Should soldiers be armed?

[2aguy]

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

again, that is stupid, since right now they can go out and buy a gun and go shoot people without a psych evaluation......right? So what would your psych eval do? How would it stop a mentally ill killer, in the military, from getting an illegal gun and going to a gun free zone military facility and shooting people? Or even using a legal gun to do it?

You are only disarming good people and doing nothing to address crazy killers...right....Mr. low intellect....?

You appear to be struggling with the point I am making. Try reading my post again or have someone with better reading comprehension enlighten you.

No.....your point is stupid. I have shown you how stupid it is....try again.....

I know...you went to a government school, which was controlled by the education wing of the democrat party...so your ability to think has been stunted....but you can overcome that....

Youve only shown how stupid you are. Again have someone brighter than yourself read my post and clarify for you what it means.

You said soldiers should have psych evals before they can carry....I correctly pointed out how stupid that was since a crazy soldier can go out, get a legal or illegal gun, right now....and go and shoot people....while good, normal soldiers can't......

You are the stupid one my friend....did you complete that process and vote democrat as well....?

 

[Asclepias]

You dont have a right to a concealed weapon just because you are in the military. There should be someway to make sure nutcases are not being given free license to kill people.

But you do have the right to bear arms as an American. I'm guessing these soldiers are American.

Well....there are a lot of non citizens in the U.S. army........

People like assclaps believe every ****** is a nutcase.

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

 

[Asclepias]

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

again, that is stupid, since right now they can go out and buy a gun and go shoot people without a psych evaluation......right? So what would your psych eval do? How would it stop a mentally ill killer, in the military, from getting an illegal gun and going to a gun free zone military facility and shooting people? Or even using a legal gun to do it?

You are only disarming good people and doing nothing to address crazy killers...right....Mr. low intellect....?

You appear to be struggling with the point I am making. Try reading my post again or have someone with better reading comprehension enlighten you.

No.....your point is stupid. I have shown you how stupid it is....try again.....

I know...you went to a government school, which was controlled by the education wing of the democrat party...so your ability to think has been stunted....but you can overcome that....

Youve only shown how stupid you are. Again have someone brighter than yourself read my post and clarify for you what it means.

You said soldiers should have psych evals before they can carry....I correctly pointed out how stupid that was since a crazy soldier can go out, get a legal or illegal gun, right now....and go and shoot people....while good, normal soldiers can't......

You are the stupid one my friend....did you complete that process and vote democrat as well....?

Its interesting to observe how slowly your mind functions. It appears you need to read my post about 20 times over slowly so you can get the full meaning of my post....or like I said have an adult read it to you and explain.

 

[hortysir]

Why should they?

Did you have to take a civics test before you were allowed to vote?

Because a nutcase with a weapon has nothing to do with civics.

Because you're infringing on their rights

You dont have a right to a concealed weapon just because you are in the military. There should be someway to make sure nutcases are not being given free license to kill people.

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

You're putting an unnecessary burden on a Constitutional right.

You're one of the first ones to ***** and moan when someone suggests spending a dollar for an ID to vote

 

[Lonestar_logic]

But you do have the right to bear arms as an American. I'm guessing these soldiers are American.

Well....there are a lot of non citizens in the U.S. army........

People like assclaps believe every ****** is a nutcase.

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

 

[Asclepias]

Because a nutcase with a weapon has nothing to do with civics.

Because you're infringing on their rights

You dont have a right to a concealed weapon just because you are in the military. There should be someway to make sure nutcases are not being given free license to kill people.

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

You're putting an unnecessary burden on a Constitutional right.

You're one of the first ones to ***** and moan when someone suggests spending a dollar for an ID to vote

You dont have a right to carry a concealed weapon and have the tax payers pay for it.

 

[hortysir]

Because you're infringing on their rights

You dont have a right to a concealed weapon just because you are in the military. There should be someway to make sure nutcases are not being given free license to kill people.

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

You're putting an unnecessary burden on a Constitutional right.

You're one of the first ones to ***** and moan when someone suggests spending a dollar for an ID to vote

You dont have a right to carry a concealed weapon and have the tax payers pay for it.

Where has it been suggested that taxpayers pay for CWPs?

 

[Asclepias]

Well....there are a lot of non citizens in the U.S. army........

People like assclaps believe every ****** is a nutcase.

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15. You appeared quite happy with the prospect. You are like some of the loons I was in the military with. In addition to being a lying convict.

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

 

[Asclepias]

You dont have a right to a concealed weapon just because you are in the military. There should be someway to make sure nutcases are not being given free license to kill people.

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

You're putting an unnecessary burden on a Constitutional right.

You're one of the first ones to ***** and moan when someone suggests spending a dollar for an ID to vote

You dont have a right to carry a concealed weapon and have the tax payers pay for it.

Where has it been suggested that taxpayers pay for CWPs?

Where you or anyone else said "soldiers". You do realize they are paid for by tax payers right? Are you claiming you meant their own personal weapons?

 

[hortysir]

People like assclaps believe every ****** is a nutcase.

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

What kind of ammo do you think an AR-15 takes?

 

[hortysir]

Well....can you tell me something...actually explain something....

You are afraid to allow military people to carry guns.....because they might be nuts...right? Am I wrong about that?

So....what stops that now? Could you please enlighten me? Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

Like most people with low intelligence you have confused the issue. Training helps you learn how to use the gun more effectively. It doesnt guard against insanity. If they pass a rigorous pysch eval, I have no problem with them carrying a gun my tax dollars paid for while on duty.

You're putting an unnecessary burden on a Constitutional right.

You're one of the first ones to ***** and moan when someone suggests spending a dollar for an ID to vote

You dont have a right to carry a concealed weapon and have the tax payers pay for it.

Where has it been suggested that taxpayers pay for CWPs?

Where you or anyone else said "soldiers". You do realize they are paid for by tax payers right?

Soldiers are paid by tax dollars.

CWPs are paid by that individual's own money and paid to the state of residence

 

[Asclepias]

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

What kind of ammo do you think an AR-15 takes?

Are you stalling or is there a point you are trying to make?

 

[Gracie]

If they can be armed to be soldiers defending our country then yes, they should be armed while on base.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

People like assclaps believe every ****** is a nutcase.

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15. You appeared quite happy with the prospect. You are like some of the loons I was in the military with. In addition to being a lying convict.

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

Exactly, when a feral dog is on my property it is a threat to my livestock. I prefer my .22 but have used an AR, a .243 and a 30.30, whichever is handier at the time is fine. Oh and yes, it is good shooting practice. I'm sure you don't do much hunting in the hood.

 

[hortysir]

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

What kind of ammo do you think an AR-15 takes?

Are you stalling or is there a point you are trying to make?

You acted like LL made contradictory statements

 

[Asclepias]

?

Only ****** like you that shoot stray dogs for sport.

I've never shot a dog for sport, but when has the facts ever stopped you.

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15. You appeared quite happy with the prospect. You are like some of the loons I was in the military with. In addition to being a lying convict.

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

Exactly, when a feral dog is on my property it is a threat to my livestock. I prefer my .22 but have used an AR, a .243 and a 30.30, whichever is handier at the time is fine. Oh and yes, it is good shooting practice. I'm sure you don't do much hunting in the hood.

You get caught in lies too easily. You arent very good at telling them.

 

[Asclepias]

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

What kind of ammo do you think an AR-15 takes?

Are you stalling or is there a point you are trying to make?

You acted like LL made contradictory statements

He did. First he said "harassing" then when confronted with the evidence he backtracked and admitted just being on the property was a threat. He also denied shooting dogs for sport but as you can clearly see by his emoticon he enjoys the target practice.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You admitted you shot feral dogs for sport. Should I prove you to be a lying convict once again?

I admitted to shooting dogs that were harassing my livestock. Living out in the country where city folk like you dump their unwanted dogs which then become feral needs to be dealt with in a humane manner, a well placed .22 shot suffices.

No you claimed if a dog was on your property it was threatening your live stock and you now had an excuse to practice with your AR-15

Yes on my property. Any dog on my property is a threat to my livestock and will be treated as such. And as a bonus I have a good reason to use my AR-15.

What kind of ammo do you think an AR-15 takes?

Are you stalling or is there a point you are trying to make?

You acted like LL made contradictory statements

Actually he showed that he lied when he said I shot feral dogs for the sport of it. In both cases I specifically stated I shot them because they are a threat to my cows. For those that don't have livestock they don't understand the harm these feral dogs can cause, not only can they hamstring cattle by just chasing them they can also take down small calves. Not to mention they are also capable of spreading diseases that endanger my dogs, rabies is one such disease.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

Any military person can go to a gun store, can pass a background check and get a gun and if they are nuts now, they can go and shoot people....right now.....since they will ignore all the laws against murder, and the gun free zone laws...right?

So how will allowing military people to carry guns, like every other American can.....be more dangerous....since by your own gun grabbing standards they have far more training with guns than non military civilians...right?

Can you explain that process....?

The problem is no one in a position of authorizing military personnel to be armed in public is willing to risk the political fallout if they do approve it and some psycho (such as that Army psychiatrist at Fort Hood) goes off and starts shooting.

It's basically the same reason why Obama, or other political Executives, won't dare call for legalizing marijuana. These issues call for the kind of political courage demonstrated by FDR and Eisenhower. The only one we've had since then is Jimmy Carter -- who was the victim of bad luck.

 

[auditor0007]

where would person in acus conceal a weapon?

In standard utility uniforms it would be easy to conceal a pistol......

You dont need to conceal your weapon when on guard duty. Its a deterrent.

Scott directed Adjutant Gen. Michael Calhoun to temporarily move National Guard members from six "storefront" recruitment centers to armories. Also, he ordered Calhoun to work with local law-enforcement agencies to arrange regular security checks of armories and said the state will expedite processing of new concealed-weapons licenses for members of the National Guard.

"We're going to do everything we can to make sure that all of our National Guard members are safe,'' Scott, who was scheduled to hold a late-afternoon news conference in West Palm Beach, said during a CNN interview.

The executive order said Guard members will be moved from the recruitment centers to armories until Calhoun "can fully evaluate and make recommendations for improving the security" of the centers. It said possible improvements could include installing bulletproof glass and enhancing video-surveillance equipment.

The move to expedite new concealed-weapons licenses would apply to Guard members who do not have such permits. Scott said during the CNN interview that the move is designed for "personal protection when they are not on duty."

Are they going to be given real psychological evals before giving them concealed weapons permits?

Why? The guy who is shooting into the building didn't get one.......why would you assume the guys who took an oath and made a sacrifice to serve their country are bad people? Typical lib............

The vast majority are good people and could be trusted to carry a weapon on their person. The problem is with the few. Allowing them to carry makes it easier for anyone who might snap, but on the other hand, if someone snaps like that, they will probably find a way to get a gun anyway, so maybe it really doesn't matter. In the end, if someone wants to shoot up the place, they will, whether they are deterred or not.