A US army major has opened fire on fellow soldiers at the Fort Hood military base in Texas, killing 12 people and injuring 31, officials say.
Base commander Lt Gen Bob Cone said that the gunman had not been killed, as earlier stated, but was in custody.
Who would do such a terrible thing, and why? Of course all the answers aren't in yet, but so far this is what's known.
The gunman has been named as Major Nidal Malik Hasan. He is now said to be wounded after being shot a number of times, but in a stable condition in custody.
"His death is not imminent," said Lt Gen Cone.
Maj Hasan, aged 39, was a military psychiatrist and was reportedly due to be sent on a mission to Iraq.
His cousin said Maj Hasan - a US-born Muslim - had been resisting such a deployment.
"He hired a military attorney to try to have the issue resolved, pay back the government, to get out of the military. He was at the end of trying everything," Nader Hasan told Fox News.
He also said that Nidal Malik Hasan had been battling racial harassment because of his "Middle Eastern ethnicity".
I've heard it said before, usually jokingly, that psychiatrists suffer from more than their share of mental illnesses. I realize this incident is no joke. Perhaps the breakdown of Maj. Hasan is a tragic illustration of that.
What's your opinion? Isn't it a sad irony that Maj. Hasan was probably the one to recommend others for discharge when they showed signs of instability, yet he himself had to stay in until he cracked?
Please leave a comment.
Yet another gun-free zone Massacre.
ReplyDeleteOddly enough on an army base everybody is trained and proficient in weapons...and not allowed to have any.
This is the world MikeB would love for us to live in.
Sounds like he owed the gov't for his education? had he gone before? Was it redeployment or a first time?
ReplyDeleteI can imagine one of middle-east ethnicity not wanting to be with the U.S. Army in the middle east. However, he was a psychiatrist so would that have been particularly high risk? Could he be targeted for worst treatment? Did he have a family here that he didn't want to leave? Had he been in active duty all this time or was he a reservist making money as a shrink on the outside?
I can imagine, at 39, wanting to pay the gov't your debt in dollars instead of years.
Be that as it may, he murdered 13 and injured more.
It's not the guns, Mike. It's the people that are going nuts. Without guns, they'd do something else.
Barb said, "It's not the guns, Mike. It's the people that are going nuts. Without guns, they'd do something else."
ReplyDeleteI don't think this is a good example to say that about. If it weren't for gun availaility this guy would have done what exactly? Barb, he did mass murder and wounded 31. He'd need a bomb to match that if there were no guns.
Of course MikeB ignores the fact that he carried his firearms in a place where he was forbidden to do so, whereas his victims were abiding by those regulations and were thus disarmed.
ReplyDeleteAnd what ultimately stopped him from continuing his killing spree? I woman with a gun.
"He'd need a bomb to match that if there were no guns."
ReplyDeleteAnd with his glorification of suicide bombers, he would have had no problem making one and using it.
"He'd need a bomb to match that if there were no guns."
ReplyDeleteSomething the army has plenty of and he would have access to them at Fort Hood.
You forgot to mention a small detail in your blog, MikeB.
The shooter was taken down...BY A WOMAN...WITH A GUN!!!
Guns are bad news for wo..., oh never mind.
Yes, I liked very much that it was a woman who brought him down. Good for her.
ReplyDeleteAbout gun-free zones, I suppose you guys envision a perfect world where they do not exist, a utopian place where every aggression is met immediately with superior firepower.
And you call that freedom.
"About gun-free zones, I suppose you guys envision a perfect world where they do not exist, a utopian place where every aggression is met immediately with superior firepower.
ReplyDeleteAnd you call that freedom."
You mean a world where people aren't corralled and disarmed for the convenience of psychopaths? A world where people don't have to die waiting for the police?
Sounds like freedom to me.
MikeB - You're damn right a world where I am able to exercize my natural, fundamental right to self-defense is freedom.
ReplyDeleteMike, what does this do to your argument that only military and law-enforcement personnel should be allowed to use guns?
ReplyDeleteIt appears that people in the army can go just as crazy as everyone else...
Anonymous, Thanks for the comment, but when did I say this?
ReplyDelete"Mike, what does this do to your argument that only military and law-enforcement personnel should be allowed to use guns?"