Search found 4 matches

by Jim Beaux
Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:32 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: CAll TO ACTION
Replies: 42
Views: 7860

Re: CAll TO ACTION

nightmare69 wrote:Only in America does the military have to call police to come protect them because they are not allowed to carry guns.
Ive read a few comments on this thread and some are essentially stating that "rules are rules" & if "you break them, you should be prepared to face the consequences".

How about you dismissive posters tell us what our military should do when they have to contend with those who respect no rules? What do you suggest? Sacrifice cuz rules are rules?

Check this out.

FBI: Middle Eastern Men Intimidating U.S. Military Families In Colorado & Wyoming
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/08/04/f ... o-wyoming/

I am in a violent rage just reading this. These slimy reptiles have no place on earth.
by Jim Beaux
Sun Aug 02, 2015 4:21 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: CAll TO ACTION
Replies: 42
Views: 7860

Re: CAll TO ACTION

Taypo wrote:
Jim Beaux wrote:
jmra wrote:So, it would be perfectly fine for teachers to break the law and carry in schools as long as they don't get caught until they have to use the gun on an active shooter?
I have no doubt what the response would be on this forum if a teacher with a CHL was busted with a gun in school if there was not an active shooter, but somehow it all becomes ok once a shooter shows up?
I think some of us need to research situational ethics and see if that is a road we want to travel.

:roll: You should try comparing apples to apples.

There is a difference between the duties, purpose & training of a soldier & those of a teacher. Disarming a soldier on duty is as outrageous as banning a teacher from talking in the classroom - both serve no logical purpose. :headscratch
#1: How many serving members of the military have ANY pistol exposure? Now, take your answer and subtract the MP's, the officers, the MI guys and the SF guys. I'll gladly stand behind putting armed guards on entrances of any federal/state/military installation, but allowing the rank and file to carry concealed is asking for trouble. In this instance, its an officer we're discussing so he, at minimum, had M9 exposure.

#2. Your comparison to a teacher not talking is also moot - that's part of the job description, or mission. A recruiter doesn't need a weapon to fulfill the mission.

We're rapidly approaching the point where we need to follow the Israeli model of troops behind armed all the time, but until that changes the law is what it is.
You havent provided anything but baseless rhetoric. There is no sense in engaging you. Have a good day.
by Jim Beaux
Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:30 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: CAll TO ACTION
Replies: 42
Views: 7860

Re: CAll TO ACTION

jmra wrote:So, it would be perfectly fine for teachers to break the law and carry in schools as long as they don't get caught until they have to use the gun on an active shooter?
I have no doubt what the response would be on this forum if a teacher with a CHL was busted with a gun in school if there was not an active shooter, but somehow it all becomes ok once a shooter shows up?
I think some of us need to research situational ethics and see if that is a road we want to travel.

:roll: You should try comparing apples to apples.

There is a difference between the duties, purpose & training of a soldier & those of a teacher. Disarming a soldier on duty is as outrageous as banning a teacher from talking in the classroom - both serve no logical purpose. :headscratch
by Jim Beaux
Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:24 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: CAll TO ACTION
Replies: 42
Views: 7860

CAll TO ACTION

We have to step up & help Lt. Cmdr. White. His actions are inspiring.
Here’s what needs to happen. Flood the phone of SecNav Ray Mabus and SecDef Carter and ask them whose side they’re. Demand the charges being brought against Lt.Cmdr White be immediately dropped. If those charges are not dropped, I will personally lead the charge to have Carter and Mabus removed from their positions.
Allen West
“A Navy officer and Marine reportedly returned fire at the shooter who killed five service members in Chattanooga, Tenn., even though current policy does not permit military members to carry firearms on facilities such as those where the attack occurred.

The cold-blooded assault killed four Marines and one active-duty Navy reservist. The center’s commanding officer, Lt. Cmdr. Timothy White, used his personal firearm to engage the shooter during the attack, according to sources quoted in the Navy Times. A report from The Washington Post said that one of the Marines killed in the shooting might have been carrying a 9 mm Glock and possibly returned fire on the shooter.

At the time, Western Journalism wrote, Lt. Cmdr. White could face disciplinary action for violating policy about possessing a weapon on the facility that was supposedly a gun-free zone.
http://allenbwest.com/2015/08/whats-hap ... lood-boil/

Return to “CAll TO ACTION”