Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) proposed an amendment to the 2015 national defense authorization allowing military personnel who’d passed state-certified gun safety courses, a background check and a psychological evaluation to openly carry firearms on bases. Last night, he pulled the plug on the proposal. “My concern had been when we had a second shooting without the administration having done anything after the first Fort Hood shooting, and then we have a second Fort Hood shooting four and a half years later, it made no sense not to do something.” And here’s someone who should not do something: former astronaut and current civilian disarmament campaigner Mark Kelley. Kelly welcomed the amendment’s death . . .
“Congressman Louie Gohmert’s amendment forces our military to do something that the Pentagon and base commanders have said over and over won’t make our soliders any safer: permit military personnel to carry loaded guns openly on bases.”
In the car this morning, Dan and I heard Progress Radio talk show host Stephanie Miller voice a similar sentiment, stating that Commanding Officers should remain the ultimate arbiter of gun-free on-base safety. Because they did such a great job at Fort Hood. Twice. Or something like that. [h/t DH]
Sounds like someone got some dirt on ol Louie.
Or payed him off.
@Deadeye, Yep.
Probably just someone in the military who doesn’t want congress messing with their orders… someone who builds something in his district, perhaps?
Perhaps the GOP doesn’t want to touch anything related to guns before the 2014 elections, just like the smart Dems will keep away from the topic before 2014.
No. Gohmert is one of the very few true conservatives in Congress, and you’re doing him a disservice.
The quote above is a small part of the discussion. The issue was parliamentary procedure; Gohmert’s amendment came late in the process, and thus needed to come in a different way. Further, as he related in the same conversion (captured here on CSPAN):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkaDxEV6-g
… he was going to re-craft elements of it based upon conversation with military commanders and former commanders. So, “based upon assurances” from his colleagues that this could still be brought into the process, he withdrew this amendment. But he will continue to push.
In fact, a Democrat rose as a result to potentially interpose an objection to the withdrawal, based upon the fact that it was in a position (“through this colloquy”) to be re-introduced later. He talked about how Democrats would strongly object to any such amendment, and asked about whether the reintroduction was possible. He was told that “it was a matter for debate.” He considered, looked around, and decided not to make a further issue of it, withdrawing his objection.
Please do not take the leftist media’s presentation of this (as reported in the post above) at face value.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
procedure
I posted as much elsewhere here. But I am still concerned that Gohmert’s bill would have required military members to be retrained in gun safety, and pass a background check and a psychological evaluation before being allowed to touch a gun “unsupervised.”
@Keith DeHavelle, time will be the judge now won’t it? Believe me, I like(d) Gohmert very much. If he is true to his word, I will like him even more. But the ball is in his court. Do I completely trust him? No. He is a congresstard afte rall.
I thought it had been a while since Kelly said something stupid. By his logic, our troops shouldn’t carry firearms into battle either, because it won’t make them any safer…
I cannot remember the name of the movie and I think it was one of the Zulu/British empire movies set in the late 1800’s (movie made back in the 60’s or 70’s). It revolved around a platoon of soldiers sent to defend British subjects gathered at an mission. The nuns, not wanting to see anyone get hurt, snuck into the armory at night and removed all the firing pins from the rifles. The next day, as the attack was approaching, the officer decided to fire a warning shot. The next few minutes were spent getting the firing pins from the nuns, breaking down the rifles and reassembling them before they were overran.
Gun-control “common sense” works something like that.
Not explained in the movie: How nuns understood firearms design enough to not only know what a firing pin was, but how to remove it silently from a platoons worth of rifles without leaving any evidence behind.
BINGO.
As much as I personally disagree with the policy, if you think the base commanders are making a mess of things now, just wait until Congress starts micromanaging them.
That is congress micromanaging them. Otherwise, they are soldiers, why would they not allow licensed carry? Because if they have a licensed carrier shoot someone, their next promotion just disappeared. If they have prohibited everyone from carrying, gee, I guess it couldn’t be helped. Biggest cowards in the world are officers up for promotion.
Um….why?
Call me stupid, but …
If we place deadly weapons in the hands of our military service members who are sworn to carry out their duty in combat, and if we have had now several tragedies with their fellow service members not doing so on their bases, why not give our men and women in uniform a chance to defend themselves against those among their ranks who would do them harm?
Would it be fair to say that when seconds count, the MPs are only minutes away?
Or do we not trust our service members, the vast majority of them, to do the right thing?
The answer is crystal clear to any 10-year old, but eludes many adults, such as yourself: THEY WANT THEM TO BE KILLED! Make hay while the sun shines. Wait ’til the Sun shines Nelly, by and by. Lazy Ole Sun. Sunshine of Your Love. Ain’t no Sunshine. Sunshine Superman. House of the Rising…..
If anyone has been paying attention, WAR has been declared on returning vets. Which is a tremendous opportunity for us. Seeing as how war’s been declared on them specifically BECAUSE they have invaluable combat training, and can lead American citizens into battle, against an out-of-control government.
Man, I’m a little on the fringe with the whole 2a thing but that is just some insane stuff right there.
It’s not even internally consistent.
If you wanted to get rid of large numbers of combat trained personnel the simple answer would be to send them piecemeal into battles that they wont return from, or even bomb them yourself and blame the enemy, not wait for some manic to take out a few here and there. To the extent that they are active duty you could simply fly them all out of the country on orders in the event you decide to send the balloon up and thus take them out of the equation.
If you’re not joking, you’re actually insane.
http://americaswatchtower.com/2009/04/14/homeland-security-classifies-returning-us-veterans-as-potential-terrorist-threat/
Next time, son, DO SOME ACTUAL RESEARCH before flapping your yap.
It’s a catch 22. People think mil bases are perfectly safe because they have so many armed individuals, so they don’t need any firearms. Yeah, when you say it out loud it doesn’t make any sense, but its hard for some people to put the whole sentence together. MPs aren’t stationed every 50 sq ft on base like civilians like to think.
At the very least, allow the two soldiers on staff duty (24-hour shift) to carry firearms. Not sure how many units/company barracks buildings there are in Ft. Hood, but that would certainly be a step forward.
I say again, seems like forever, it is a UNIFORM change required, in BDUs (fatigues), officers and NCOs uniforms include sidearms. On base and off. They are the freaking military. If we do not trust them, we are done.
That was the policy before WWII. All duty officers and staff NCOs were required to carry sidearms. My associate Pastor who is a retired O-6 told me when we discussed this that many commanders returned to this policy after Vietnam when the Army had lots of trouble with drugs and poor discipline.
Stupid Idiots,it shows their complete ignorance to the problem and will perpetuate more shootings at military bases.Look at what a great job the government does in running anything!
Well, I wish the amendment would have gone further and permitted DoD civilian workers to carry if licensed in their state….
You forgot to point out how well the current ‘gun-free zone’ policy worked at the Washington Navy Yard. It isn’t just an Army issue….
Wait! You mean we have people in our military who aren’t already trained in gun safety, can’t pass a background check, and are unstable? Why are those people in our military?!
Yeah, that had me scratching my head too!
Glad I’m not the only one that thought that’s some pretty obtuse wording.
I did a double take on that one too. Who are these unstable, untrained members of the US military who have criminal back grounds?
We can’t tell you, wouldn’t be PC.
Mark Kelly and all the non-carry asshats are going to get folks hurt and killed. There WILL be another on-base shooting. The law of averages makes it a certainty.
Mark Kelly and all the non-carry asshats *have gotten* folks hurt and killed. There WILL be another on-base shooting. The law of averages makes it a certainty.
FTFY
Honestly, the amendment wouldn’t have changed much. Even if Congress gave the legislative OK, the D.o.D. answers to the POTUS: as does the civilian department heads.
Bottom line: base commanders would be like “whatevs, no guns for my troops anyways.Must have corner Pentagon office……. “
I don’t understand why anyone would want to join the military when feckless cowards who don’t give a **** about your safety at home are the ones running things.
This, combined with the idiotic social justice **** that’s crept in, leaves me surprised recruiters even meet their recruitment goals.
Probable why they are pushing for illegal Dreamers to enlist.
Military commanders should be free to actually, you know, command. So it’s their call.
OTOH, anyone who enlists in this climate is being taken for a ride by the government. The base commander doesn’t care if they get killed by a militant jihadist or renegade soldier, and if they make it off the base alive and shoot the wrong person on the battlefield, the G will go out of it’s way to court martial them.
On top of which, the VA will screw them to a faretheewell. While vets are dying because of the VA’s neglect, the G is making sure that illegal aliens have good health care and a nice, new phone.
Want to change the way the military acts? Don’t enlist. End of story. If you volunteered, stop complaining. This is what you signed up for.
Sadlt, I agree. According to the news Obama was given a headsup on the VA Scandal a year ago and apparently did nothing. Or Valery instructed Chuck to keep it hush hush or something. H/t Instapundit
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/188994/
30 years ago when the biggest bulge of vets now receiving care, the Vietnam generation, enlisted the social contract was free medical care for life when you retured with twenty. Now that promise is delivered via Tricare, which was transitioned to the Medicare system, which we already know will have benefits reduced by the amount of money taken out of it for Seniors as a whole, to pay for the Obamacare benefit for those under 65. Which we know now is not paying for itself due to not eniugh healthy young signing up to pay for the more than anticipated older and sicker who did. Not to mention the additional subsidies of free healthcare for those under 65 who fit into wharever favored Democratic voters of the future the Feds or State exchanges need to buy votes from, including as Ralph notes, illegals and welfare moms, the fake disabled, etc.
And Tricare is the system the vets try to get on but if there is no state grant to fund their deductions or copays…they have to use the VA hospitals. To be denied appointments for months, crtitical tests, etc. Remember “death panels”…well, this is it, by default.
Most of the people who served in Vietnam enlisted in 1984? I think that you mean more like 45 years ago.
Joined up in 1969, retired in 1991. When I reached 65, my monthly giveaway to Medicare for myself and bride went from zero to $2400/yr, since then I’ve been bad, made too much money, punishment was $4800/yr. Benefits increase, not so much. When I was considering joining, I was PROMISED free medical care for life if I served 20, a real consideration, a real incentive, discussed with my bride, before my enlistment decision was made. I was lied to.
Correct foggy. My bad math based on denial.
I still think i am 21, and every morning am surprised by some fat old gray haired guy in the mirror looking back at me while shaving.
Actually during his FIRST presidential run, Obama ran on a campaign platform of “fixing” the VA because it was broken.
Sen. Obama, 2007 TV appearance: “When 400,000 veterans are stuck on a waiting list, we need a new sense of urgency,”
Sen. Obama, 2008, Charleston, WV speech: “At a time when we’re facing the largest homecoming since the Second World War, the true test of our patriotism is whether we will serve our returning heroes as well as they’ve served us. We know that over the last eight years, we’ve already fallen short of meeting this test. We all learned about the deplorable conditions that were discovered at places like Fort Bragg and Walter Reed. We’ve all heard about what it’s like to navigate the broken bureaucracy of the VA – the impossibly long lines, or the repeated calls for help that get you nothing more than an answering machine. How can we let this happen? How is that acceptable in the United States of America?”
Obama was briefed on these backlogs back in 2008: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-did-obama-know-the-va-hospital-scandal-and-when/
“vets are dying because of the VA’s neglect”
You don’t have your priorities straight. Sure vets are dying on waiting lists, but at least the VA is fast-tracking sex changes.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/05/16/Obama-s-VA-Fast-Tracks-Expensive-Sex-Change-For-Convicted-Traitor-Bradley-Manning-At-Same-Time-Vets-Die-on-Phony-Waiting-Lists
Which shows that the G values transsexual traitors more than it values its soldier, sailors, airmen and marines.
Which is to say less than day-old boogers.
Well, thank goodness. But what happened to “lowest bidder” sh!t? I could geld that bitch for $5! In 2 minutes. And if (s)he was not satisfied, I guarantee a return visit would silence any further problems.
Armed police should be stationed on the bases at all times with full body armor and carrying scoped rifles and handguns.
How silly. How EXPENSIVE! Why not arm the Army? Every man, every day, after graduation from basic, ARMED. On base, off base, like a LEO, what is the problem?
It seems Mr. Kelly’s brain didn’t make the return trip to earth with him. One suspects it must be just yet another piece of debris in low earth orbit.
I doubt that. I also doubt his wife has anything to do with this, other than motivation, in which I hope for the best for him and her. Otherwise, I suggest you follow the money.
Election-year grandstanding.
Maybe things’ll change next time Ford Hood has another unfortunate incident. What do they say? Third time’s a charm?
Enlisted personnel, at least in my experience, were treated like irresponsible children. I don’t expect that to change.
I’ve had this discussion about on-base carry with a number of military personnel, including a retired Army Master Sergeant and an active Lieutenant Colonel. They all tell me that the military, at least the enlisted, is comprised of alcoholic misfits that cannot be trusted with guns outside of being deployed and closely watched over.
Elitists. I was a Naval Officer- the enlisted will live up to the expectations you set for them. I was in Darwin Australia in charge of the emergency recall of the Navy and Marine personnel to the ships if required on 9/11.
We heard about the attacks, after a bit the decision was made to recall everyone. Unnecessary. The enlisted folks saw the attacks and the aftermath on the TVs in the bars and nightclubs. (it was late evening/night in Darwin)They headed back on their own–thousands of them. They understood what the attacks meant, that they would be needed to do the job they signed up for and the bars/clubs were already empty by the time shore patrol was out spreading the word. Only one person out of thousands didn’t make it back. (Sailor met a girl and had already left the area AWOL prior to 9/11.) I can not say enough about those young men and women, how they responded willingly to the call. They weren’t just in the military for the benefits– they truly wanted to serve their country.
Damn. You beat me to it.
“the enlisted will live up to the expectations you set for them.”
Bingo. Our sailors were treated like children, and that’s how they behaved. It was a self-propagating downward spiral. It was rather disgusting to see how some “leaders” viewed and treated people who knowingly, willingly offer to put their lives on the line.
Slight hijack, but as long as we’re on this detour…
A guy I know was in the Navy. His brother wanted nothing more than to join the Navy, too, so he went to the recruiter, went to MEPS in San Antonio for the physical, and got rejected because he has Duane syndrome (eye disorder where you can’t turn your eye outward). He was dejected. He tried the Army, the Air Force, the Marines, nobody would take him. So, he set off in life.
A decade later he tried again. By this time he was 30 years old and fat. He got in. Know how? The book says that Duane syndrome is disqualifying, but it doesn’t say that bilateral Duane syndrome is disqualifying, and since he had it in both eyes, not one, he was good to go.
I asked him, “In what real world job wouldn’t you get fired for being stupid or dishonest like this? Are you telling us that if asked by senior command about this he’d be able to justify it?”
He said, “Yup. The book says Duane syndrome. It does not say Bilateral Duane syndrome. That’s the military.”
Again, I clarified, asking if the recruiter would he be able to defend his actions by saying, “I knew it was against the rules to have one eye with Duane Syndrome, but I had no idea it was against the rules to have two eyes with Duane Syndrome!” Are you honestly going to tell me that would happen? And if upper military management is going to ignore it anyway, then why not let him in the first time? How about if a cop said, “I knew it was against the rules to pepper spray an arrestee in the face just because she made me angry, but I didn’t know I couldn’t pepper spray her vagina because she made me angry.” Just how stupid is that? You think that would fly? (And yes, that really happened, the pepper spray thing).
Again, he replied “Yes.” I asked him how could he surround himself with people like that, and told him, “No wonder you left.” He said the frustration in the military is mind-boggling. Then the military stories started flying. Wow. I really find it hard to see how people survive, er, serve twenty or thirty years in the military after hearing the stuff that goes on. No wonder some have a hard time adapting to civilian life.
Danny Griffin, don’t believe all the hype. Since, the way you comment, it seems you never served, you have no idea what the hell you are talking about.
PavePusher, don’t believe all the hype? Are you suggesting that these various military people are lying? Since I never served, I have no idea what I am talking about? That’s the exact same argument used by the people I quoted above who said our enlisted are alcoholic misfits that couldn’t be trusted. Since I had never served myself, I shouldn’t be advocating that our military personnel be allowed to carry guns on base because “I didn’t know what the hell I was talking about,” and had I served, I would know better.
All I did above in my several comments was repeat, word for word, what I was told by those who are in or were in the military. So in that sense, I guess I don’t have to know what I’m talking about from a personal experience, I am using their personal experiences. Or are you saying that they were all lying, so I shouldn’t believe them?
This is mostly what I was refering to.
“They all tell me that the military, at least the enlisted, is comprised of alcoholic misfits that cannot be trusted with guns outside of being deployed and closely watched over.”
And your insinuation that one apparently disabled person getting into the military means we’re all unfit for service.
Interestingly, you didn’t provide any info on if that person had a successful military term/career or not…..
“This is mostly what I was refering to…” “They all tell me that the military, at least the enlisted, is comprised of alcoholic misfits that cannot be trusted with guns outside of being deployed and closely watched over.”
Read my post below about the Marine NCO’s position on personal responsibility in the military.
“And your insinuation that one apparently disabled person getting into the military means we’re all unfit for service.”
I didn’t insinuate that, you inferred that. Not sure how, though. That post was a slight tangent to the discussion of how the military treats its members and how the military works. In the example of the recruiter I gave, I asked “In what real world job wouldn’t someone get fired for doing something like that? How could someone honestly say, ‘I knew it was against the rules to have one eye with Duane Syndrome, but I had no idea it was against the rules to have two eyes with Duane Syndrome!’” That’s stupid, but I guess it fits in with the military. Somehow.
Again, read my post below about the Marine NCO’s position on personal responsibility in the military. Even some here have stated that soldiers and Marines are “routinely treated as if they can’t pick their nose without supervision. After a while, they are so demoralized that they sink to the level of their leaders’ expectations.”
“Interestingly, you didn’t provide any info on if that person had a successful military term/career or not”
He went on to serve ten years in the Navy.
I am a military officer. The problem is not the people. The problem is culture. Junior enlisted Soldiers are routinely treated as if they can’t pick their nose without supervision. After a while, they are so demoralized that they sink to the level of their leaders’ expectations. The idea that they are alcoholics and misfits represents an elitist attitude that is at the core of the problem. How would you feel if you worked hard and were treated like a stupid child by your bosses?
The best way to develop Soldiers is to give them responsibilities and hold them accountable. If I were king for a day, I’d make them responsible to carry their rifles and M9s everywhere at all times. Will it lead to negligent discharges? Yes. Sensitive items lost? You betcha. Injuries and lives lost? Yes. shenanigans? Certainly. Train, entrust, enable, supervise and, if necessary, discipline. What you would end up with are accountable Soldiers matured by discipline and enabled by responsibility.
We would have a military free from active shooters. Soldiers that understand how to handle loaded weapons safely at all times. Sadly, this discussion is the result of a dying warrior culture. It has been happening for some time. The American people trust our combat arms soldiers to be killers. That concept is rapidly diminishing.
Damn it, you said it way better than I did.
While we’re all down about the military, isn’t all this a pretty good description of how politicians/bureaucrats treat the other citizens of this country? With an elitist attitude that we cannot survive without their iron fisted control?
Back in the day (1939) when my dad joined up the enlisted troops were pretty much drunks and misfits. You couldn’t find a tougher group soldiers in the world than the force of pre-war regulars.
“If I were king for a day, I’d make them responsible to carry their rifles and M9s everywhere at all times.”
Last month Ammoland had an interesting article. I will excerpt a quote from it:
“When I was a brand-new 2LT at Fort Lewis, my Battalion CO told me, when I met him for the first time, that I would be carrying my issued M1911A1 45 ACP pistol everywhere on post. He said, ‘Son, you are an Infantry Officer. You, and all our brave soldiers, comprise the first line of defense for our Nation. You are assigned to serve as the S-2 in an infantry battalion. So great an honor is difficult to imagine! We serve to fight, son! First and foremost, we’re here to gun-down enemies of the USA. Welcome aboard!’
His final word of warning: ‘Son, don’t let me catch you unarmed. Lead by example. Your battalion, your family, and your Nation expect great things from you. Now, get out of my office and go inspire our troopers!’
The article also stated that the Assistant Division Commander at the time was (then) Brigadier General Norman Schwarzkopf who verbally praised junior officers who were seen openly bearing arms on post, and that he (Schwarzkopf) personally was always armed. His division commander at the time also wore his M1911A1 everywhere.
Not so much any more I guess.
@Danny Griffin, that was a different country.
Then those two need to be retired. Because they are unfit for service.
Well, the Army Master Sergeant is retired, but the LTC is active. They weren’t the only ones, though. I think without exception all the ones who stayed in and achieved rank or did their twenty were against it. One former Marine NCO told me that the life of a non-NCO is frustrating and aggravating, and that “Personality conflicts” occur in every unit. He reiterated that the military has an alcohol problem, and that the military is about CONTROL, just like jail, and that officers and staff NCO’s must maintain that control at all times. He said that arming military personnel would be like arming inmates in a jail.
And then he, too, pulled out that argument, “If you had served you would know.”
Of course, he gave his own personal example why guns are a bad idea. There was a particularly bad NCO that he served under that would have found himself riddled with bullets if some of them had access to weapons when he went off. To use his words, “The little f*cker got off on f*cking with people.”
He joined the Marines because he was third generation military and it was a family tradition, but he said that most join the military because they are societal misfits lost in life, and that people who had their life together generally did not join the military. He said that anyone who wanted to add loaded handguns to that powder keg of tension because of a few base shootings are nuts.
This former Marine is now a cop.
It seems you’re basing your stereotypes of the military on the anecdotes of a small number of disgruntled people. At best, this is perception bias.
Or outright bigotry.
Regardless, if we really were as bad as your sources claim (and you seem to believe), we wouldn’t be able to do the things we do on a routine basis. You’d realize that if you thought about it for 30 seconds and weren’t simply looking for an excuse to bash the military by proxy.
What a cowardly way to make such commentary.
“small number of disgruntled people”
I only posted some comments by a few current and retired officers and NCOs, I could have posted a lot more by others. But they are/were by no means disgruntled. In fact, every one enjoyed being in the military, enlisted or officer. But they all agreed on the problems. Oddly enough, most enlisted were pro-guns-on-base.
“Or outright bigotry.”
Not at all. My son is a USMC Staff Sergeant. So is my daughter-in-law, his wife. He’s been to the sandbox twice.
RF,
I know that I’ve posted a WHOLE lot of angry flames against the various RKBA opponents over the years.
Just wanted to let you know how hard it is not to flame people like Mark Kelly. He is so completely contemptible that no word is too strong. I only refrain out of respect for you and TTAG staff. Thanks for doing what you do in the pursuit of civil rights.
Come on, Hal, it would also be too damn easy. Still, I think “sellout” isn’t really a flame, is it?
I suspect Louie got some $$$ for his favorite pet DoD project in return for the amendment withdrawal.
Why can’t we strip congress and potus of their security/secret service protection? I mean, it is so damn safe in a gun free zone.
Well, to be fair, he is withdrawing his proposal to amend the 2015 national defense authorization bill on assurances it will be brought up during House-Senate bill reconciliation. Apparently he can’t do it this way because of the rules.
Let’s face it folks. The people on charge are simple minded children. That can’t hold a candle to their grandparents
Mark Kelly JUST ENDORSED stripping every service member the right of lawful self defense. Good job, keeping your job at the expense of sacrificing others. Well done. Enjoy all life have to give, while others give theirs up to a mad person.
Just another cull in the herd, I suppose.
This proposed law was not needed to authorize CC on base. The Executive branch and Military already have the discretion to do so. They chose not too. After all who cares about an on-base massacre once in a blue moon, there are always more soldiers signing up.
There is always the problem of the uniform, as well. I mean, it is not optional. OC is therefore not possible while in uniform, which for most would be most of the time. Unless it is mandatory.
OC is not possible while in uniform? What about this guy?
http://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/General-Norman-Schwarzkopf-Geogre-Bush.jpg
Pretty much any flag officer can make it optional with a simple policy letter/direct order.
“allowing military personnel who’d passed state-certified gun safety courses”. WTF does the state have to do with it?
This whole concept continues to absolutely baffle me.
“…Stephanie Miller voice a similar sentiment, stating that Commanding Officers should remain the ultimate arbiter of gun-free on-base safety.”
R-e-a-l-l-y ???
I wonder why Miller and other progressive liberals don’t maintain that stance on other pet liberal issues, too!
More double standard hypocracy from the left! If they like the message it’s ok, but if they don’t, watch out for the PC and ad hominem inferences and attacks to begin.
Suppose she’s been following the stories from military women about repeated rape being ignored by commanders? She thinks THOSE commanders need authority to endanger everyone’s lives?
Can you spell “B-L-A-C-K-M-A-I-L”, boys and girls? I KNEW you could!
So our armed forces continue to be disarmed. If not for “gun free base” bullsh!t, I probably would have re-enlisted. I’d love to shoot M249s and 240s full auto, and train with they guys again. Under this administration, re-enlistment is not desirable. Sadly, I’ve advised my son not to enlist. If we get a decent president in 2016, that may change.
With all due respect, the military is most at the whim of Congress. And we are far more resilient than the span of a few Presidential terms, no matter who holds the office. By making such recommendations to your son, you do a dis-service to him, our nation, and a grave insult to the serving military.
NTIT! New troll in town!!
Good. It should die. Anything requiring the government to do a “psychological” evaluation stinks of the Kremlin.
Army “leadership” is the same group if bluetards that decided ACU pattern camo was a good idea too.
Oh my GOD! ACU! Who got bought off to adopt THAT shit? Worse camo of ALL TIME! It works one place, and one place only: if you’re crawling through sagebrush on your belly.
Otherwise, it sucks royally. Thankfully, Multicam is slowly replacing it, and A-TACS, while imperfect because it requires two patterns instead of one, is actually highly effective.
That and the beret is the brainchild of Gen Shinseki. You know who has the best cammo pattern in the world? The Bundesheer. [That’s the offical name of the German Army] It is just splotches of color found in nature.
It’s Bundeswehr.
No Billy, Bundeswehr means the State’s Armed Forces. The Bundeswehr is composed of the Bundesheer (Army), Luftwaffe (Air Force] and Duetsche Marine or alternatively Bundesmarine (Navy)
Bundeswehr is the genteel replacement for Wehrmacht. Literally War Power but meant armed forces as well. If you look at the WWII German military command structure you had Oberkommando der Wermacht or OKW which meant Armed Forces High Command and Oberkommando der Heeres or OKH which meant Army High Command. The Nazis being more warlike referred to the Navy as the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe has always been the Luftwaffe since it merely means Air Force or literally air weapon.
Back in the days of the Kaiser the Army was called Deutches Heer or simply the German Army. The Navy was the His Majesty’s Imperial German Navy.
The only references I can find to Bundesheer is in the Austrian Army.
Look harder. I have been on Bundesheer facilities and they all say heer = Army. It was Heer under the Kaiser, the Weimer Republic, the Nazis and the FRG.
Instead of looking harder, I’ll take your word for it. I never intended to make an issue of it, I assure you.
So we can’t trust the military to carry a firearm to defend their base on US soil, but the same military can conduct a war. Does the cognitive dissonance hurt when anti-gun groups speak?
Hmmm…my son is DOD. He DOESN’T support gun rights or carrying a gun. Desite serving in Kuwait, Iraq & Sinai as an MP.And spending time in the Green Zone with a Glock 21 on his hip. He also spent months in Jordan very recently. I no longer say ANYTHING about guns or 2A to him. I hope he, his wife & my 3 grandchildren are OK in the Peoples Republic of Maryland.
@former water walker, sounds like he drank the elitist koolaid. He is living in the right state.
Oh God. How did this happen? You sent him to public school in Maryland, didn’t you? I don’t mean to be accusatory, but your son took a wrong left turn. I’m so sorry. But there may be hope still. And I hope it doesn’t involve a deadly home invasion.
He didn’t say the boy was unarmed, he said he wants everybody else unarmed.
Really? What unit uses Glocks?
Why would anyone in their right mind enlist in the military today anyway? Is modern America really a place worth defending? It used to be the only nation in the world worth giving one’s life for, but now it’s just another dime a dozen socialist tyranny. If you want to fight for America, you don’t need to look beyond her own borders to see her true enemies.
Absolutely. Look not further than the fact that the VA and WH have made returning veterans Public Enemy Number One.
1.Yes, it can still be saved.
2. Yes, it’s still worth saving.
3. Thanks for the insult to the serving military.
Look for tax money to flow to his district as payback
Just dumb dumb and dumber.
As George Carlin used to say rest his soul.
Military Intelligence????
You DO realize that George Carlin was one of the most anti-NRA people ever, right?
Listening to his schtick, I’m pretty sure he was anti-everything.
My son grew up in Illinois. His mother and I parted when he was 3…36 years ago. He did drink the elitest coolaid. Hell he voted for Ralph Nader. He doesn’t think a dumb redneck should be able to have any gun he wants. He served in the Army. Works for DOD. Some kind of spy thing. He thought Jordan was great. No crime bur he did notice a guy with an automatic weapon oFTn every corner. I think a lot of it has to do with being an MP. AND he thinks I’m a bit of a GUN NUT.
Forgot to mention my son has cops living next door so he feels ” safe “.
As an active duty soldier stuck in the barracks, I feel like a sitting duck.
You are.
I always thought the Army would have armed troops patrolling the perimeter as a backup to the MPs at the gates.
Military bases being a gun free zone does sound ridiculous.
George Carlin was an atheist who thought we were all just evolved apes. And that no one has a soul or spirit. Kinda’ like a slightly funnier version of Bill Maher. Sorry I typed that. Not a fan of either.
I hope soldiers can still carry concealed on bases, otherwise I will openly start calling military bases a “Pussy Zone.”
“Step right up, we like to keep our soldiers unarmed, easily identified, and defenseless!” – without a weapon, our soldiers aren’t really soldiers, they might as well be playing “dress-up.”
Sorry, but a soldier caught carrying a concealed weapon on post will be subject to disciplinary action.
Possibly a career-ending move.
Sheeit. Ain’t much of a career nohow.
By the way, here’s a list of military base shootings since the 1992 directive about weapons being carried by military personnel on base. Oddly enough I haven’t found anything before then. Shooter, place, killed, wounded.
April 2014: Ivan Lopez, Ft. Hood, TX, 3 killed, 16 wounded
March 2014: Jeffrey Savage, Norfolk, VA, 1 killed
September 2013: Aaron Alexis, Navy Yard, Washington, DC, 12 killed, 4 wounded
June 2013: Alvin Roundtree, Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston, 1 wounded
April 2013: Marquinta Jacobs, Fort Knox, KY, 1 killed
March 2013: Eusebrio Lopez, Officer Candidates School in Quantico, VA, 2 killed
December 2012: Marshall D. Drake, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK, 1 killed
June 2012: Ricky Elder, Fort Bragg, NC, 1 killed
May 2012: Unnamed soldier, Fort Carson, CO, 1 wounded
April 2012: Rico Rawls Jr., Fort Campbell, KY, 1 killed
May 2011: Jason Seeds, Fort Drum, NY, 1 wounded
November 2009: Nidal Hasan, Fort Hood, TX, 13 killed, 32 wounded
July 2009: Armano Baca, Fort Hood, TX, 1 killed
September 2008: Unnamed soldier, Ft. Hood, TX, 1 killed
October 1995: William Kreutzer Jr., Fort Bragg, NC, 1 killed, 18 wounded
March 1995: Ernest Cooper Jr., Naval Air Systems Command, Arlington, VA, 2 wounded
June 1994: Dean Mellberg, Fairchild Air Force Base, 4 killed, 23 wounded
Comments are closed.