DoD: The terrorist act at Fort Hood was “workplace violence”
Old Trooper sends a link to a Fox News article which reports that wishy-washy Susan Collins finally found something that gets her knickers twisted, and in this case I have to agree;
During a joint session of the Senate and House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, the Maine Republican referenced a letter from the Defense Department depicting the Fort Hood shootings as workplace violence. She criticized the Obama administration for failing to identify the threat as radical Islam.
Talk about an understatement. I guess we could call the two wars we’ve been involved in over the last ten years as workplace violence, too.
If Congress wants to do something about protecting soldiers, they should let those guys carry their weapons, their personal weapons, on base. As it stands now they can’t and that makes them a target between their homes and their work…a target that can’t fight back. They’ve just returned from an assignment during which they carried loaded weapons to protct themsleves and now that they’re home, they can’t defend themselves and their own families? Where’s the common sense in that?
But that workplace violence call by the Obama Administration, is total horseshit, just so they don’t have to admit that there is indeed a terrorist threat in this country.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War
A Muslim terrorist threat, Jonn. I can’t recall the last time I read, or saw a report, on a Mennonite shooting up a military base or recruiter’s office. Or, a Jehovah’s Witness.
“… they should let those guys carry their weapons, their personal weapons, on base.”
Actually, the Army reg says it’s the installation commander’s decision: AR 190-11, para 4-5 b. :
“The carrying of privately–owned weapons, explosives, or ammunition on military installations are prohibited unless authorized by the installation commander or his designated representative.”
So…Commanding General can make it so. I’m working on a package right now to present to our installation leadership to ask that they recognize the state laws for concealed carry. Should be interesting.
It would be nice if we were allowed to carry; however, I think there should still be some level of control over who can and can’t, even above and beyond concealed weapons permits. Guns in the barracks can be bad, for example; just ask the former Soldier who was accidentally shot in the chest by a gun I sold to one of his buddies. I’d say that we should be permitted to carry concealed based on two things: a state-recognized concealed carry permit (in the case of less gun-friendly states, perhaps a concealed certification course run by the Provost Marshal), and a commander’s interview and assessment (appealable to the CG himself in the case of anti-gun commands).
I have a concealed carry permit and I would love to be able to carry here on post…..
Sadly I see this never happening. Hell they don’t even let the soldiers on gate guard carry weapons here…..
Soldiers living in the barracks are supposed to store their weapons in unit arms rooms. When they go shooting the unit commander is supposed to sign a memo stating the reason the soldier has his weapons. A married soldier living on base is required to register his weapons with the provost marshal but they can have their weapons in base housing. When it comes to random inspections for entering base a active duty soldier can not refuse his vehicle to be inspection cause it’s an direct order from the garrison commander. A retired military may be able to get away by just turning around but they can issue a bar letter for driving on base for up to a year. A law enforcement official can enter base with their weapons but only for official business. These are some of the guidelines for my base.
Regardless of the DoD depicting the Fort Hood shooting as “workplace violence,” the Anti-Terrorism Level 1 Awareness Training that is required training for all military members and DoD civilians, does convey the Fort Hood shooting as precisely that: terrorism…as well as the other Islamic terrorist incidents that have taken place in the recent past.
Actually, the Fort Hood shooting can be considered “workplace violence” as long as radical Islamic terrorism is considered to be a subcategory of workplace violence.
@6 – I’m sure you also remember that the AT Level 1 training stipulates behavior that runs absolutely opposite to what most of us here would do.
Some reasonable form of defense is warranted but something short of everyone locked and loaded. Guards, certain designated troops, whatever–but I can’t see everyone.
Anonymous: I get the willies when I see soldiers/bases. Has the vernacular changed? Time was soldiers were on Army posts.
It takes quite a lot to piss off Senator Collins.
@8 – Get used to Base again…..many co-located USAF bases and Army posts are being reflagged as “Joint Base Lewis/McChord..Story/Little Creek…etc…
Susan Collins? I have more respect for Joan Collins or, for that matter, a tom collins. Screw her. Screw Obama. And while I’m in such a joyful mood, screw Eagle whatever, Joey, Steve, and boy. Ah. Night night.
@10 – Uh…not to be splitting hairs, but Little Creek is Navy, not Air Force – Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story. Langley, OTOH, is Air Force, hence, Fort Eustis is now Joint Base Langley-Eustis (even though they’re actually a good 30-45 minute drive apart). And when you drive through the main gate of Fort Eustis, although the big sign over the main gate still says, Fort Eustis, the little sign on the ground says it’s an Air Force installation. And the Air Force is in charge of the, er, base.
@Anon – That’s right baby! The Air FOrce is taking over the world! People are finally starting to see that you ground pounders are becoming obsolete!
Sorry. I couldn’t resist that one.
What was the subject? Oh yeah, weapons on base.
Sorry guys. I’m going to have to throw out the dissenting opinion here. The stressors our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines work through on a daily basis are waaaay above and beyond what your average civilian deals with; and a civilian can usually walk away from a situation when their limits are reached. Our troops do not have that option.
I spent the last 20+ years doing without my personal firearm on base. I would do it the same way again.
The caveat here is that their leaders need to stop going so damned PC and threatening their troops with legal action every time they get in a fistfight. Hell. Once upon a time, picking fights with troops from other branches was a time-honored tradition.
OMG…
If this is considered “Work place violence” … then I am a Chinese fighter pilot. What a stretch!
MSgt B, you picked a bad day to try to pick a fight with the Army… http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/air-force-dumped-ashes-of-more-troops-in-va-landfill-than-acknowledged/2011/12/07/gIQAT8ybdO_story.html?hpid=z1
MSgt B,
I gotta ask……. just what “stressors” does the Air Force have? Golf Course closing too early? EM Club running out of Quiche or Brie? Ice machines broken in the barracks?
Sigh…….
If you don’t trust your folks to carry weapons, then don’t let them into your branch of the service.
MSgt B,
So you are saying that a soldier in garrison has higher stress level than, say…your average cop on the beat? The average civilian with a carry permit? Sorry, I just can’t follow your logic.
I suppose that our vehicles getting hit with IED in Af and IZ were just traffic accidents.
When you’re deployed and facing real danger, priorities are quite well defined, as the bullshit factor is greatly reduced.
Eventually, you always end up back at some stateside base. This is where the fun starts. Many of you guys are, or have been, active duty military and will know what I’m talking about.
How do you return from convoy duty to some O-3 actually raising his voice at you because your Powerpoint presentation is not properly color-coded? (This is just an example, I’m sure it’s never actually happened…)
Let’s get back on subject here. This whole “workplace violence” tag is just another move on the part of the gun-grabbers to show why “Guns are bad, mmkay?” Look at it along side the Brady bunch’s insistence that the Fast and Furious scandal is proof that we need more gun control. WTF?
The whole “Should we let our troops carry on base” issue is a sidebar. Like I said, I did 20+ years without carrying on base, and it didn’t hurt me one bit.
Look at the big picture. I think this is just another part of the whole under-the-radar thing our president promised his minions years ago.
Almost forgot…I much prefer fighting with jarheads rather than army guys. A jarhead will have a beer with you afterwards, army guys get all pissy about it.
Ms.SgtB…. “stressors are to manifest back in stateside” argument… What about cops? Turn in their weapons as soon as their shift is completed? Weak argument.
MSgt B; ” A jarhead will have a beer with you afterwards, army guys get all pissy about it.”
We do not get all “pissy”! Just for that, I’m gonna call your “dining facility” a fucking chow hall!!!! There; take that zoomie!
@22. Why would a soldier or two get all pissy about whomping an airman or two? I don’t get that. I would understand it if the airmen were standing after the rock and roll session but I never saw or heard of that happening.
I know, I was just throwing a little poo at the AF. Now, there were some right badass AF types that I knew of, PJs and CCs, but that’s about it.
I put the comment up @5. Your right it is a joint base. It is an army base but the AF took over all garrison operations. While my back ground is retired army. Even I get confused with base or post. I still shop at the PX on sundays though. I still take basic security measures like not displaying my career on the bumper of my vehicle or having a post decal letting everyone know I can enter the post. While, the fight my be drawing down overseas it may end up on our shores at anytime. In my state we have very nice concealed weapon laws which I follow.
If the bases/posts/otherwise named military installations were properly controlled for bad guys being allowed to enter, then it would be super duper nice for no one to be armed except the installation cops. Yeah, they should be armed when on duty. (Dang, why is that even an issue??)
As it is, military instrallations are far from secure. Anyone who thinks that they are is delusional. Evidently it’s up to each on his/her own to protect themselves from real threats with imaginary weapons?
May we set aside for a while the interservice rivalry? All breanches are under attack here. My US Air Force service was no better or worse than anyone else’s in another branch of service. It was honorable, and for a few moments here and there, with distinction. Like most of yours, just in different ways.
OK, so technically, violence that occurs in a workplace can be labeled “workplace violence.” So what?? Fine, throw those death stix on that chart in your annual report. Now, can we get to the business of seeing that it never happens again? You know, ferreting out the terrorists and ridding ourselves of them?
Thanks for nailing the whole thing, OWB.
Just when I was getting the grunts riled up, OWB puts the icing on the cake and calls it done.
I still disagree with letting GI’s carry on base unless it’s part of their duty. We can come back to that later.
Great post, and I had a lot of fun arguing with you guys. Let’s do it again, soon.
MSgt B
You are entirely welcome, UpNorth. Occasionally the synapses fire properly.
Or maybe it’s the full moon.