns when that was not the problem.
It has come to light that this guy was in touch with the Imam who was in
touch with several of the 9/11 bombers. He made statements frequently about
his religion and his religion being attacked. All the signs were there and
the investigators did not follow up because we have to be politically
correct! It is not appropriate to go after a Muslim—that is profiling and
god forbid anyone follow this guy’s calls and emails because his civil
liberties would be violated. I am sorry, but to me a line has been drawn. All
of the people who are so worried about those things need to take
accountability and recheck reality. I can think of thirteen reasons why those
things aren’t more important. Because we didn’t want to offend anyone
thirteen people are dead and numerous injured. I can’t believe that people
STILL argue for that. How many more dead Americans before we get serious????
I agree with Windsor. The gun did not shot the people, the confused
individual did. The army needs to step it up and make sure this does not
happen again. Forget political correctness. Let’s look out for the AMERICANS!
I have an honest question. I have a lot of negatives points when it comes to
any thing about guns. Why are people afraid to have a cooling off period?
It’s to protect people, knowing in anger someone can NOT purchase a
gun(legally). Why not mandatory training? This also protects people. You
learn the correct way of handling a gun.. You learn safety. Why not more
investigating? To me any responsible gun owner would want those things or do
them. Right now there is no way to tell the honest helpfull gun owners from
the other ones. You can not get those guns back, but we can try to make it
more difficult for them in the future.
Cooling off for what , a Major who is a doctor will pass all the tests you
have mentioned and more, he knew how to handle a weapon! This wasnt an
accidental discharge of a weapon. Open your eyes - he wasnt a criminal, he
wanted to commit a terrorist act and he did.
I have an Arizona concealed weapons permit. In order to get a permit, you
must attend an 8 hour(minimum)training course. You must also fire your weapon
on the range and have a passing score. I know they do a background check on
everyone as well as take a copy of your fingerprints. I’m not sure about the
cooling off period for non permit holders. On this, I agree with LGreenlee on
this one, that only the criminals will have the guns. For all you know, this
guy could have stolen the gun. No law is going to fix that. I do think that
other states should follow Arizona’s example though. As for your comment
about how tell the honest gun owers from the other ones, that’s one reason I
have my concealed weapons permit. You’ll never be able to tell who’s going to
hurt you, so I try to not set myself up to be a victim.
Two issues here. 1) there are already laws in place. The law abiding citizens
are within the law, criminals are not. If you make the laws more restrictive,
the law abiding citizen will follow the law, the criminal will not. The only
thing that changes is it makes it more difficult for those that follow the
law. Nothing changes for criminals. They will break whatever law you put in
place. Case in point, Ft Hood. It was illegal to have POW’s on base. The
victims followed the law, the terrorist did not. Net result, the law abiding
citizens were killed. 2) The Government rarely, if ever stops at “just a
little regulation”. Literally every government that has begun any level of
gun control has resulted in the guns of the citizens eventually being
confiscated. Case in point, CA, IL, NYC, D.C. etc. This is an old story
worldwide. Nazi Germany - gun control, Soviet Union - gun control, Communist
China - gun control. Just remember, when armed, you are a citizen, when
unarmed you are a subject.
In this AR there is nothing stating that POW’s are illegal on a base. It does
state that it is up to the instillation commander on the storage of weapons
and ammunition in the Arms room. If the Ft. Hood commander declared it
illegal then I stand corrected. I know Ft Huachuca lets folks with weapons on
post to hunt as long as you comply with all post regulations on having the
weapon.
HR, you are correct about the AR. I was being generic in that all
installations pretty much follow the policy that weapons are prohibited
unless being transported or used in and authorized manner with specific
permission. Even with a concealed carry permit, you cannot just carry a
weapon on base. The Ft Hood Commander did declare this same policy. The
intent was to show that laws are in place already and that this piece of
garbage Muslim was breaking the law. It was also intended to show that when
citizens follow the law, they endanger themselves and their families. The
laws do need to change, but they need to be much less restrictive on gun
ownership and much more effective on prosecution and punishment of criminals.
I agree just wanted to point out that having a gun on post is not illegal. In
fact when transporting POW’s you have to have them unloaded at all times.
Also you must physically separate the ammunition from the firearm as well.
This scumbag muslim did break the law in that respect. I do think this
country needs to wake up again before we do have another 9/11. We are slowly
sinking back to a pre 9/11 mentality and that is something we cannot afford
to do.
I think you may be incorrect in the base not allowing POW’s. Most military
bases allow you to have a POW if you register it with the Provost Marshal. If
you live in the barracks then you have to keep the POW’s in the unit arms
room. If you live in housing you can keep them in your house. The biggest
question is if the Army knew about his radical muslim links, why was nothing
done?