We don’t yet know if it was one gunman or more, whether it was terrorism or a disgruntled nutjob, but we do know that the left has jumped on another mass shooting as an obvious reason we must DO SOMETHING!
Damn the details, for the love of God pass some legislation, man!
After all, if a gunman can shoot up a military base… that pretty well ends the argument that we could solve this if only victims were armed, right? I mean, this happened on a military base.
Of course, what those using that argument forget is one of the first acts of President Clinton was to disarm our service people on military bases.
That’s why this event, like Nidal Hassan’s “workplace violence” episode at Ft Hood, took place in yet another “gun free zone”. You’d have more chance of getting return fire at a McDonald’s in Texas than at a military base.
So like in so many other cases, the battle cry is to try and eliminate guns, not eliminate the obvious problem we created when we implemented “gun free zones”… which have failed magnificently. We use guns to guard the president, our banks, our bloody sporting events, but we create these mythical gun free zones and refuse to acknowledge that they are like shooting fish in a barrel when someone decides to go on a spree.
That is an inconvenient fact that the anti-gun crowd keeps trying to gloss over and ignore. Gun free zones do not work. Period. The never have, they never will.
And for the record, those who say arming MORE people in response to the issue will return us to “the wild wild west” might want to note that though our violent crime rate in heavily gun-controlled areas is the highest in the nation (DC, Chicago, etc)… and the violent crime rate in our nation as a whole is actually higher than it was during the late 1800s, AKA “the wild wild west”.
But don’t tell that to a gun-control advocate. They find facts horribly inconvenient, as those seldom support their theses.
Rob Jones for President 
THIS! This is why I find Liberals and discussions with them so maddening. For the simple reason that facts and logic are absolutely useless against them. In what passes for a mind that they possess, the IDEAL is the reality and anything that interferes with or negates said ideal is false, trumped up, racist, you supply the word du jour that works in their argument.
There was a time in this nation when these things did not happen. You did not go into a crowded place and open up on innocent folks as if you were in a county fair shooting gallery. This is quite simply because a number of gentleman among that crowd would whip out a piece of their own and ventilate your sorry hide in a nano second. For the same reason, you hesitated to make a bully of yourself or insult a gentleman’s lady friend. An armed society is a polite society.
In short, “gun free zones” are a truly stupid idea in general. All these things do is manifestly provide a target rich environment of unarmed victims for whatever lunatic or terrorist that comes along. I’ve not even started on the fact that such a thing is a direct violation of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. But having military men and women on a base unarmed is the very HEIGHT of stupidity. I spent the better part of 13 weeks in the Summer of 1979 with a fully automatic M-16 rifle hanging from the end of my bunk, as did the other 80 or so young recruits who were quartered with me. I do not recall anyone of us going on a shooting spree. Imagine that.
If a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine does not possess sufficient discipline to carry at least a loaded sidearm on base, he or she damn sure has no business in the combat zone. This would also have the very nice effect of putting an end to things like the Ft. Hood massacre and this latest shooting spree. Here’s a question for the Libtards. If disarming a member of the Armed Forces on base is such a grand idea, why then are police officers allowed to carry inside the police station or sheriff’s office?
But again, there is logic and reasoning involved here, so the Liberals will find this of no value.
LikeLike