Navy Yard Attack
While we don't have all the information yet, including the full list of the victims or a motive behind the attacks, our prayers to out to all the families of those hurt in the cowardly attack at the Washington Navy Yard yesterday.
It was almost surreal seeing my friends -- including one old shipmate who works in the next building over -- checking in safe on Facebook. When we joined the Submarine Force, we knew there was inherent danger in what we did; we just didn't figure that working in an office building could be one of the dangerous things.
I don't want to get started on the politics of the situation too soon, but I'm hoping that this, along with the Ft. Hood terrorist attack, will start a movement towards an understanding that active duty military personnel should be allowed to be armed at all times when on active duty during wartime.
posted by Bubblehead at 6:13 AM
120 Comments:
Agree we should be able to qualify/certify and arm active duty personnel when on a military base! It should go like this, show ID, report to armory, verify quals, issue weapon and open carry throughout the day! End of day report to Armory, return weapon, go home.
I work at the Yard and laugh at all the news media "experts" and elected officials talking about how "secure" the Navy Yard is... areas of the Yard, VERY Secure! general areas of the Yard LMFAO!!!
BTW the Navy did it right when releasing folks from lockdown last night! They brought folks out of the building, had food, chaplains and transportation coordinators to get people headed in the right direction home since they didnt allow any POV's to leave the Yard.
9/17/2013 7:16 AM
Concur with allowing to carry on base. Does anyone remember the reason why it was banned in 1993?
I notice that some media outlets are trying to play up the fact that he received the gwot service medal, trying to parallel that with the promotions and accolades that the jihadist traitor Hassan (may his neck not break when he is finally hung so he dies a slow and painful death) received, I guess. Apples and oranges... it makes me wish there was some common number to call and fix media misinformation.
9/17/2013 8:15 AM
I don't really feel like security on the Yard is the issue here. The guy was (somehow) able to get a clearance and a CAC despite firearms violations and a general discharge, how were these not gigantic red flags?
Here's how arming everyone would go.
1. Hand out lots of guns to everybody.
2. Lots of dumb squids shoot themselves or others accidentally
3. Take guns back.
9/17/2013 8:22 AM
It does seem like a good idea in theory to allow personal or issue weapons to all (authorized) hands on a base. However, in the chaos of trying to ID a single or multiple shooter, if everyone is running around with a weapon, how are law enforcement supposed to tell the bad guy from the good guys, especially with an "insider" threat?
9/17/2013 8:42 AM
Since this is now public information thought it worth posting. The last 2 sentences from W Hilarides is pretty impressive IMHO.
From COMNAVSEA's morning update:
Since it is on the news, I thought you should have the list of our fallen
comrades. Please mourn for them and their families.
Mary Knight
Sylvia Frasier
Gerald Reed
Frank Kohler
John Johnson
Mike Arnold
Kathy Gaarde
Michael Riddel
Marty Bodrog
Ken Proctor
Arthur Daniels
Kisan Vishnu Pandit
Please pass any information to your leadership. I will muster them all
virtually at noon. If you visit a wounded shipmate or one of the families,
please let us know.
Other items:
Do not come to the Navy Yard today unless you have urgent business. There is
still no access for cars, but there is walking access. We will let you know
when that is relaxed.
Bldg 197, the garage and Isaac Hull Blvd are still a crime scene.
CMC Banks and I will represent you all at a wreath laying at the navy
Memorial at 10 am.
The NAVSEA duty office is here at MSC HQ. It cannot handle a lot of traffic,
but for urgent calls, the number is 202-685-0006/5366.
As a reminder, for grief counseling, 1-855-677-1755 is the phone number for
the Warfighter and Family Support Center at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling,
which is being continuously manned. Clinical Counselors are available for
anyone who is seeking assistance. Call them if you need them. They can set
up in person counseling as well. The entire Navy is behind us in our moment
of loss.
To all of you in the field, as you grieve, keep the fleet in mind. With HQ
out of action, make sure you are supporting the ships at sea and in port.
You are empowered to make decisions and move out for them. Keep us informed.
Vr
Willy
VADM W Hilarides
9/17/2013 10:13 AM
One story says alleges Alexis had been angry at Navy for not advancing him beyond PO3. A reservist with no overseas deployment, officially ignored mental issues and a record of problematic performance wanted advancement? Move over (ex-Major) Malik Hasan. He was treated well to get where he was.
How many other honorably discharged vets like Aaron Alexis lurk in our military?
Isn't it time to restore standards for volunteers to at least what they were for draftees during Viet Nam?
Legally owned/authorized guns are not the problem, the cost of political correctness has been deplorable even if it has been for compassionate reasons.
We now know how the pipeline of military miscreants was loaded! federal (particularly military) standards should be uniform.
9/17/2013 11:05 AM
Al Qaeda is known for preying on the weak-minded in the Middle East when it comes to launching suicide bombings.
I would hope that the government would at least be considering this line of attack, but with the Hassan attack at Ft. Hood still being labeled "workplace violence," I'm not holding my breath.
9/17/2013 12:00 PM
"[A]ctive duty military personnel should be allowed to be armed at all times when on active duty during wartime."
Hear, hear, Joel.
I'll go one step further.
I submit that active duty military personnel should not only be *allowed* to be armed at all times when on AD during wartime, but should be *REQUIRED* to be armed under those conditions.
Like Judge Andrew Napolitano said recently (somewhat paraphrased), "if we can't trust military officers to carry firearms on military bases, we don't believe in the Second Amendment at all."
9/17/2013 3:05 PM
Sounds like a great way to add some extra time to your workday as you go through the Navy Turnover procedure every morning before work and after work.
Fall Asleep at your desk? Great, now you've fallen asleep while armed.
Sailor sleeps with another sailor's wife and both are armed? I am sure this will not create any problems. Sometimes sailors get in fights... you know what will make this worse? Give them both guns and 4 hours of semi-annual training in how to use them.
Frankly, most Navy Officers (and enlisted members) are not really all that well-trained to shoot, nor are most of them trained *at all* about how to engage an armed intruder.
FYI, the security guards in the Navy yard are armed with guns. The Petty Officers at the gate (when it's Navy, not civvies) are armed with guns.
I guarantee that if this actually happens, you will have more sailors, marines, and soldiers shoot each other in a heat of rage or accidentally than they will armed intruders.
9/17/2013 4:31 PM
Also: Want to go to lunch? Don't forget to stop by the armory and complete the weapon turnover procedure before leaving base and coming back on.
9/17/2013 4:32 PM
If I'm not mistaken, before 1993 a privately owned sidearm was allowed to be carried. Sailors could carry a weapon they are comfortable using and can practice with on their own time. Under no circumstances would a required carry with an associated GMT be a good idea. Apply for the proper registration on base and there you go.
As far as people shooting each other if something happens, as long everyone doesn't run around trying to be the hero, there shouldn't be an issue.
9/17/2013 4:42 PM
I will admit, there are some Sailors I would be very afraid if they were allowed to carry loaded weapons.
I would make it a voluntary carry. If a Sailor didn't want to carry, then he didn't have to.
As for armory issued weapons, forget that. Wanna carry on base, buy your own gun to carry. The bases/Navy can put out a list of acceptable parameters for pistols carried. That way, no 50 cal pistols!
Plus, annual training with semi annual qualifications at the local armory, bring your own ammo!
Of course you have to have the "if you have one drink, no weapons for up to 12 hours after the last swallow. Go to mast, privileges suspended until requalified. You can come up with a bunch of parameters and restrictions so the right people have guns when needed.
9/17/2013 4:51 PM
Bill Clinton outlawed carrying guns on base, before that some officers where required to carry at curtain times.
9/17/2013 6:11 PM
anon @4:42
>If I'm not mistaken, before 1993 a privately owned sidearm was allowed to be carried.
You are mistaken.
Concealed carry and open carry of private weapons was never permitted, on and off duty. Clinton didn't change things.
9/17/2013 6:57 PM
Counterpoint to Anonymous at 4:13 PM...I would be willing to sacrifice some convenience (hell, even a LOT of convenience) if it would mean I was better equipped to protect the Sailors for whose safety I am responsible.
We are in the profession of arms, ladies and gentlemen...we don't always get to do what is the easiest/most convenient thing to do if it is not the safest and/or most effective.
9/17/2013 7:02 PM
During the last declared war (WWII) members of the military were not armed all the time. Nor did they live in a combat uniform, but that is a side issue.
For those who believe the 1993 myth get it out of your heads. We were never allowed to carry private weapons on base with the exception on those bases that permitted hunting or had shooting ranges. Even then one had to travel to and from weapons unloaded.
9/17/2013 9:10 PM
It does seem like a good idea in theory to allow personal or issue weapons to all (authorized) hands on a base. However, in the chaos of trying to ID a single or multiple shooter, if everyone is running around with a weapon, how are law enforcement supposed to tell the bad guy from the good guys, especially with an "insider" threat?
Historically, shootings ended by an armed member of the general population tally 2-3 deaths. Shootings that end up waiting for the police to respond ring up 10 or more. Do the math.
9/18/2013 1:54 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
9/18/2013 9:09 AM
Who are we at war with, our own people and the mentally ill?
It won’t be long if all sailors carry weapons, where a fruit cake takes out the whole ward room or one CO or XO at a time.
How about taking over a naval reactor just to get you name rememebred?
I mean it wouldn't do much actually damage to the Navy on the big picture...but it would be a national public relations nightmare for the high brass and the president.
9/18/2013 9:18 AM
Here's how arming everyone would go.
1. Hand out lots of guns to everybody.
2. Lots of dumb squids shoot themselves or others accidentally
3. Take guns back.
Nothing like discussion of guns to bring out retarded liberals.
Here are some facts for you:
1) Every cone sailor carries a firearm regularly in his course of in-port duty.
2) These Sailors don't find and shoot other Sailors who piss them off, nor do they shoot themselves at anywhere near a high rate.
3) Many Sailors who don't carry firearms in the course of their duties own personal firearms at home, which they could use to shoot someone who pisses them off or themselves.
You're not going to get widespread blue-on-blue gun violence because Sailors are allowed to carry firearms on base. People who own personal firearms know what they do and are generally responsible with them; they don't waive around a pistol everytime they get into an argument with someone.
Despite this, you'll never see servicemembers be able to carry around base because:
1) You'd have to reinvigorate firearm training in the Navy to ensure it's effective at preparing Sailors to combat an armed threat (it isn't right now).
2) You'd have to develop a robust tracking mechanism for Sailors who are allowed to carry personal firearms on base vs. those who are not (e.g., how do you know Sailor A went through the proper training and certification and how do you know Sailor X is going through a divorce and isn't allowed to be carrying his glock on base?)
3) You'd have to take a look at and re-write some of the Navy's rules toward firearms to make sense and be conducive to carrying weapons on base, e.g. the falling asleep at the desk scenario.
All of those require a lot of work for O-6 and above base commander types and incurs way too much career risk for someone at that level if the policies are found inadequate if an incident does occur.
So we're going to have more of the same in regards to that. If anything, the solution will be to find more ways to make your stop at the gate take 10x longer while they search everyone's muffler for possible pipe bombs to more effectively prevent weapons from getting on base in the first place.
9/18/2013 9:21 AM
even on the Army and Marine Corps bases, weapons are tightly controlled and we train with firearms regularly. if Army/USMC doesn't believe they should entrust firearms to infantrymen whose job it is to employ those weapons except on the range or when deployed, then the Navy should definitely not issue firearms to its sailors and technicians whose job is NOT regular employment of firearms. as someone who's spent many years on Bragg, there are a lot of knuckleheads and dimwits who i would not trust to be around with firearms (and yes they are/were considered "well-trained"). I've seen Green Berets commit firearm safety violations. can't imagine a base full of sailors running around with loaded arms.
9/18/2013 9:53 AM
"can't imagine a base full of sailors running around with loaded arms."
Neither can anyone else except for the monumentally fucking stupid.
"Historically, shootings ended by an armed member of the general population tally 2-3 deaths. Shootings that end up waiting for the police to respond ring up 10 or more. Do the math."
Bullshit. Provide a credible source.
9/18/2013 11:11 AM
Nothing like discussion of guns to bring out retarded liberals.
Not retarded, not liberal..just a little smarter than you...and just stating the fact that the more dopey squids that you give guns to, the more incidents you will have of accidental/intentional shootings by those squids. It's purely math, if something happens one out of every 1000 times, and you do it 2000 times, you can expect to have it happen twice. Now, multiply it by thousands (since you're going from .1% armed to 100% armed) and do the math. If training would prevent all the incidents, why haven't we implemented it now, to prevent the ones we already have? The simple answer is that you can't prevent the incidents with training; you might reduce the frequency but you will still have them happen.
Someone else mentioned the variety of issues caused by this, e.g. sleeping while armed, the huge amount of overhead associated with arming all AD personnel, and let's not forget about the costs associated with obtaining, issuing, and maintaining these weapons. The burden of something like this on our forces would be unmanageable, and in the end the squids still would not be trained on anything more than hitting a paper target 25 yards away.
9/18/2013 11:24 AM
'... that active duty military personnel should be allowed to be armed at all times when on active duty during wartime...'
Joel, let that be the cause of this whole sad event. People getting easy access to guns. What will the consequences be with all these extra guns out there? With all respect to the people serving, but this isn't the wild west anymore.
Besides, it's wartime but you're not in a warzone. Unless you're taking in account the nutcases wandering around on the streets.
One can always find a reason to justify loose gunlaws. They should just get tighter but hey, who am I?
9/18/2013 11:25 AM
65% of mass shootings stopped by civilians were stopped by UNARMED civilians.
9/18/2013 1:41 PM
Not retarded, not liberal..just a little smarter than you...and just stating the fact that the more dopey squids that you give guns to...
Dopey squids? Do you not trust these guys to operate complex warships? Do you not trust these guys to save your life in a casualty?
So you're 'smarter than me' because you think allowing Sailors to carry firearms that they ALREADY OWN onto base and that they ALREADY CARRY ON DUTY will result in going full-retard and shooting each other? Or should I say, "running around with loaded firearms" as if carrying a firearm is suddenly going to make fat submariners jog more than twice a year while shooting their pistols in the air like a hick from the Civil War?
Really, you think inferring any of that will happen makes you smarter than me?
Perhaps it's just that you think very lowly of the people with whom you serve, in which case you should leave the military ASAP.
Do you not realize how easy it is to get a gun onto any Naval base for an AD servicemember? I have never had my car searched in over 1600 times entering a military installation.
9/18/2013 2:32 PM
tom said "With all respect to the people serving, but this isn't the wild west anymore.".
Apparently it is. Fort Hood. WNY. The list is just starting, and this is the future Al Qaeda would like to see. They can see that CONUS military bases are soft targets once you penetrate the crunchy hard exterior.
Which is easy. If a wacko can do it, then a trained terrorist can.
We have been fortunate that up until now we have carried the fight to the enemy instead of letting him come to us. This will change, no doubt.
If everyone on a FOB carries, then why not active duty on CONUS bases? Ships on the waterfront are armed, but not squids in buildings because it is "too unsafe"?
In 2001, when condition 1 weapons were mandated above and below decks on SSN, there was a lot of people who called it crazy and predicted a rash of negligent discharges, and injured service members. How many of those occurred? 3?
9/18/2013 2:38 PM
65% of mass shootings stopped by civilians were stopped by UNARMED civilians.
Yea, well, here's the reality:
-Only something like 38 states allow concealed carry.
-Many mass shootings occur in 'gun free zones.'
-Mass shootings are usually conducted with weapons that outperform a pistol at range (shotguns, rifles).
-Even in states that allow concealed carry, there are enough establishments that restrict that right that people don't carry as often as you think.
For example, a servicemember in TX is going to leave his firearm at home because he can't bring it on base. A guy who works in a 'gun free' office building is going to leave it at home because he doesn't want someone taking it from his car.
The likelihood that a shooting happens in the presence of someone armed AND brave (or stupid?) enough to try to take out 2 dudes with shotguns with a 9mm pistol is very, very low.
9/18/2013 2:40 PM
anon at 6:35: 65% of mass shootings stopped by civilians were stopped by UNARMED civilians.
That is a specious argument.
And how many FEWER people would have died if those civilians had been armed and didn't have to duck and cover until the wacko paused to reload, but could have responded immediately?
The gunman at the WNY roamed for 30 minutes before he was stopped. Surrounded by active duty military who are qualified on small arms but have no weapons. All of whom would rather have drawn a beed instead of hid underneath desks.
I wonder how many WNY employees who didn't own a firearm stopped by a gun shop on the way home and bought a weapon. This sort of event shatters you perceptions of how safe your world is, and you seek to do whatever you can to regain control of the world around you.
9/18/2013 2:44 PM
Blogger Mike Mulligan said... if all sailors carry weapons, where a fruit cake takes out the whole ward room..How about taking over a naval reactor just to get you name rememebred?
Get some time on the pond.
2/3 the crew of a submarine carries a small arm on their duty day at some point (once every third or fourth day). Loaded, condition 1 since 2001. Even nukes get to play in elevated THREATCONS.
Yet no dead ward rooms, no "taken over reactors".
Geez, you think we don't trust our military with weapons?
WE ARE THE MILITARY! Weapons are what we do.
9/18/2013 2:52 PM
Tom at 11:25
Easy access to guns is not the problem.
Fort Hood: the guy was a terrorist, and would have found a weapon/been given a weapon. Boston Marathon bomber: ditto. I wouldn't be surprised if the WNY wacko ends up to have some terrorist tie as well, due to his target.
Look at Aurora. In the absence of firearms, that wacko would have blown up the theater, and more would have died. His apartment was rigged with explosives that were proficiently deployed.
The problem in the WNY case is not easy access, but a system that failed. 3 different events should have led to his getting flagged on the NICS list (weapons violation in Seattle and Texas, interaction with Newport police), and prevented him from getting "easy access" to a firearm.
The system already exists, the laws already exist, they just need to be enforced.
9/18/2013 2:59 PM
"People who own personal firearms know what they do and are generally responsible with them."
This statement may be true, but there has been much research showing that the single biggest risk factor for getting shot, or having one of your family members shot is owning a gun. Consequently, there is not statistically significant difference in likelihood of being shot by an armed intruder (primarily because that's a really rare occurrence).
I agree with your gross generalizations that MOST gun owning sailors are responsible and relatively level-headed, but there are always going to be sailors on the margins. There are something like 20 people accidentally shooting themselves or other people in the USA everyday.
http://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2012/12/health-risk-having-gun-home
If you don't like this article, use google and find hundreds of more just like it spanning at least a decade of data and studies.
9/18/2013 3:38 PM
Really, you think inferring any of that will happen makes you smarter than me?
No, what makes me smarter than you is my ability to perform rudimentary mathematical calculations.
Solve for X
If 1,000 people with guns = 5 accidental shooting deaths per year, then
2,000 people with guns = 10 accidental shooting deaths per year
...
Therefore 50,000 people with guns = X accidental shootings per year
Number of people who *might* have been saved by arming everyone on Active Duty at Ft. Hood and the Navy Yard: 25
Total number of shooting deaths = X -25
Is your number negative or positive?
9/18/2013 4:07 PM
Apparently I am the stupidest b/c I hit "Publish" in error. Not going through all that again.
9/18/2013 4:09 PM
No, what makes me smarter than you is my ability to perform rudimentary mathematical calculations.
That's what we call "the cost of doing business."
We can also stop automobile accidents by banning Sailors from driving, and motorcycle accidents by banning motorcycles. We can also drastically reduce suicide by keeping everyone on the boat under supervision at all times.
Also, what's more important is the rate of gun incidents, not the absolute number. Even you assume the rate remains the same in your fabricated numbers based on absolutely no empirical data.
9/18/2013 4:58 PM
"Dopey squids? Do you not trust these guys to operate complex warships? Do you not trust these guys to save your life in a casualty?"
Yes I trust them. Do you know why? BECAUSE WE HAVE SPENT YEARS TRAINING THEM TO DO THOSE THINGS YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER. Are we going to spend the same amount of time training everyone how to deal with an armed assailant because that's what it takes. There is a huge difference between gun safety and shooting paper targets and confronting an armed assailant. Get a fucking clue.
9/18/2013 5:03 PM
That's what we call "the cost of doing business."
It seems to me that if you have 25 sailors accidentally shoot each other because of poor training, and create some extra administrative burden, than that is worse than having 25 sailors shot in cold blood with no additional administrative burden.
If 25 sailors still get shot either way, why bother?
9/18/2013 5:26 PM
Not the heart of the issue here, but I do find Anon at 5:03PM a tad confusing (or confused): Why exactly would we arm every non-nuclear watchstander in port, if NOT to confront armed assailants? I guess they're there to guard the boat from an invasion of paper targets.
Anon at 2:59PM does a good job focusing on where the current system is weak. Too often these events inspire "discussion" in the form of two groups of people trying to shout each other down, each proposing their utopian vision of how the world would work if they could just get their way entirely on a divided issue. It's refreshing to find a few folks who understand that it's better to find solutions that a majority can agree to adopt, rather than just insist that everyone with a different viewpoint is necessarily stupid.
9/18/2013 5:37 PM
BECAUSE WE HAVE SPENT YEARS TRAINING THEM TO DO THOSE THINGS YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER. Are we going to spend the same amount of time training everyone how to deal with an armed assailant because that's what it takes. There is a huge difference between gun safety and shooting paper targets and confronting an armed assailant. Get a fucking clue.
You're the dumb motherfucker who doesn't realize he boarded a ship with an armed POOD and Topside Sentry. Did they accidentally shoot you? Did they ever point a weapon at you because they got pissed off at how utterly stupid you are, or that you refer to them as 'dopey squids?' I didn't think so. We work in a professional Navy manned with (mostly) professional Sailors; I think we found an exception in you, though.
It seems to me that if you have 25 sailors accidentally shoot each other because of poor training, and create some extra administrative burden, than that is worse than having 25 sailors shot in cold blood with no additional administrative burden.
What extra administrative burden are you talking about? A voluntary training and certification program to carry personal firearms on base akin to the motorcycle safety course?
9/18/2013 5:50 PM
"What extra administrative burden are you talking about? A voluntary training and certification program to carry personal firearms on base akin to the motorcycle safety course?"
Have you ever been a part of a gun turnover? Every time we load a gun we have three people verify the safety, point it into a metal tube, and use circle X to track somebody going through the motions of loading and unloading with a verbatim repeat back. We also count the bullets every six hours.
Do you really think the Navy is just going to let you come onto base with a loaded handgun in your passenger seat, and leave with a loaded handgun in your passenger seat without verifying that you have everything you came onto base with and didn't like, leave the gun sitting on a bench at the playground or something?
The Navy will have to 1) verify everybody on bases's quals
2) verify their concealed carry permit.
3) verify that they are complying with state law leaving and coming onto base
4) Probably will want to register and track every gun that enters and leaves the base, as well as the owner.
Again, the shooter walked by at least 1 dude with a gun at the Navy Yard, and then shot two "Good Guys with guns" that were actually trained to use guns as part of their everyday job. He actually used the "Good guys with guns'" guns to shoot the rest of the people.
Why do you think CS3 Jones will do a better job in this situation?
9/18/2013 6:17 PM
Do you really think the Navy is just going to let you come onto base with a loaded handgun in your passenger seat, and leave with a loaded handgun in your passenger seat without verifying that you have everything you came onto base with and didn't like, leave the gun sitting on a bench at the playground or something?
No, I don't. That's why I wrote 'it will never happen because...' above.
Nothing to do with Sailor competence, and everything to do with creating a viable program where the base commander can point to CS3 Jones for being irresponsible because leadership did everything possible under the sun to ensure he met safety requirements.
9/18/2013 6:23 PM
to anon at 1817:
The FObs in Afghanistan manage to deal with the "administrative requirements" associated with arming all uniformed personnel. There just needs to be a mind-shift that we are a nation at war, and that war can reach out and hit us at a base deep in CONUS.
It is making us the laughingstock of the world that a wacko managed to shoot at will INSIDE a headquarters military base for 30 minutes.
Doesn't speak well to our core competencies, does it? Maybe someone should gen up a LRTP to address this...
I would bet that a terrorist leader after reading these news articles, will be shifting his focus toward attacking CONUS bases inside of Afghanistan FOBs. Much easier.
9/18/2013 6:37 PM
Anyone questioning the value of arming military personnel in potentially contentious circumstances (e.g., time of war) might want to take a trip to Israel sometime and stop by the Western Wall to see how the world's foremost security experts do it.
Short story: I had the opportunity to visit Jerusalem just before and after the shoe bomber moron did his thing on a Paris to Miami flight that forever condemned the rest of us to taking our shoes off at the airport check in.
Net-net: The security at the Western Wall both before and after said moronic act was identical -- every Tom, Dick and Harriet that was in uniform of whatever kind was carrying either a pistol or an automatic weapon. Probably saw at least 10 different uniforms from various security forces..and they were all packing heat.
Moral to the story: When was the last time you heard of an attack at the Western Wall...?
9/18/2013 7:18 PM
A true "back in the day" story--I was SDO in a foreign port. In those days the torpedo room watch was armed but when in a foreign port the .45 was in a locker above his watch station. Late one night (or very early in the morning) a very drunk first class TM came back to the sub and proceeded to the TR. He took the .45 from the locker and proceeded to fire aimlessly about the TR hitting a few Mk 14 torpedoes but, fortunately, no people before the Duty Chief disarmed him and tied him to his bunk. Needless to say, he was removed from the sub and never seen again. The TMs cleaned up the Mk 14. The Mk 45 in the rack across from the Mk 14 was untouched (whew!). Such an incident could reoccur when least expected. I hope it doesn't.
9/18/2013 7:48 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
9/19/2013 1:49 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
9/19/2013 1:53 AM
Sorry for the deletes. I was having spelling and grammar errors. I should have checked the numbers before I posted. I was off a bit on the 10.
"Historically, shootings ended by an armed member of the general population tally 2-3 deaths. Shootings that end up waiting for the police to respond ring up 10 or more. Do the math."
Bullshit. Provide a credible source.
http://www.examiner.com/article/analyzing-shooting-rampage-statistics-after-newport-school-shooting
The data cited in the above article show it to actually be closer to 14.
9/19/2013 1:56 AM
From the article:
"Second, within the civilian category 11 of the 17 shootings were stopped by unarmed civilians."
There's still no coherent argument for arming everyone. Try again.
9/19/2013 5:55 AM
Actually, I find all civilians (except police) who carry guns cowards. They have to have a pistol on their hip to think they are a man.
The only heroes I consider here are the guys who run bare handed towards the bullets in order to put down the killers...
9/19/2013 7:22 AM
Mulligan,
I just heard a report on CNN (So it HAS to be true) that a village is missing their idiot!
You should go home as soon as possible!
9/19/2013 9:15 AM
So, on another note, "Navy Hero" pilot Shane Osborn (of 2001 EP-3 Hainan Island fame) is running for Senate.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/shane-osborn-nebraska-senate/2013/08/14/id/520432
Not sure how submariners feel about...but most pilots I know have a pretty solid disgust for the guy.
9/19/2013 9:53 AM
Dear Mulligan:
I am a man, a retired Sailor, and by your definition - a coward.
•I'm a coward because I consciously choose to take the strongest possible measures to protect myself and my family.
•I am a coward because I consciously choose to ensure I am competent and capable (through annual classroom training and practice) to carry that firearm.
•I am a coward because I lack faith in my fellow man and refuse to be a victim of random acts of violence and terror.
•I am a coward because I recognize the responsibility of carrying a firearm safely and legally.
Because I do not live up to your definition of “bravery” I must be deranged or deficient in character or spirit … longing for the simpler days of cowboys wearing white & black hats to bolster my sense of safety in a unpredictable world.
You have proven yourself a monumental ass on numerous occasions; thank you for adding additional evidence. The view from your ivory tower in the pseudo-Orwellian world you dwell, resting on your self-righteousness, must be pretty dim.
9/19/2013 2:41 PM
It sounds like you are a anti government freak because the police are tasked with protecting a community.
So where are you with making sure your police force has all the resources and training they need?
9/19/2013 5:32 PM
So, on another note, "Navy Hero" pilot Shane Osborn (of 2001 EP-3 Hainan Island fame) is running for Senate.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/shane-osborn-nebraska-senate/2013/08/14/id/520432
Not sure how submariners feel about...but most pilots I know have a pretty solid disgust for the guy.
I won't sit in judgement, or show any disgust, for anyone who had to make the choices he had to make. It's pretty easy to sit in the bleachers, point and criticize.
I will, however, ridicule anyone who reads newsmax. You're a fucking idiot.
9/20/2013 6:13 AM
So, honestly, WTF does this have to do with ANY ACTIVE DUTY military member currently serving?
Do they stand WATCH there?
Were they killed or wounded there?
Can you read this anywhere else in the obama media?
A small service provided by your retired Navy Chiefs.
hagar
9/20/2013 6:53 AM
Hagar:
There are active duty personnel stationed at the Navy Yard. There are Sailors standing the anti-terrorism watch at NCIS HQ. Sailors acting as program exec officers and managers at the various NAVSEA functions overseeing the programs run by the Navy as part of the acquisition effort. These are only a few of the positions there for AD but AD is a fraction of the civilian work force.
Sparky
9/20/2013 9:20 AM
More importantly, this is the 2nd depraved act by a DoD civilian in as many years (Fury lit fire to the Miami in May 2012).
Their employee screening process is broken. Both individuals had obvious red flags that were overlooked; they both should have never been given access to a military installation.
There are DoD civilians at every Naval installation. You think this can't happen at SUBASE NLON or KBAY?
9/20/2013 12:11 PM
Neither of those guys were "DoD civilians." A "DoD civilian" is a civilian member of the Department of Defense who takes an oath of office not too different from that of the uniformed military. Many of the Navy Yard victims were DoD civilians, but the perpetrator in each case was a civilian contractor. And yes, there are even more civilian contractors who have daily access to submarines than DoD civilians.
9/20/2013 1:56 PM
Alright, who's on Mulligan watch?
Why does that ignorant little bastard have access to the internet continuously? Gentlemen this has got to stop!
9/20/2013 8:42 PM
Wrong. Casey James Fury (who torched the MIAMI) was a government civilian employee of Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, not a contractor.
9/20/2013 8:57 PM
Ya know I'm just a dumb ol squid, but it sounds like a whole bunch a ring knockers don't think squids are intelligent enough to walk and chew gum, considering the number of JO's who's asses my shipmates and I had to pull our of the wringer ...
9/20/2013 9:37 PM
i think people are saying that squids will have the same faults as the general public if you equip them with guns. It is a fact that the biggest risk factor in getting shot is owning a gun. Period. Keeping them locked, in a safe, and the amount of training have no statistically significant effect on the risk... probably because most people are trained, and do these things religiously until one day they forget and the unfortunate happens.
If you put guns in the hands of all sailors, some sailors will shoot themselves or others. Police shoot innocent bystanders at times, or themselves in the foot, at times and have a lot more training in using guns than the average squid.
FYI, no active duty people were even killed in this shooting, so I am not sure how allowing AD to concealed carry would have even helped. Maybe we should allow Government contractors and Government Civilians to open carry as well, since that's who the actual victims were?
9/21/2013 3:40 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
9/21/2013 6:42 AM
Either find me a job, or I will never stop. This is plain and simple blackmail!
Little; I am 205 pounds 6” 2’, resting pulse of 56...bike 70 to 100 miles a week in hilly NH. I like struggling up a hill with all my might more than being a slacker riding down a hill...
9/21/2013 8:33 AM
anon @3:40
You should read the news more closely.
Yes, no AD military were shot. But there are two news accounts of AD officers coming face-to-face with the killer and managing to survive (Navy Capt. Mark Van Vandroff, Navy Cmdr. Tim Jirus).
Additionally, a large percentage of the govt civilians at the Navy Yard are retired Navy veterans (including at least one of the victims).
If these individuals had been armed, this would have been over.
Actually, it probably would never have started. This wacko would have seen the inside of the WNY as a hard target, based upon evidence of numerous personnel armed, and gone elsewhere.
Here is a nugget of info that is a kick in the pants: the Capitol Police’s Containment and Emergency Response Team (CERT) arrived at the Navy Yard “fully deployed and with a sniper,” but were instructed to return to Capitol Hill when the senate issued a “shelter in place” order. And the killing continued, while we waited for the police to protect people., rather then allowing the military the right of self defense ON A MILITARY BASE.
9/21/2013 9:31 AM
"This statement may be true, but there has been much research showing that the single biggest risk factor for getting shot, or having one of your family members shot is owning a gun."
This is only true because SUICIDE by gun is considered as "getting shot" in this "research." Look it up.
9/21/2013 12:55 PM
Mulligan, maybe you can start your own business towing fellow lazy libtars up the hill so they can scoot down the otherside. I'm sure you can get a grant from the White House and a photo op with FLOTUS. You can call it "lets move up the hill together"!
Until then keep enjoying your right to express your opinion and your food stamps. Have a natty light on my tax contribution, many others are drinking on my nickle this weekend.
9/21/2013 3:14 PM
'This is only true because SUICIDE by gun is considered as "getting shot" in this "research." Look it up'
That is simply not true:
Here is a link. Both accidental shootings and risk of homicide are higher among gun owners. Homicide rates are higher in states with high levels of gun ownership. The US has the highest homicide rates in the world, as well as one of the highest rates of gun ownership. Yes, the suicide rates with guns are also obviously higher, but even if you just say that suicides with guns aren't what we are really worried about, you and your family are still less safe with a gun in your home than without one.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/753058_2
This article is sourced in the references if you want to look at the original research, (though I know you are not interested)
9/21/2013 4:56 PM
"If these individuals had been armed, this would have been over."
You do realize that the shooter actually killed two people with guns on his way in, right?
Are Navy CAPT's generally expert marksman trained to have shootouts? I ask, mostly because there were people in the Navy Yard with guns one of whom was among the dead.
A better policy would be to fix the security clearance investigations than to add more guns.
9/21/2013 5:02 PM
Actually, he shot one guy with a gun, not two.
9/21/2013 5:03 PM
RE: " The US has the highest homicide rates in the world, as well as one of the highest rates of gun ownership. "
Careful! Your liberal perception does not match reality.
The US does NOT have the highest homicide rate in the world. Russia beats us by a good margin in per capita rate but also has a gun ownership rate that is considerably lower.
My recollection, I don’t want to do all the research for you, is that the country with the highest rate of gun ownership has the lowest homicide rate.
The argument that “having a gun in the home increases the risk of death by gun” is essentially a red herring as the research reporting it turned out to be crap. Besides, if you don’t have knives in the home you can’t cut yourself with one; if you don’t have ladders you cannot fall off one; if there are no automobiles then the death toll from auto accidents would be zero…
BTW, if my recollection holds, the country with the highest suicide rate happens to be a country with essentially zero gun ownership. I will leave the proof as an exercise for you.
Old chief from the dark ages
Jerry
9/21/2013 6:41 PM
"Mike Mulligan said...
It sounds like you are a anti government freak because the police are tasked with protecting a community."
Thiis could be the most ignorant staement of the thread. Courts have consistently ruled that civilian police have zero obligation to protect a community. Consistently. Zero. Nada. None.
Link 1: http://www.copblock.org/27067/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-you/
link 2: http://gothamist.com/2013/07/26/subway_stabbing_victims_suit_agains.php
link 3: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=1172&issue_id=52007
It's easier for the police to nab dreaded criminals going 5 MPH (Tht's 70 here in NY) over the limit on an interstate highway designed for 90 MPH then it is for them to confront an armed criminal pointing a gun at someone.
Look at the actual response time to Washington Navy Yard. The gunman walked around upright for more then 30 minutes. Tell me that in DC all the cops and all the Navy yard rent a cops were more then 25 minutes away.
9/21/2013 6:50 PM
"Look at the actual response time to Washington Navy Yard. The gunman walked around upright for more then 30 minutes. Tell me that in DC all the cops and all the Navy yard rent a cops were more then 25 minutes away."
What was the response time after the first 911 call? How many armed guards were shot? You seem to be able to post a link, try reading one fucktard.
9/21/2013 7:12 PM
Yep. The cops showed up right away. And he walked around upright for 30 minutes.
\Very proactive on their part. It took the cops at Columbine much longer before they entered the school.
And you are right- armed guards were shot, and their weapons taken and used by the gunman. Which brings up a question that will never be anwered- how did that happen? From reports I've seen, they weren't the first targeted. How did they get caught unawares? Or, were they fumbling around trying to load their weapons because they weren't trusted to carry loaded ones? I remember the days of carrying unloaded weapons topside, knowing how stupid it was.
And you must be a liberal- name calling right away, without anything useful to add to the discussion. And the links are there because otherwise Mulligan and you would have called BS on the truth.
9/21/2013 8:00 PM
Jerry: Thanks for the engaging discussion. You are partially right, and partially wrong (as am I). You are correct that Russia has a higher homicide rate in the world. My statement, as it was, is incorrect.
A correct statement is that, Among Developed countries, (as defined by the CIA Factbook), the USA has the highest homicide rate apart from South Africa, as well as the highest gun ownership rates. If you assume that South Africa is somewhat different than other developed countires due its recent history of Apartheid and racial tension, then there is a strong correlation between gun ownership and homicide rate.
I agree that Russia has a higher homicide rate, it is also a developing country with a GDP/Capita less than 1/3 of the USA.
My recollection, I don’t want to do all the research for you, is that the country with the highest rate of gun ownership has the lowest homicide rate
Incorrect. USA has the highest gun ownership rate by almost double any other country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
The argument that “having a gun in the home increases the risk of death by gun” is essentially a red herring as the research reporting it turned out to be crap.
I have actually read the research, and don't agree that it is "crap". It is published, and peer-reviewed. Can you produce any peer-reviewed analysis stating that it is "crap", or this an article in the National Review?
Besides, if you don’t have knives in the home you can’t cut yourself with one; if you don’t have ladders you cannot fall off one; if there are no automobiles then the death toll from auto accidents would be zero…
The last part of this statement, you are basically acknowledging that having guns around is more dangerous than not having guns around... So, yes, I agree with your assertion that there will be less gun deaths in a workplace that has less guns than one that has more guns. That's actually the entire point of this argument.
In fact, in this specific instance. If the guard in the building was armed with a nightstick instead of a pistol, there would have been less deaths.
9/22/2013 7:27 AM
My son had serous seizure issues when he was 3 years old. His first seizure was terrible. It was actually Christmas morning (we spent that Christmas day till 6 pm in the ER). We were in utter shock and terror. Guess who first showed up at our door…it was two burley policemen. They took one look at him and began worrying about his breathing…they immediately began giving him mouth to mouth until the ambulance crew showed up. His longest seizure was 1.75 hours…
I bet you those cops didn’t have an obligation to save my son’s life, but they did anyways…
My son just entered college for computers this year…
Why is there such a big government hating contingent out west…
9/22/2013 8:19 AM
to anon at 7:27:
You are using arbitrary statistics to prove your point.
Russia has the highest homicide rate? Let me look around until I can figure some way to discard that number...
Oh look, they are not considered a "developed country" (which is a meaningless arbitrary assignment), so we will ignore them and claim the US has the highest....
Just goes to show that statistics don't lie, but every statistician can warp the numbers to prove any point in the universe.
9/22/2013 9:37 AM
Alright, here is a better way of looking at things...
Among countries with the letter 's' in their name, the US has the highest INTENTIONAL homicide rate (defined as one person purposely kills another). Because we are so horrible...
Oh, no, wait, Russia has the letter 's' in their name, and so does South Africa... oh wait, there are 28 countries with the letter 's' in their name with a higher intentional homicide rate.
Drat. Let us find some other way to prove we are horrible. How about among countries with the letter...
And so it goes. If you search hard enough, you can find a way to warp statistics to prove your point. And a statistic that allows you to ignore Russia (one of our biggest historical competitors) is just absurd.
Lets just lay it down: Among ALL countries in the world, 102 countries have a higher homicide rate than the US. Among all countries in the Americas, 16 countries have a higher homicide rate than the US (Honduras is #1 in the world, with an intentional homicide rate that is 19x the US).
17 countries have an intentional homicide rate 6x (or more) than the US. 47 countries have an intentional homicide rate 4x (or more) than the US.
9/22/2013 9:52 AM
Comparing the U.S. intentional homicide rate to countries like Syria which don't have a stable civil/political relationship is silly.
On the other hand, excluding Russia from the list of developed nations is also stupid.
Then again, which other countries besides the U.S. have 13-15% of the population account for more than half of the total homicides? Also protip: they usually use illegally acquired weapons.
9/22/2013 10:49 AM
The CDC published a study called “Homicide Rates Among Persons Aged 10–24 Years — United States, 1981–2010.”
Homicide rates in 2010 by persons aged 10-24 by race (per 100k):
Blacks: 28.8
Hispanics: 7.9
Whites: 2.1
This means blacks aged 10-24 were 13.7 times more likely to be a homicide victim in 2010, then whites aged 10-24. They were victims at 3.76 times the Hispanic rate.
According the FBI, blacks make up roughly half of all homicide victims. However they make up over half of all perpetrators. Between 1976 and 2005, blacks perpetrated 53% of felony murders and 56% of non-felony homicides.
Federal data suggest that between 93-96% all black homicide victims are killed by blacks.
Since blacks aged 10-24 were 13.7 times more likely to be a homicide victim, it is safe to assume that the rate of perpetration is a similar multiple.
Overall, blacks commit murder at 9 times the white rate.
9/22/2013 11:58 AM
Blacks murder more whites in the US than the other way around, and commit 50% of crimes although they are only 12% of the population (if one takes out the old and the children, we have 3% of the US population committing 50% of the crimes.
What was the question on carrying guns again?
9/22/2013 12:03 PM
What was the question on carrying guns again?
People were trying to compare homicide rates from countries without a significant number of blacks committing murder to one that does, and they thought the difference was due to different gun control laws.
9/22/2013 12:18 PM
Full response from the anti-gun crowd:
{{{Crickets}}}
9/22/2013 2:23 PM
This is why the numbers are so bad:
At 19 percent, African-American unemployment in Chicago ranks the third highest in the country, according to a report published this week by the Washington-based Economic Policy Institute.
Between 2010 and 2011, the jobless rate for Chicago's black workers increased 1.7 percent. In contrast, nearby Detroit had similar rates, closer to 18 percent, but with a 7 percent decrease in the black unemployment rate during the same time period.
The Department of Labor’s latest jobs report, which was released last Friday, shows that 12.6 percent of Black Americans were unemployed in July, compared to 13.7 percent in June. This is the lowest rate since Barack Obama became president, when the Black unemployment rate was also 12.6 percent.
A stunning unemployment rate among Black 18- to- 29-year-olds continues to rattle experts at 20.9 percent. According to Generation Opportunity, a national, non-partisan youth advocacy organization that released its “Millennial Jobs Report for July 2013” on Friday, Black unemployment numbers are problematic.
9/22/2013 2:38 PM
We have a high rate of gun ownership so the King of England can't come around whenever he wants to and start pushing us around. The whole point of the second amendment is to ward off tyranny and arbitrary persecution.
The small rate of accidents and intentional shootings are the price we pay as a society to prevent state sponsored massacres (as in the Soviet Union and many other countries). So far, so good.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Answer: We The People
9/22/2013 2:43 PM
I'd like to be able to say 'nice try,' Mulligan...but apparently all you can do is parrot-talk for the gun confiscators.
Black homicide rates do not correlate to unemployment rates.
Next time...do some homework instead of just talking crap. You might even find that "doing the work" is the kind of thing that employers are looking for.
9/22/2013 4:15 PM
Does speaking ebonics and dressing/acting like a thug lead to unemployment? I have a small business and won't hire a black who does not represent the image I want my business to portray. Yes dat be raciss. But the truth hurts.
I rest my case ... Fuck you complainers in advance.
9/22/2013 5:34 PM
I work on the Navy Yard. Security it not the issue. The base is plenty secure. Pundits, the NRA, et al., have it wrong, and it is wrong to the point that it makes me angry. The NRA, for example, things the answer is in flooding the U.S. with guns, proliferation of another sort, and more guns are not the solution. Some type of better administrative gun control is essential. Frankly speaking, they are a source of violence, just like anything else, that has the potential for being in use by a human being.
Life as we know it will not be free from violence, but the looseness in which it occurs, is disturbing. I made it out with seconds, and not minutes, before I too could have been shot. I debated with a colleague, a Navy Officer, and we convinced each other to leave. We could've stayed.There likely would have been two more names.
What kind of a country do we want? One that is essentially civil, responsible, and has a culture where people matter. Not one like this, and especially the one the NRA espouses. Let them move on and get over it. Those who live by the gun will die by the gun.
Anyways, I made patrols on the OHIO (3,5,7,9). I have been affiliated with the Navy all of my life. I served two years in Baghdad (DoD civilian), and not that it matters. I expected and encountered violence in Baghdad, and on the OHIO I threaded the political play out of a very stupid period in our history.
In looking back, years from now, I hope we will collectively see, how stupid the media, and especially the NRA is. The fire they are fanning makes no sense.
VADM Hilarides moved me with his speech.
9/23/2013 5:57 AM
People are naturally seeking a rational way of dealing with all this...but the major problem is irrationality.
Neither arming nor disarming will solve that problem, as they have little or nothing to do with it.
In particular, taking the 'solutions' regarding guns one at a time:
A) Banning guns will not work. People have a right to self-defense, so disarming the criminals would be step #1...not the law-abiding public. Any wagers on that happening anytime soon?
B) Arming everyone will not work. There would inarguably be greater accidents & incidents, and possibly overall loss of life.
So...deadlock. If something of consequence could be done about it, it would already have been done. Increased screenings might be of some assistance, but that may only help an increasingly fortressed DoD and (apparently) our government officials...not the general public.
9/23/2013 8:04 AM
"Anonymous said...
Some type of better administrative gun control is essential. Frankly speaking, they are a source of violence, just like anything else, that has the potential for being in use by a human being."
Numerous recent studies have been run about guns being a source of violence. This is one of them: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread926884/pg1
Without a person attached on the end, guns don't seem to do much of anything. Same with knives, spoons, machetes, IEDS, and nuclear tipped missiles.
The common denominator in tool use and violence? People. Without the tools, claws and teeth come into play. Without the tools, people wouldn't be at the top of the food chain.
9/23/2013 2:16 PM
“I'd like to be able to say 'nice try,' Mulligan...but apparently all you can do is parrot-talk for the gun confiscators.”
I don’t get it, the report backed me up to the hilt…
So you are saying white billionaires kill each other more with guns than poverty and without hope stricken blacks in ghettoes…
Bottom line, high quality and a free gold plated mental illness services should be provided to all of the seriously mentally impaired people in the USA…with positively incentivize treatment like room board and dignified employment…buy them so called toys if that is what it takes.
Compel mental treatment if it comes down to it…
9/23/2013 2:28 PM
"Mike Mulligan said...
Compel mental treatment if it comes down to it…"
I'm sure the Falun Gong would disagree with you on this. As well as many of the political prisoners in Cuba.
I mean right now there are liberals calling for "Non-believers in Obamacare" to be refused any medical treatment at all. But I'm certain the health care system here could never be abused that way- just like the IRS could never be used to investigate political enemies of the President.
I don't think there is any way to forcefully commit people that cannot, and has not in the past, been abused. In the US and England as well as the communist states. IMHO, if people want mental help, find a way to deliver it. There's a slippery slope to foreced commitment that is way too easily slid down. But use the flip side of the coin. Hold people responsible for their actions, lunatic or not. Instead of "not guilty by reason of insanity" find them "guilty but insane." Treat them, which doesn't count against their imprisonment time; when cured, imprison them for the crime.
9/23/2013 3:05 PM
Believe me, Mulligan - virtually everyone on this site knows you "don't get it", and never will. How the fuck can you claim the report "backs you to the hilt"? Do you even know the difference between correlation and causation? Probably not, since you so repeatedly demonstrate your complete lack of critical thinking skills. This link may clear it up for you, but probably won't...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
9/23/2013 6:25 PM
Wow Mulligan that news report is back on CNN again "Village Continues to be Missing their Idiot"
You must not have found your way home yet. Did you forget your bread crumbs to find your way back?
You'd mentioned something about "giving you a job" earlier on this series of comments... (Just so you cant liberal your way out of the facts here is the exact quote you typed: "Either find me a job, or I will never stop.") The reason you wouldnt get hired by anyone with a rational thought is you "are stuck on stupid!" (To quaote an amazing Louisiana National Guard General.
9/24/2013 4:47 AM
See, this exactly why we superior North Easterners think all you Westerners have gone stark raving mad through your isolation out on the big range.
Well, except for California.
You know where institutionalization came from…in the old days we got sick and tired of the seriously mentally ill running around freely like animals dying, stealing and killing on the streets of our towns and cities.
Today we institutionalization through waiting for the mentally ill to break a law as they are running like animals in our street…now with guns...or arrest them after the slaughter if they are lucky enough to survive.
If they would have fully supported institutionalization through adequate state and federal budgets, made the politicians accountible, put science behind it…created a environment of near total outside transparency...it would have worked. It is the shameful secrecy and hiding of the mentally ill that causes these societal problems.
9/24/2013 9:37 AM
“You'd mentioned something about "giving you a job" earlier on this series of comments.”
I call it blackmail...
The reason I can’t get a job, is I won’t let “them” turn me into a “slave” like the rest of you weakling workers of American.
I am not addicted to glory, status or money...I am just out and live for the truth. It is the freest I have ever been from the slavery of business and corporations.
Here is my new hero: Pope Francis.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/22/us-pope-economy-idUSBRE98L04H20130922
"Pope attacks global economics for worshipping 'god of money"
Francis said he did not want the crowd to see him as a smiling "cordial manager of the Church who comes here and says to you 'have courage”. He added: "I don't want this. I want this courage to come from inside me and push me to do everything I can as a pastor and a man."
"I find suffering here ... It weakens you and robs you of hope," he said. "Excuse me if I use strong words, but where there is no work there is no dignity." (The Pope’s next step is talking about a living wage.)
Mattana, his voice trembling, told the pope that unemployment "oppresses you and wears you out to the depths of your soul".
To defend this economic culture, a throwaway culture has been installed. We throw away grandparents, and we throw away young people. We have to say no to his throwaway culture. We want a just system that helps everyone," he said.
(and the mentally ill)
9/24/2013 10:11 AM
Speaking of California and Pope Francis: Nancy Pelosi is now being denied Holy Communion by the Vatican.
That took a long time, but the truth is finally catching up with her. So it goes.
9/24/2013 11:57 AM
Mulligan,
Interesting you seem to know alot about "mental illness" probably b/c you have had lots of treatment for it yourself...
YOu know, John Wayne must have been thinking of you with this quote:
"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid."
BTW that's why you "can't" get a job!
9/24/2013 12:04 PM
It's funny that Putin and the Pope think Americans actually care about their opinions.
The catholic church and 'social conservatives' need to get with the times, or they will become extinct.
9/24/2013 12:26 PM
^^^Typical lib Kool-Aid drinker.
Here's some fun facts for you, hater-dude. And we all know how well you libs deal with facts...right?
Bottom line:
1) U.S. Catholics continue to grow in number, and Catholicism..."is the largest single religious denomination in the United States, comprising 25 percent of the population."
2) "Nationally, more parishes have opened than closed."
9/24/2013 12:55 PM
"Lights on...cockroaches gone."
9/24/2013 1:08 PM
Most catholics are concentrated in U.S. urban areas and are socially liberal. They generally think the Pope is off his rocker and the church needs to evolve.
Also, 75% of the country is not catholic and still doesn't give two shits.
9/24/2013 2:52 PM
More facts for the liberal-impaired:
From the Politics section of the Wikipedia article: "Since the election of the Catholic John F. Kennedy as President in 1960, Catholics have split about 50-50 between the two major parties. "
Moreover:
Q. What percentage of the American people does it take to put anyone in political office...?
(Warning: mathematics and logic involved...this may be very challenging to the liberal mind.)
A. The correct answer is "25.01%"...as 50% of the American people do not vote.
9/24/2013 4:11 PM
You shouldn't be making fun of other people's comprehension of logic when you have yet to post any evidence of your point, which I think your point is that you believe most catholics take the Pope more seriously than the British take the Queen of England when it comes to their moral values and don't just view him as a figurehead kept around for charity and tradition, but I can't quite tell.
Newsflash: there are catholics living in America. Thanks for the census info. You're so smart and mathematical. How can I be like you?
9/24/2013 5:12 PM
PS the above was posted by a catholic who grew up in a catholic neighborhood and dated a catholic girl in hs. *Gasp* I've used birth control. Time to pay the church 2000 dollars and say 1000 hail maries so I don't go to hell.
9/24/2013 5:15 PM
^^^One for you, compadre:
“In the desert
I saw a creature, naked, bestial,
Who, squatting upon the ground,
Held his heart in his hands,
And ate of it.
I said, ‘Is it good, friend?’
‘It is bitter — bitter,’ he answered,
‘But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart.”
― Stephen Crane
Have a nice snack...
9/24/2013 6:45 PM
Thanks to the last two posters - I enjoyed that.
9/24/2013 7:21 PM
A little closer to 'home'...on PBS tonight in some areas: "Secrets of the Kursk"
VERY interesting to hear directly from the mouth of one of her former COs that Kursk was "a first strike weapon."
9/24/2013 8:07 PM
"Mulligan,
Interesting you seem to know alot about "mental illness" probably b/c you have had lots of treatment for it yourself..."
That was my primary qualification in getting on a submarine..."I am crazy". That is how we all get on subs! We are nuts!
9/25/2013 6:17 AM
Yes Mike but the rest of us are crazy in the fun to be around way, you are crazy in the deranged dangerous way,
9/25/2013 1:45 PM
Getting kinda quiet. This one is for any skimmers checking in that might need calibration.
9/25/2013 6:39 PM
Oopsie. War crime. Sorry about that.
9/25/2013 6:40 PM
"Yes Mike but the rest of us are crazy in the fun to be around way, you are crazy in the deranged dangerous way,"
A period goes at end of a sentence, not a comma!
9/27/2013 8:00 AM
"A period goes at end of a sentence, not a comma!"
You're right Mulligan...
"Yes Mike but the rest of us are crazy in the fun to be around way, you are crazy in the deranged dangerous way, Ass-clown!"
9/27/2013 11:04 AM
Remember, the last time I got arrested at home (a few mounts ago) with four misdemeanors and a felony for endangering a human life…the cops never put handcuffs on me thoughout the whole process. If I was deranged and untrustworthy certainly they would have handcuff me.
http://www.reformer.com/localnews/ci_23801494/bridge-protester-arrested-hinsdale
9/28/2013 7:31 AM
The bottom line is there's no diagnosis for identifying a shooter. They can come from any background at and strike from anytime.
9/29/2013 9:18 AM
Nope…the vast amount of mass murder deaths in the USA comes from severely untreated mental illness. Most have shown openly indications of severe mental illness for months and years…but the good people of the community stood by and did nothing.
Communities have very little power when a mentally ill person begins to run riot in their organizations and towns.
The solution is to have broad based positive incentivized and high quality holistic mental health services for everyone who needs it independent of income…forced treatment for the unwilling and irrational.
9/29/2013 11:01 AM
As a reminder, for grief counseling, 1-855-677-1755 is the phone number for
the Warfighter and Family Support Center at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling,
which is being continuously manned.
9/30/2013 4:03 PM
Investigators Search for Causes Behind Washington Car Chase
By MARC SANTORA and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
Published: October 4, 2013
Investigators have found antipsychotic medications in the Connecticut home of a woman who was killed in Washington on Thursday after leading the police on a high-speed chase through the heart of the nation’s capital, law enforcement officials said on Friday.
10/04/2013 4:18 PM
These parts are not resold or redistributed in any way for more distant benefit, and all papers are in composing from rub arranged for each clientele that arrives to them. All research papers that we invoke will comprise a comprehensive report on the selected topic research paper help corresponding to the required academic grade and citation format absolutely vital to flawless the paper.
12/03/2013 2:18 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home