First off, that it could have been allowed to happen. Even more so when you consider that the ridiculous access to firearms is done under the guise of the Second Amendment. This is a text that includes the words:
necessary to the security of a free State
Why has that gottten lost in the debate? I hear all sorts of stupid shit about "fighting tyranny", "rights", "Liberty", and "freedom", but I never hear about the responsibility and obligation that is incumbent upon this right.
That is service in the militia. Not some bullshit "unorganised" militia, which is the quivalent of having a draft card, but actually serving in a legally organised militia unit.
There has been at least two conspiracies to shoot up military bases in the US: Fort Dix and Quantico, VA. U.S. domestic military bases are still "wide open to attack."
Charles Faddis, a 20-year CIA counterterrorism veteran, says:
"If you drive around the United States today, other than security measures in place at airports, you will see very little has changed in the last eight years," said Faddis, who has visited several U.S. military bases in the past year while researching an upcoming book on homeland security, "Willful Neglect".
"We remain wide open to attack. That is true in the nation as a whole, and it is true on military bases as well," said Faddis, 51, who retired in 2008 as chief of the CIA's weapons of mass destruction terrorism unit. Before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, he led a counterterrorism team into northern Iraq in search of an al Qaeda base. He has authored two withering critiques of his former employer, most recently "Beyond Repair: The Decline and Fall of the CIA", published last month.
“They know how to secure an installation,” says Faddis. “They are not failing to do so because they do not know what to do. They are failing to do so, because somehow, some way, we have convinced ourselves that an attack cannot happen here.”
"You may have to show a photo ID at some locations, but even that is not always true. Even if you have to show an ID, a civilian driver's license will often suffice," he said. "Most bases remain open to civilian visitors with even the most cursory of explanations for why they are coming on post. "
Even the Fort Meade, Maryland, headquarters for both the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command and the super-sensitive National Security Agency, has porous security, said Faddis, who has visited the sprawling post within the last few weeks. "There are no barriers (at the gate)," he said. "If you want to stop, you do so. If you want to go by the gate and onto the base at 60 miles an hour, you do so.
"Once you are on base," the former CIA official continued, "you go wherever you want. There are no armed guards. There are no checkpoints. There is no visible security. Even entering buildings, the only kind of security you are going to see is the kind designed to deter unauthorized personnel who are trying to sneak in, steal secrets. and sneak back out.
Nothing has been done to restrict access to firearms either. One can walk in to a gun store with a valid drivers licence and walk out with enough firepower to cause serious mayhem. Hey, you can buy enough guns and ammo to start WWIII. There have been mass shootings in the United States for at least 30 year, yet gun laws are becoming laxer, not tighter. The assault weapons ban was crap, but somewhat useful. Even then, it was allowed to lapse and newly made assault weapons can once again be bought,
So, why the fuck are people who should not have access to firearms still buying them legally? Or even acquiring them easily. I mean we lock our houses and cars, but we leave firearms wide open.
The next thing that pisses me off is that people are pointing fingers at everything except what allowed this to happen.
Yeah, sure guns are tools. They are highly effective tools for killing. They work quite quickly as the Fort Hood shootings show.
Don't give me any crap about an Army Base being a gun free zone since there was an armed guard who returned fire. They were guns on the base which could have been used to fend off the attack, but a semi-automatic pistol can has a high rate of fire. Unfortunately, people, especially civilians, don't understand that an incident like this can happen quite quickly and result in a high body count before anybody can do anything.
The FN 5.7 holds 20 rounds. In a crowded room it would be easy beyond belief to hit 43 people in a matter of a few SECONDS, say nothing of minutes.
Are you going to tell me that US soldiers are cowards and didn't resist in any way? They just let this psychotic asshole shoot up the military processing center. I don't believe that.
Not to mention someone did return fire, but by that point, the body count had racked up.
Of couse, in this outrage, we also see a backlash against muslims, which also doesn't make sense. The Fort Hood shooter could have been screaming "Kill for Cthulhu". He was a fucking whack job.
His religious pseudofundamentalism is a symptom of his mental illness.
As Zirgar said, do we point out the people who kill abortion doctors are christians? Likewise, do we point out the religion of other mass shooters? How about the asshole who shot up the Holocaust museum, what religion was he? How about the dickhead who gunned down 3 Pittsburgh Officers, what religion was he? How about the Jerkoff who shot up an LA Fitness Centre in Pittsburgh? What religion was he?
No, only this asshole because he is a "muslim".
If this is terrorism, then it is because someone with a firearms shoots up a place we would like to think is secure. But we would like to think streets, shopping malls, supermarkets, schools, universities, fitness centres, and so on are secure. Terrorism is creating a feeling of terror and panic, which mass shootings do create.
The United States has to become like Northern Ireland during the troubles where security checkpoints were ubiquitous and frequent if people are going to demand more guns without restrictions. Even with registration, there should be checkpoints.
It is completely moronic to give terrorists the tools they need to accompllish their goals. Those who block any restrictions, especially if they do it in the name of "fighing tyranny" are complicit in this act.
After all, who defines tyranny? Is it a small minority who feel that they have been wronged? Then why aren't they praising the Fort Hood shooter for standing up against what he saw as tyranny?
No, because that it complete bullshit. So, cut the crap with the Second Amendment being for "fighting tyranny" and "freedom" because somehow our freedom of movement and right to live safely will have to be curtailed. Even if that destruction of liberty is from sheer paralysis about leaving the safety of your own home.
As for the Second Amendment, I have said more than once that it is archaic and its meaning has been lost with the passing of time. The founders would be shaking their heads in disbelief at things which are being said and done regarding "the Second Amendment right". Especially when people say that the Army should be able to "exercise its Second Amendment rights".
No, too much emphasis has been placed upon the phrase "right to keep and bear arms" with neglect of the concept of the "Security of the Free State". The Supreme Court wrote those words out of the Amendment in its DC v. Heller decision, but it is time to revive that concept.
The "right to keep and bear arms" is related to the "Security of the Free State" and those who would allow terrorists, foreign or domestic, access to arms are guilty of treason.
So, where the fuck is the outrage that this shit can happen and why isn't it directed at the ease it can happen?