Those of us who are actually paying attention have noticed that mass murders consistently happen in gun-free zones. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that a killer is likely to be more effective if he’s not dodging bullets heading his way. He’s the fox in the hen house. (Or maybe it does take a genius, because the stubbornly ignorant folks on the right refuse to recognize this cause/effect nexus.)
What most people didn’t realize before the Fort Hood massacre is that military bases — which are the places where you’d think everyone is armed — are places where no one is armed. This is because William Jefferson Clinton decided in 1993 that, while the military can carry guns to protect him (think of those Marine guards), they’re not allowed to bear arms to protect themselves.
Jeff Bruner describes vividly the fallout from Clinton’s “I don’t like scary soldiers” policy:
Excepting military police and troops shooting under supervision at practice ranges, no person (regardless of rank) is today allowed to carry any weapon (including standard service pistols) onto any US military base or to keep any weapon, even stored securely, in his office or personal quarters.
Prior to that order, officers of certain ranks were required to wear side arms.
Anyone who watched more than a few minutes of the extensive television coverage of yesterday’s attack at the Navy Shipyard saw multiple accounts by senior Navy officers who described running for their lives after others nearby them fell or hiding under their desks, desperately texting colleagues seeking and offering reassurance that they had escaped the shooter thus far.
Think about that.
Career commissioned officers of the United States Navy–the Navy of “I have not yet begun to fight!” and “Don’t give up the ship!”–the Navy of “We have met the enemy and they are ours!” and “Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!”–the Navy of which George Washington said “[W]ithout a decisive Naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious!”–had no choice but to “shelter in place,” cowering despite their proven personal courage and the best training in human history, while a lone gunman without benefit of body armor calmly executed 12 of their colleagues and wounded as many others.
As a former anti-gun liberal myself, maybe I should give Clinton a pass. Nah, on second thought, nah. You see, I’ve figured out how dumb I was, and I try to make amends (including an NRA membership). Clinton and the party to which he belongs have instead decided to double down on a policy that transcends stupidity and heads into evil.
As you know, I wholeheartedly support America’s military. I know that, as an entity, it will survive the Obama years. If America elects another Democrat president, however, I would strongly advise people not to enlist or to re-up. There’s nothing more dangerous to America’s military than a Democrat in the White House. What makes Democrats worse even than Republicans such as Bush who took the military to war is that, with war, at least military members expose themselves to risk doing what they’re trained to do and, because we have a voluntary military, what they want to do. Under Democrats, though, they’re exposed to unreasonable risk when being forced to do something that goes against their training, ability, and instincts.