Fort Hood Texas, gunman has killed 11, 30 wounded, 2 additional suspects in custody - Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

JohnR · 11-05-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

At least one U.S. soldier opened fire Thursday at Fort Hood, Texas, killing at least 11 people and wounding 31 others, military officials said. One gunman was shot to death, and two other soldiers were in custody, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone, commanding general of the Army’s III Corps, told reporters.
Cone gave no further details on the dead gunman. A senior Obama administration official told NBC News analyst Roger Cressey that one of the suspects who was in custody was an Army major.

More - Army: 12 dead, 31 wounded at Fort Hood - Crime & courts- msnbc.com

missing link · 11-05-2009, 05:35 PM

First off thoughts and prayers sent to thoes who lost their lives and the wounded and their families
BUT
When our President came on national TV and gave a shout out and talked about other things first I am totally horrified and the way he smiled and got applause about what he did today,
I was waiting for a President to be informative ,stern , and a commander and chief I thought WTF
I wish I could explain my feelings and could type in an knowlageble
fashion.
totally disapointed in OBAMA
ML
I did not vote 4 him but have to put up with him

missing link · 11-05-2009, 05:37 PM

John I just posted in Scuppers
ML Sr.

BigFish · 11-05-2009, 06:02 PM

Coincedence the shooters name sounds like a terrorist????

TheSpecialist · 11-05-2009, 06:19 PM

Identified as Maj. Malik Nadal Hassan, either a Psychiatrist, or Psycologist

Backbeach Jake · 11-05-2009, 06:31 PM

Sometimes I feel like this country is flying apart at the seams, what the hell could he possibly be thinking to make this alright in his head?

Raider Ronnie · 11-05-2009, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigFish

Coincedence the shooters name sounds like a terrorist????

Same goes for our president !

Swimmer · 11-05-2009, 09:47 PM

HE EITHER HAD TWO OTHERS WITH HIM OR THEY WERE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY FOR BEING COMPLICIT IN ANOTHER WAY.

kenyee · 11-05-2009, 10:22 PM

What I don't understand is how he shot 40 people w/ two handguns. Assuming a 9mm, it's only 15 rounds each and everyone around him should have been armed but he got shot by a *civilian* cop??

The irony of a head shrink going postal....the guy was against the war and was ticked he was being shipped out...

JohnnyD · 11-06-2009, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigFish

Coincedence the shooters name sounds like a terrorist????

It's difficult not to racially profile people when it comes out that many have backgrounds like:

Quote:

A federal official said Hasan is a U.S. citizen of Jordanian descent. Military documents show Hasan was born in Virginia and has never deployed outside the United States.

If all terrorists and people that commit these types of mass murders had a last name McDougall, McDonald, McGuire, or Callaghan, then most redhead that live in Southie would be scrutinized.

The Dad Fisherman · 11-06-2009, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

If all terrorists and people that commit these types of mass murders had a last name McDougall, McDonald, McGuire, or Callaghan, then most redhead that live in Southie would be scrutinized.

or McVeigh.......

Duke41 · 11-06-2009, 06:58 AM

This stuff happens every war. Check it out on line. The dogs of war once released are extremely difficult to put back in the cage.

Fishpart · 11-06-2009, 08:12 AM

Quote Duke41 "This stuff happens every war. Check it out on line. The dogs of war once released are extremely difficult to put back in the cage. "

Unfortunately this dog has never been off the porch. I will reserve judgement until we get whatever facts we can get, but if it walks like a duck....

If he acted alone then he was a shrink that went crazy. If he acted with somone else we have a much bigger problem....

kenyee, military weapons spend most of their lives locked up unless there is a specific reason to have them out. Even then there is no live ammuntion unless there is a specific (training) purpose and then it is closely controlled...

kenyee · 11-06-2009, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishpart

military weapons spend most of their lives locked up unless there is a specific reason to have them out. Even then there is no live ammuntion unless there is a specific (training) purpose and then it is closely controlled...

I didn't realize that. For some reason I thought it was a military base so everyone had sidearms strapped on. Sounds like it's time for a change of policy...it's ironic that no one on a military base was able to defend themselves from a guy who went postal :-P

JohnR · 11-06-2009, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenyee

I didn't realize that. For some reason I thought it was a military base so everyone had sidearms strapped on. Sounds like it's time for a change of policy...it's ironic that no one on a military base was able to defend themselves from a guy who went postal :-P

They have Armories to keep weapons under tight control and soldiers to keep an eye on them. 40,000 soldiers under arms on a state side base, how many weapons could be lost? Temporarily misplaced, damaged or worn out? Would the local populace want them all under arms?

I would imagine some, such as the MPs, but maybe there were different priorities such as guarding the school, base housing, etc.

In any event, all we are pretty much doing is speculating at this point. We'll see more and more info in time.

kenyee · 11-06-2009, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnR

Would the local populace want them all under arms?

Whenever I've seen a national guardsman in uniform in MA, they've always had a sidearm and it never seemed to bother people...you'd think folks would trust soldiers to be armed like they do cops.
I always thought armories were for rifles, grenade launchers, tanks, heavy arms.

Even the media is speculating about motive at this point...lots of stories about whether he was a terrorist, etc. and lots of contradictory information...you have to wonder if some reporter is just making stuff up to get a headline

Islander77 · 11-06-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenyee

I didn't realize that. For some reason I thought it was a military base so everyone had sidearms strapped on. Sounds like it's time for a change of policy...it's ironic that no one on a military base was able to defend themselves from a guy who went postal :-P

Ok son take this AR-15 go into a hot zone... Now when they start shooting at you remember this.. "YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT THIS REPORT AND THAT REPORT TO MAKE SURE YOU WERE JUSTIFIED SHOOTING BACK" The sad very sad almost disgusting state of our millitary.. Sorry guys no bs if you fire a weapon in a active war zone you have to fill out reports to make sure you were justified to fire back.... So you think just because on base and everyone has guns they can shoot to stop an issue... Oh no cause that isnt allowed we have to be concerned with the civil liberties of the people trying to shoot and kill us so we cannot fire back.... Sad when you look at this the government is more worried about the civil rights of NON AMERICANS or terrorists, or criminals.... Nice so nice... Why does our Commander in chief of our military have NO military experience none nada zip?????? ok off my soap box and onto coffee I cant keep going on this topic or its gonna get ugly and John will have to slap me around for the words I would use....

maddmatt · 11-06-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenyee

I didn't realize that. For some reason I thought it was a military base so everyone had sidearms strapped on. Sounds like it's time for a change of policy...it's ironic that no one on a military base was able to defend themselves from a guy who went postal :-P

arm the army??

what are u? some kind of whacko conservative???

someone might get hurt!

next thing u know you'll want the army to shoot bad guys.

we can't have that! the world won't like us then.

i just wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing that.

The Dad Fisherman · 11-06-2009, 11:02 AM

They are armed when they need to be. When on Watch, When Deployed, or when required for training. The National guard has them when they are deployed to an area as you have seen Ken.

When they are just working at the base or just hanging on base they don't carry them and they are checked into the armory.

There are a lot of people on an army base that are strictly in Administrative roles or Medical/Corpman roles. they don't sit at desks with sidearms.

also remember this guy was one of them, a Major that was in for years, that was also one of their psychiatrists...even if everyone that was standing there was armed to the teeth, when this guy just decides to arbitrarily start firing...there are going to be casualties. These guys weren't on field ops in Iraq and geared up for something to happen....they were comfortably back home on an army base in Texas, surrounded by people they knew.....This is just a tragedy.

UPSmanMatt · 11-07-2009, 08:51 PM

United We Stand!

TheSpecialist · 11-08-2009, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenyee

I didn't realize that. For some reason I thought it was a military base so everyone had sidearms strapped on. Sounds like it's time for a change of policy...it's ironic that no one on a military base was able to defend themselves from a guy who went postal :-P

After 9/11 all those vicious looking Humvees with the 50's on top guarding the canal had no ammo.. That is the liberal country we live in we don't even let our military protect themselves or us with real ammo..