Are CCW permitted at Fort Hood? I bet not. n/t

[doc03]

[tekisui]

1. And?

What's your point?

[PavePusher]

3. If they were, this probably would have ended a lot sooner.

As a 19-year military member, it is my belief that the percentage of military members who have a CCW is somewhat higher than that of the population at large. Now, if only we could use that right on base...

Look up Fort Bragg and Fairchild AFB/shootings for additional data.

[TheWraith]

7. I doubt that.

A military base is supposed to be a secure facility. Who's expecting hostile fire in the middle of a medical exam? I doubt there would really be many people carrying on base even if it were permitted.

[doc03]

11. So these people that are fighting for our freedoms

are not permitted to a CCW to protect themselves or other soldiers, f-----g amazing.

[TheWraith]

14. Not really that surprising to me. A military base is a secured facility.

They have craploads of things that people could conceivably want to steal--banning people from having concealed or personal weapons is a nod to insuring that a bunch of grunts couldn't try to jack an airplane, or a truckload of C4, or something like that.

[PavePusher]

22. "A military base is a secured facility."

For the most part, not really. There are "secure facilities" on military bases, but very few of those even have armed guards. Many large Army and some large Air Force bases are wide open. Frequently only the airfield and a few command facilities are fenced off. Many places, even overseas, the housing areas are completely unsecured.

Getting on to most military bases (even those with Nukes) is no more difficult than faking an ID card.

All military people on active duty should be armed 24/7. Period. effing. dot. If you can't be trusted with a gun (bomb, fire, poison, electricity, aircraft MX, vehicles, pointy sticks...), you shouldn't be in the military.

[AtheistCrusader]

29. Huge debate around that.

Negligent discharges used to be pretty common, so the greatest, most stubborn, and unyielding bureaucracy on earth decided that needed to stop. Hence, you take your weapon to qualify, it's empty when you go, you get rounds there, you expend them all and take none with you.

You'll find armed soldiers on most bases only when performing guard duties, or the MP's are around. The rest of the time, very very few people are carrying a live weapon. Of the weapons that are fully capable of firing, even fewer have any ammo.


This has the unfortunate side effect of engendering ND's in forward bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, because the soldiers have little experience handling a live weapon 24x7. The debate is ongoing, even within the military, much like .223 versus anything bigger.

[gorfle]

41. I have heard...

Negligent discharges used to be pretty common, so the greatest, most stubborn, and unyielding bureaucracy on earth decided that needed to stop. Hence, you take your weapon to qualify, it's empty when you go, you get rounds there, you expend them all and take none with you.


I have also heard, from people who served in the military, that another reason they ration the ammo out only on an "as-needed" basis is they don't want people shooting their officers.

[AtheistCrusader]

50. I would assume that's more of a cynical joke BUT

there is historical precedent.

[doc03]

6. If they were permitted maybe the shooter

could have been stopped. That's my point. I figure being a military base they are not permitted for enlisted men, officers maybe.

[jeepnstein]

20. Back in '95...

I had a buddy who was at Ft. Bragg with the 82nd Airborne. His company came under fire during a morning PT run from some Sgt. who had come unglued. He stated quite matter of factly that the lack of a firearm didn't prevent him from rushing the guy.

If the D.O.D. wants to prohibit the carrying of weapons on base, I can understand that completely. It's their army and their rules.

It's a dirty shame about the guys killed and wounded today.

[Duckhunter935]

2. No

Restrictions Military personnel, government employees, and civilians authorized
and licensed by the State of Texas to carry a concealed handgun
according to the Texas Concealed Handgun Law cannot carry a
concealed handgun anywhere within the boundaries of Fort Hood.

http://www.forthoodhunting.com/FH_REG_190-11.pdf

[gorfle]

42. Whew!

It's good to see that they have those effective laws and rules to prevent people from bringing concealed weapons on base! :eyes:

[TheWraith]

4. Concealed carry is not permitted at ANY military base or DOD facility.

Either by troops or by civilians. Period.

[PavePusher]

23. Well, for the Air Force at least...

it is up to each base commander. I don't know of any that allow it though.

I have been working on a proposal for my base to allow it. I think I just moved that project to the very top of my to-do list...

[valerief]

5. Amazing how they get there, huh, with that rule?

:eyes:

[lepus]

8. And this has what to do with CCW?

Me personally, I kind of think of it as a point against the people who think that only government players should be trusted to have firearms.

[doc03]

10. It has everything to do with CCW, maybe a dozen peoples lives

could have been saved if someone had a CCW.

[RC]

12. The answer to stopping the killing it to give everyone killing machines?

Like that makes sense. Look at the Middle East.

[eqfan592]

19. Ahh yes, a twist of logic worthy of any true authoritarian!

How about letting people defend themselves using the most effective means possible from those who have no intention of obeying the law? Oh, that's right, you value dead victims more than living would-be victims. I forgot about that....

[RC]

25. Gee, I wonder why military bases have such strict control of guns.

You'd think having a very high % of personal trained on gun safely & use, they let them carry them around all the time. :shrug:
Maybe they know something you don't?

[PavePusher]

26. Yes, it's called "liability at promotion time".

Basically, no officer wants his record to reflect the rare but inevitable dumb-ass who will do something... dumb-assed.

It's also a reflection of when the military was a male-only deal, and most enlisted personnel were not allowed off-post without special permission. This tends to make people... cranky... for the obvious reasons.

[AtheistCrusader]

31. A few Negligent Discharges led to strict control by the military.

Which has the consequence of high rates of ND's in bases in actual combat zones, because the soldiers are unprepared to deal with daily life with a M4 slung around their neck all day long.

I'd take some accidents (which training can generally address) over a hostile with nefarious intentions running amok.

[AtheistCrusader]

30. Well, it CAN be an answer.

If everyone turned their backs, and stopped interfering, they would fight until one side was completely wiped out. Then there would be peace indeed, in a manner of speaking.


(I do not endorse this solution)

[rd_kent]

49. HAHAHAHA....killing machines....HAHAHAHA

I LOVE the hyperbole!

[villager]

9. Just when you think the Gungeon can't stoop any lower...

n/t

[SteveM]

21. ...DeVille is ready to savor the stink.

[AtheistCrusader]

32. Seems like a practical question, actually.

You don't have to smear everything with innuendo, you know.

[benEzra]

33. You must have missed the glee thread

about the unarmed mother of 3 who was shot in the back in her kitchen by a rogue LEO.

Oh, wait...

[rl6214]

46. Just when you think the gungeon can't stoop any lower

they let you in.

[Arctic Dave]

13. The question you should ask now is, How draconian are gun requirements on DoD

facilities going to become after this?

[TheWraith]

15. Depends on where the weapons came from.

If they're Army issue pistols taken from stores, it'll be an internal security problem.

[Arctic Dave]

17. So a couple of people get CM and its all good?

[slackmaster]

16. No, of course not. Military bases are largely gun-free safety zones,

Except for people who are required to carry them on duty.

[doc03]

18. Probably one of the few places in Texas where people don't

have CCW rights and we have one of the worst massacres in history. Fort Hood would compare to a gun banning city like Chicago. What if the victims of the murder rapist in Cleveland had a CCW?

[oldhippie]

24. No. I work on Fort Hood and have a CHL ......

Absolutely not permitted to carry on post. Even bringing on post a shotgun to shoot skeet at the Gun Club is a PITA.

I was locked down in my building until 1900 (7 PM for you civilians).

The only folks with weapons are guards and police, just like any other (gun free)city.

[PavePusher]

27. Hope you and your comrades are all in good health.

"The only folks with weapons are guards and police, just like any other (gun free)city."

And there's damn few of those.

[one-eyed fat man]

34. it's worse than you think

The CIVILIAN contractors manning the gate are armed and have ammunition. The soldiers detailed to guard duty in most instances have only an empty weapon. Even those exceptional circumstances where a sentry is issued ammo, actually chambering a round is generally proscribed until ordered or under fire.

Regardless, what makes this attack beyond despicable is that it that the perpetrator, a Medical Corp Major, did not have to resort to fake anything. The uniform, the ID card, everything were all as genuine as can be. There was nothing to betray his evil intent until he shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before opening fire. Who would look twice at an Army doctor walking into an Army Medical Processing Facility except to see if a salute were required? This is a betrayal most foul!

The last execution by the U.S. Military was the hanging of Army Pfc. John A. Bennett, on April 13, 1961, for the rape and attempted murder of an 11-year-old Austrian girl. Bennett's execution took place four years after it was approved by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Should Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan be found guilty under Article 118 of the UCMJ, it is my fervent hope that he shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct. May the hangman say back to him the same words he used when he opened fire on his fellow soldiers, `Allahu Akbar!'

[X_Digger]

28. Glad you're still here to post!

Hope you and yours are all alright! Take care!

[tekisui]

35. Some of the victims were killed by 'friendly fire'.

Had there been 30 people with CCW, and had they been carrying, the death toll may have been much higher.

When the guards, with guns, got on the scene, they killed some of the innocent bystanders. Just imagine if they showed up and saw a shoot out with multiple shooters. Everyone with a gun would be dead.

[slackmaster]

36. Or not

It's not possible to say what would have happened if CCW was permitted on base.

[tekisui]

37. I agree, that is why this OP is ridiculous.

[slackmaster]

38. The purpose of the OP is to point out that Fort Hood is a "gun-free safety zone"

Which makes it a desirable target for mass murderers.

[tekisui]

39. Not entirely, the point of the OP is also that it would have ended sooner.

Which is without merit.

[slackmaster]

40. It may or may not have, the point is that the prohibition on personal weapons didn't do any good

Which parallels what is seen in statistical evidence among states that allow CCW vs. those that do not.

[eqfan592]

43. Sorry, but your wrong.

Yes, it COULD have POSSIBLY turned out as you say, OR it could have meant that, instead of a prolonged gun fight (which is what they got anyway in spite of there being no CCW's allowed), the people being shot at could have dropped the assaulter's before the MP's even arrived.

There's two sides to the coin, buddy, and just because you can bring light to one side doesn't mean the other side has any less merit.

[armueller2001]

44. If you'd like examples of

mass shootings that have been stopped by private citizens before police arrived, saving lives, you can just look up the New Life Church shooting in Colorado or the Appalachian School of Law shooting in Virginia.

Can anyone provide examples where someone carrying legally has made a mass shooting situation WORSE?

[RamboLiberal]

47. Where are you getting info that some killed by friendly fire?

I haven't seen that anywhere yet. As far as CCW on a base - I'll leave that up to the military.

[rl6214]

48. Can you please supply some evidence that supports your

claim that innocent bystanders were killed by the responding guards? I have not seen or heard that in any news report.

[RamboLiberal]

51. Finally found the story that mentions friendly fire

Officials are not ruling out the possibility that some of the casualties may have been victims of "friendly fire," that in the confusion at the shooting scene some of the responding military officials may have shot some of the victims.

Cone acknowledged that it was "counterintuitive" that a single shooter could hit so many people, but he said the massacre occurred in close quarters.

"With ricochet fire, he was able to injure that number of people," Cone said.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-11-05-Fort-Hood_N.htm

Though I don't find Cone all that credible on firearms after hearing him last night or that it took him till after 9PM to announce that Hassan was still alive.

[AtheistCrusader]

52. Cite your source.

"The gunman was struck four times by a civilian police officer who also was wounded herself. Authorities said Kimberly Munley fired on the suspect just three minutes after the gunfire began, and base officials said her efforts ended the crisis. Munley was recovering Friday at a hospital and was in stable condition.

"It was an amazing and aggressive performance by this police officer," Cone said."



Where are you getting cross-fire? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I'm not seeing it in any major news carriers.

[rl6214]

45. Like ALL federal facilities

Firearms are not allowed.