Like many Americans I was shocked and deeply saddened by the cowardly and terrorist massacre of 13 U.S. troops and the wounding of 30 others last week at a military base in Texas. As reports of the sequence of events unfolded and the alleged facts of the case came to light my disbelief grew. Like many I asked "How could this happen"? Ft. Hood is a military base. Where were the thousands of soldiers? Where were their weapons? Why didn't someone do something? Then came the greater shock: the sad, sobering, and horrifying answer to my questions. Army Regulation 190-14. With the stroke of a pen, the sword of the armed forces was forced down.
In March of 1993 President Bill Clinton signed into law Army Regulation 190-14 prohibiting personnel on U.S. Military bases from carrying or possessing firearms unless they have direct law enforcement or security duties. This irrational act began a new era of "gun free zones" all over the United States and set the stage for potential acts of criminal and terrorist operations.
What? Did the intellectual prowess of the President lead him to think that the very men and women who leave home and family, train for combat, and risk their lives day and night to protect our country would not qualify as safe carriers of weapons? That these very people could not be trusted to possess and secure firearms while not in a combat zone? Seriously? Are you kidding?
The thinking and subsequent action of producing and enforcing Army Regulation 190-14 defies logic. Has it not been known for eons than law abiding persons abide by the laws? That only the bad guys could care less about some regulation # whatever? Please!
Consider further the idiocy of the scenario. Upon induction into the armed forces recruits are sent to basic training for a period of not less than eight weeks and up to 12 weeks for some branches. Here, they experience a combination of physical training, field exercises, and classroom time that equips them with the basic tools necessary to perform their duties throughout their tour.
After basic training most recruits move into AIT or Advanced Individual Training where they receive additional instruction and experience necessary to execute their particular military job. But wait, there's more. As professional soldiers, troops are encouraged to continue their education and skill enhancement through military provided ongoing training opportunities. Areas of study include tactical, technical, physical, and leadership development. Simply put, these guys are capable of anything that comes their way.
And what might come their way? Well, depending on the theater it could be anything from uniformed enemies in declared war zones such as was seen in both World Wars, The Korean War, and Vietnam to exploding cars, motorcycles, bicycles, and crazed suicide bombers, dressed in dessert drab, burqas, or even infant wear. The truth is our soldiers are required and prepared to defend and protect at any given time for any and every reason.
If there is anybody, anywhere in the world that we should want to be armed and ready at anytime or anywhere for any event that might occur it is the U. S. Military. Now I'm all for second amendment rights. I even believe every capable citizen should be trained in firearm safety and should be licensed for concealed carry, but that's another story. But most certainly American troops should be armed at all times, even on bases within our borders.
At Ft. Hood, no one was armed. In fact the crazed gunman shouting "Allahu Akbar" knew no one was armed because he experienced the same training and exposure to laws and policy as everyone else. It is the very knowledge that gave him the ability to plan and audacity to walk into a group of America's finest and start emptying rounds into human beings - taking human lives. Like John F. Kennedy once said, "In a time of turbulence and change, it is more true than ever that knowledge is power." Especially in the absence of weapons.
Thank God for local police woman Sgt. Kim Munley. Within minutes of the beginning melee she responded. Having been directing traffic prior to the confusion, she rushed into the building and confronted Hasan as he rounded a corner. Four shots from her weapon ended the atrocity. Though wounded by Hasan, Sgt. Munley was able to shoot back. There is an obvious moral to this story: the only way to confront a gun is with another gun - an equalizer. It is the very reason the greatest military in the world issues weapons to every troop. They defend us, they protect us, and when necessary they fire back.
If it were not for the death of the 13 victims, the pain and suffering of their families and the wounded troops the irony of that dreadful day at Ft. Hood would be laughable. But there is death, there is suffering, and it's not funny. So how do you explain that a gunman could come onto a military base - one that is home to a portion of the greatest armed force on earth - and cause such destruction? How do you explain that a tough, but petite policewoman with a single firearm was needed to come to the God sent rescue of those men and women trained to defend the entire nation from such heinous crimes against humanity?
In Act II of the play "Richelieu," by English playwright Edward Bulwer-Lytton, the Cardinal Richelieu said, "...The pen is mightier than the sword." This famous line written for the 1839 performance was spoken by the Cardinal because as a priest he could not challenge the monk (Joseph) to combat. And now 170 years later, the story remains to an extent true. However, in the case of Ft. Hood and Army Regulation 190-14 the mighty executive pen forced the sword down, and caused those who are trained for combat to rely not on weapons with which they have qualified, but on the unsubstantiated hope that evil will play by the rules.
In March of 1993 President Bill Clinton signed into law Army Regulation 190-14 prohibiting personnel on U.S. Military bases from carrying or possessing firearms unless they have direct law enforcement or security duties. This irrational act began a new era of "gun free zones" all over the United States and set the stage for potential acts of criminal and terrorist operations.
What? Did the intellectual prowess of the President lead him to think that the very men and women who leave home and family, train for combat, and risk their lives day and night to protect our country would not qualify as safe carriers of weapons? That these very people could not be trusted to possess and secure firearms while not in a combat zone? Seriously? Are you kidding?
The thinking and subsequent action of producing and enforcing Army Regulation 190-14 defies logic. Has it not been known for eons than law abiding persons abide by the laws? That only the bad guys could care less about some regulation # whatever? Please!
Consider further the idiocy of the scenario. Upon induction into the armed forces recruits are sent to basic training for a period of not less than eight weeks and up to 12 weeks for some branches. Here, they experience a combination of physical training, field exercises, and classroom time that equips them with the basic tools necessary to perform their duties throughout their tour.
After basic training most recruits move into AIT or Advanced Individual Training where they receive additional instruction and experience necessary to execute their particular military job. But wait, there's more. As professional soldiers, troops are encouraged to continue their education and skill enhancement through military provided ongoing training opportunities. Areas of study include tactical, technical, physical, and leadership development. Simply put, these guys are capable of anything that comes their way.
And what might come their way? Well, depending on the theater it could be anything from uniformed enemies in declared war zones such as was seen in both World Wars, The Korean War, and Vietnam to exploding cars, motorcycles, bicycles, and crazed suicide bombers, dressed in dessert drab, burqas, or even infant wear. The truth is our soldiers are required and prepared to defend and protect at any given time for any and every reason.
If there is anybody, anywhere in the world that we should want to be armed and ready at anytime or anywhere for any event that might occur it is the U. S. Military. Now I'm all for second amendment rights. I even believe every capable citizen should be trained in firearm safety and should be licensed for concealed carry, but that's another story. But most certainly American troops should be armed at all times, even on bases within our borders.
At Ft. Hood, no one was armed. In fact the crazed gunman shouting "Allahu Akbar" knew no one was armed because he experienced the same training and exposure to laws and policy as everyone else. It is the very knowledge that gave him the ability to plan and audacity to walk into a group of America's finest and start emptying rounds into human beings - taking human lives. Like John F. Kennedy once said, "In a time of turbulence and change, it is more true than ever that knowledge is power." Especially in the absence of weapons.
Thank God for local police woman Sgt. Kim Munley. Within minutes of the beginning melee she responded. Having been directing traffic prior to the confusion, she rushed into the building and confronted Hasan as he rounded a corner. Four shots from her weapon ended the atrocity. Though wounded by Hasan, Sgt. Munley was able to shoot back. There is an obvious moral to this story: the only way to confront a gun is with another gun - an equalizer. It is the very reason the greatest military in the world issues weapons to every troop. They defend us, they protect us, and when necessary they fire back.
If it were not for the death of the 13 victims, the pain and suffering of their families and the wounded troops the irony of that dreadful day at Ft. Hood would be laughable. But there is death, there is suffering, and it's not funny. So how do you explain that a gunman could come onto a military base - one that is home to a portion of the greatest armed force on earth - and cause such destruction? How do you explain that a tough, but petite policewoman with a single firearm was needed to come to the God sent rescue of those men and women trained to defend the entire nation from such heinous crimes against humanity?
In Act II of the play "Richelieu," by English playwright Edward Bulwer-Lytton, the Cardinal Richelieu said, "...The pen is mightier than the sword." This famous line written for the 1839 performance was spoken by the Cardinal because as a priest he could not challenge the monk (Joseph) to combat. And now 170 years later, the story remains to an extent true. However, in the case of Ft. Hood and Army Regulation 190-14 the mighty executive pen forced the sword down, and caused those who are trained for combat to rely not on weapons with which they have qualified, but on the unsubstantiated hope that evil will play by the rules.
Wally, Shelton and I would like to thank you. First for educating us to the 190-14 regulation, that was one thing we could never figure out on as to why help did not come sooner. Second for so elequently voicing an opinion that we both could agree with. Now my question is WHEN. When is our president going to buck up and do the right thing...calling it an act of terrorism and sending our troops the reenforcement need overseas. What will it take for the American citizens to cry out for action?
ReplyDelete