BoatBanter.com - View Single Post - For those who think arming teachers is the answer...

Califbill

iBoaterer wrote:
In article 401073031377723076.686172bmckeenospam-
, says...

thumper wrote:
On 12/18/2012 9:53 PM, Califbill wrote:
ESAD wrote:
Let's not forget that Nadal Hassan shot 43 people, 13 fatally, at Fort
Hood, a facility filled with armed and trained people. Approximately 214
shots were fired (Hassan had another 177 rounds on him when captured). He
was attacked by three different soldiers, all of whom he shot. It was not
until a civilian police officer arrived some time later that Hassan was
shot and wounded. If the army can't stop a guy like this, how is a
kindergarten teacher supposed to?

It was a gun control area. Nobody was allowed to carry weapons. The
people were trained, but not armed. Most bases in the states have the
weapons in the armory. I was stationed on an airbase, Travis, that had APs
at the gates and the only other armed people were the guards out on B52
line.

That's interesting. All those trained people. More guns = more
safety... why don't they trust them?

We were not in a war zone. I sat in an electronics shop fixing radar
units, or was in an airplane wrenching on a radar unit. Did not need the
tool, a weapon, in my job. Yes, we did go to the range and qualify yearly.
But we were not in a combat situation. The APs on the flight line for the
B52 were guarding nuclear armed planes. Was a retirement then. I guess
you never were in the service, or had other than an assembly line job where
you were not required to think. If I dad been in a war zone, I would have
been issued a weapon and kept with me while wrenching on planes.

But we are talking about a whole, very large military base. Oh, and one
that is home to a brigade of MP's!

So was Travis AFB. All military air traffic to the pacific basically goes
via Travis. In the US and most Likely all other military bases not in a
war zone, very few are armed.