FRANKSMITHSAYSNB
EDITORIAL:
As usual, the liberal drive by media is failing to tell the public the whole story about the ban of guns on military bases. With a second shooting incident at Fort Hood, the public deserves to be reminded who caused this problem in the first place:
As usual, the liberal drive by media is failing to tell the public the whole story about the ban of guns on military bases. With a second shooting incident at Fort Hood, the public deserves to be reminded who caused this problem in the first place:
For the first 200+ years of our history, military members were allowed to carry whatever they wanted on military bases and with guns everywhere on every base, there was never any kind of mass shooting like has now unfortunately become commonplace under a total gun ban. Does anyone remember a mass shooting on a military base before the Clinton gun ban? You won't because there was never one before the gun ban.
In March 1993, President Bill Clinton ordered a ban of all guns on military bases not because of any problem that needed to be addressed, but apparently because he is simply a typical gun hating liberal Democrat. "Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. (Washington Times 11/11/09).
Interestingly enough, Clinton was such a gun hating liberal, that disarming the military is reported as one of the first things Clinton did when he took office. Clearly nothing is of more importance to a liberal extremist Democrat than to ban guns any way possible, otherwise with no history of problems on military bases, why was this among his highest priorities as soon as he was sworn into office?
If you Google mass shootings on military bases, you will find there have been 23 mass shootings on American military bases. The first one was in 1994, one year after the total gun ban went into place and to date there have been a total of 23. Just like in Chicago, gun bans simply cause mass carnage because only criminals can have guns and the innocent victims are powerless to defend themselves. Clearly the best way to respond to this phenomena of mass shootings on our military bases would be to end the Clinton gun ban and once again allow our military members their Constitutional rights to defend themselves. These soldiers deserve to be treated better after risking their lives for the safety of our nation. How many more of them must die simply because Democrats are pushing their liberal gun hating agenda?
Frank, your editorial is just another absurd piece of right-wing rhetoric. In reality, the rules on military bases don't ban all guns, which is obvious since among the shooter's first victims were armed security personnel. And those rules were actually issued during the first Bush administration, the rule was actually established in response to a 1992 Department of Defense directive, issued during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, and survived the second Bush administration, despite their alleged perfidy. Speaking to reporters, Washington, D.C. police chief Cathy Lanier detailed how local police officers arrived at the Navy Yard within two or three minutes of the first shots ringing out, and that even before that, "internal security" at the Navy Yard was firing at the gunman. Does that sound like gun-free facility to you? Does that sound like the gunman didn't have to worry about anybody shooting back? Studies have shown that most shooters choose their locations not because it is easy, but because there is a personal connection. It's great to editorialize, but please at least try to do so honestly and with some research.
ReplyDeleteFrank, the last posting comes from someone who clearly knows nothing about the "Clinton Military Gun Ban of 1994" which not only bans any and all military personnel from ever bringing personally owned firearms onto bases, but also makes it almost impossible for commanders to issue weapons to military personnel in the performance of their official duties with the exception of security personnel which more times than not are square badge contract $7.00 an hour security guards with little or no training. To follow this clearly liberal person's twisted logic, by saying that guns are not banned on military bases because the Pinkerton or Wackenhut guards are allowed to carry them would be like saying that it is OK to ban every resident of New Britain from owning a gun so long as the police are armed. The population of Fort Hood is over 100,000 and this clueless individual makes an argument that as long as a few dozen contract guards are allowed to carry their pistols at the gates, then no guns have ever been banned, despite President Clinton's order that prohibits anyone else from ever possessing a firearm on the base--including the shooter himself!
ReplyDeleteThe point is that by dictate of a liberal extremist president, these soldiers are denied the right to defend themselves making these bases soft targets just like Connecticut's schools where everyone is barred by law from defending themselves. If the principal of Sandy Hook were allowed to carry a gun as well as the teachers, then 20 students would be alive today--but Democrats with their radical gun laws made that a crime for the principal to defend herself or the children under her charge. I believe that these 26 deaths should be credited to the Democrats in our legislature who made it illegal for the principal and the teachers to be able to defend themselves against an armed intruder--which is why in many correct thinking states, school systems are not only allowing their teachers to arm themselves as a response to Sandy Hook, but in some cases, the school boards are even purchasing the guns for the teachers.
Democrats once again demonstrate they clearly have no concept of reality within their socialist utopias.
I suppose after today, our military will be banned from having even butter knives on any base by order of the Dictator in Chief?
ReplyDelete