http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/us/ar-15-gun-debate/?hpt=hp_t1

 

Now they're saying that it was the Biden-approved shotgun and a couple of pistols that he (probably) liberated from security guards that he shot.

 

It's interesting that they have the reflexive need to bring up the AR again, when of the most worst shootings, an AR was used in few.

 

Major Hassan used a handgun. Holmes, I understand, had an AR -- but it jammed so he needed to use handguns. Jared Loughner used a handgun. Now it looks like Aaron Alexis used a double-barrel shotgun.

 

The only one of the recent notable shootings where an AR inflicted most of the damage was Adam Lanza's Sandy Hook massacre.

 

According to this list, it looks like "assault rifles" were only involved in a small minority of mass shootings since 1982.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Most news still going with AR., says he bought a few days earlier in north VA.. No link but it was on CBS news

 

and den

 

 

 

Forget background checks for firearm purchasers, how about who's doing these background checks for these contractors?

 

Bingo!  The vetting process for contractors needs to be re-examined. 

 

and den

 

its almost as if he doesn't care if he reports incorrect information....

I'm thinking the will go after stronger background check again and for private sales too.

http://www.rachelpapo.com/serial1.html

 

If we had a few of these "female infantry" on the base we would not be in this mess.

 

In effort to improve polemic skills I have no choice but to help you with baby steps into military world of infantry. 

 

1. The photo shows a group of females (with focus on their rears) in IDF uniform with old M-16s. They are not infantry. Israelis don't use females for infantry. They tried few decades ago, results were very very bad. Females are not only easier targets, they also desired for capture. What happens to them after capture and what it does to troops morale - another story. 

In Israel males and females have mandatory military service. I'm pretty sure the picture shows young female recruits. 

 

2. What is infantry? It's traditional fighting troops, shooters. Boots on the ground. Skilled face to face combat killers. 

 

3. Female infantry doesn't exist in nature. Number of reasons for that.

Females are naturally week physically and emotionally, they don't make good face to face killers, they can't carry required load for required distance and they can't methodically kill man after man - not their thing. 

How often you see male babysitters? Would it cross your mind to hire a male to care for your baby? Females don't fit infantry for similar - natural - reasons. 

It's OK to have lower standards for females in general military. Who cares if paper pusher or technician does less push ups or runs slow? 

But when it comes to infantry you can't lower standards for females, unless you expect your enemy to be very politically correct and don't fight them too hard.

 

Therefore idea of female infantry is stupid waste of time and money. Another politcorrect liberal BS. Even if it goes through, I hope generals have enough of common sense to keep them as funny troops and don't use in real combat. 

 

In the meantime Marines have to deal with enlisted females who volunteer for basic infantry training. Babysitters have been assigned "to ensure they are not put at risk of sustaining career-threatening injuries" while in training. 

 

Attempts to train female infantry officers so far failed. 

To date, six female lieutenants have volunteered for infantry officer training, but none has completed the course. Only one woman has passed the initial endurance test, but she was later dropped from the program after developing stress fractures in her foot.

 

Just in case my opinion is not strong enough for you, maybe opinion from experienced Marine female officer will do better: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/video/marine-officer-women-shouldnt-be-infantry

 

.

Piers Morgan was beating his drum again last night for a ban on AR-15's.  "Why would anyone NEED one of those killing machines?"  He completely ignored Ben Ferguson, who was trying to tell him that it's not AR-15's that are getting people killed, it's those Gun Free Zones.

Aren't Flag officers issued a personal sidearm as a badge of rank, which they are able to purchase when they retire?

 

I thought this might explain the reports of older men in uniforms who were seen on security cameras with guns and lead to the reports of three shooters.

 

http://www.army.mil/article/6938/

General Officers in the Army are issued their sidearm and they may purchase it. It is not a badge of rank but a sidearm. General Officers in the Army are not required to abide by uniform regulations so a general might feel carrying his sidearm is part of his uniform. I've encountered a lot of general officers in my time and saw exactly one that carried his sidearm and was not in a combat or field environment. That was over 40 years ago. I would think most Admirals and Marine Generals don't walk around with their sidearm all the time.

 

Generals carrying guns in an office environment just isn't seen.

its almost as if he doesn't care if he reports incorrect information....

Because he doesn't care. He knows it isn't the truth, doesn't matter to them.

Bingo!  The vetting process for contractors needs to be re-examined. 

The background checks were outsourced to a private company. How about the FBI do the checks and be held responsible if they screw it up?

In effort to improve polemic skills I have no choice but to help you with baby steps into military world of infantry. 

 

1. The photo shows a group of females (with focus on their rears) in IDF uniform with old M-16s. They are not infantry. Israelis don't use females for infantry. They tried few decades ago, results were very very bad. Females are not only easier targets, they also desired for capture. What happens to them after capture and what it does to troops morale - another story. 

In Israel males and females have mandatory military service. I'm pretty sure the picture shows young female recruits. 

 

2. What is infantry? It's traditional fighting troops, shooters. Boots on the ground. Skilled face to face combat killers. 

 

3. Female infantry doesn't exist in nature. Number of reasons for that.

Females are naturally week physically and emotionally, they don't make good face to face killers, they can't carry required load for required distance and they can't methodically kill man after man - not their thing. 

How often you see male babysitters? Would it cross your mind to hire a male to care for your baby? Females don't fit infantry for similar - natural - reasons. 

It's OK to have lower standards for females in general military. Who cares if paper pusher or technician does less push ups or runs slow? 

But when it comes to infantry you can't lower standards for females, unless you expect your enemy to be very politically correct and don't fight them too hard.

 

Therefore idea of female infantry is stupid waste of time and money. Another politcorrect liberal BS. Even if it goes through, I hope generals have enough of common sense to keep them as funny troops and don't use in real combat. 

 

In the meantime Marines have to deal with enlisted females who volunteer for basic infantry training. Babysitters have been assigned "to ensure they are not put at risk of sustaining career-threatening injuries" while in training. 

 

Attempts to train female infantry officers so far failed. 

 

Just in case my opinion is not strong enough for you, maybe opinion from experienced Marine female officer will do better: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/video/marine-officer-women-shouldnt-be-infantry

 

.

When I use the word infantry I use it in the way the media uses the word AR-15

i.e. infantry=all military

AR-15=all evil guns

Because he doesn't care. He knows it isn't the truth, doesn't matter to them.

I was being sarcastic

General Officers in the Army are issued their sidearm and they may purchase it. It is not a badge of rank but a sidearm. General Officers in the Army are not required to abide by uniform regulations so a general might feel carrying his sidearm is part of his uniform. I've encountered a lot of general officers in my time and saw exactly one that carried his sidearm and was not in a combat or field environment. That was over 40 years ago. I would think most Admirals and Marine Generals don't walk around with their sidearm all the time.

 

Generals carrying guns in an office environment just isn't seen.

 

If Flag officer wouldn't keep the pistol in a safe in his or her office, then I have no clue as to the identity of the two older gentlemen who were reported seen on the security cameras with guns.

 

Unless they were made of the same stuff as the AR15.

Are we sure Piers Morgan doesn't work for the Star Ledger?  Seems like a perfect match.

In effort to improve polemic skills I have no choice but to help you with baby steps into military world of infantry. 

 

Females are naturally week physically and emotionally, they don't make good face to face killers, they can't carry required load for required distance and they can't methodically kill man after man - not their thing. 

 

I think the biggest problem is genetics, not emotion.  A soldier can carry roughly 1/3rd of his own body weight indefinitely without becoming fatigued.  All of the crap I wear, from my vest to my rifle and everything in between weighs about 60 pounds.

 

Find me a woman who weights 180 pounds, is physically fit, and is graduating high school.  Maybe there are one or two on the basketball or volleyball team, but for the most part, they don't exist.  It's like unicorns or... AR-15 Shotguns.

 

I honestly wouldn't have a problem serving with female infantry, but they better be able to keep up.

 

In effort to improve polemic skills I have no choice but to help you with baby steps into military world of infantry. 

 

1. The photo shows a group of females (with focus on their rears) in IDF uniform with old M-16s. They are not infantry. Israelis don't use females for infantry. They tried few decades ago, results were very very bad. Females are not only easier targets, they also desired for capture. What happens to them after capture and what it does to troops morale - another story. 

In Israel males and females have mandatory military service. I'm pretty sure the picture shows young female recruits. 

 

2. What is infantry? It's traditional fighting troops, shooters. Boots on the ground. Skilled face to face combat killers. 

 

3. Female infantry doesn't exist in nature. Number of reasons for that.

Females are naturally week physically and emotionally, they don't make good face to face killers, they can't carry required load for required distance and they can't methodically kill man after man - not their thing. 

How often you see male babysitters? Would it cross your mind to hire a male to care for your baby? Females don't fit infantry for similar - natural - reasons. 

It's OK to have lower standards for females in general military. Who cares if paper pusher or technician does less push ups or runs slow? 

But when it comes to infantry you can't lower standards for females, unless you expect your enemy to be very politically correct and don't fight them too hard.

 

Therefore idea of female infantry is stupid waste of time and money. Another politcorrect liberal BS. Even if it goes through, I hope generals have enough of common sense to keep them as funny troops and don't use in real combat. 

 

In the meantime Marines have to deal with enlisted females who volunteer for basic infantry training. Babysitters have been assigned "to ensure they are not put at risk of sustaining career-threatening injuries" while in training. 

 

Attempts to train female infantry officers so far failed. 

 

Just in case my opinion is not strong enough for you, maybe opinion from experienced Marine female officer will do better: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/video/marine-officer-women-shouldnt-be-infantry

 

.

 

 

It's interesting that someone that knows so much about the subject of women in infantry didn't mention the main, overriding reason that all Western armies and most of the armies in the world have abandoned the practice. The reasons you brought up were all valid, but you missed the deal killer.

While this is a very sad event, we must look like a total joke to the rest of the world. Only in America is the military unarmed. Can you imagine any military base in China, Russia, North Korea, Iran or anywhere else where the military personnel don't have weapons. We have become a joke.

Very well put. It is inconceivable how much our own military have embraced gun control. "Armed forces" indeed.

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

If Flag officer wouldn't keep the pistol in a safe in his or her office, then I have no clue as to the identity of the two older gentlemen who were reported seen on the security cameras with guns.

 

Unless they were made of the same stuff as the AR15.

Don't know what the regs are in the Navy or Marines but in the Army the General is issued his sidearm and stores it as he or she sees fit. Possible they would keep it in their office. Some General/Flag grade officers warrant protection details. If there were any of them at the Navy Yard, the detail would have made sure they got out.

 

Just saying Generals just don't walk around with their sidearms.

 

Or they were made of the same stuff the AR was .

 

Just saying Generals just don't walk around with their sidearms.

 

 

 

 

Light Colonels did where I grew up.

AR-15 stock buying just leveled off...

oh great ... and I can't return the lower I just over paid for ....

 

 

Light Colonels did where I grew up.

In a field or training environment yes. Officers of any rank walking around with a sidearm in a garrison or office environment is rarely done for no reason (pay officer, transporting classified material, etc). I base my statement from observations made during over 40 years active, guard, and reserve with a bunch of short AD tours thrown in there.

I was just watching channel 4 news and they were doing a piece in the shooting guess who they talk to at the memorial. Some women from moms demand action from Brooklyn no less. That's all I have to say about that.

 

Well there was a good thing on after that they were talking to a 94 yo about sandy damage that wasn't fixed and in background there was a repeal the safe act sign

In a field or training environment yes. Officers of any rank walking around with a sidearm in a garrison or office environment is rarely done for no reason (pay officer, transporting classified material, etc). I base my statement from observations made during over 40 years active, guard, and reserve with a bunch of short AD tours thrown in there.

 

I actually remember the days of cash pay and the paymaster with his loaded .45 in a shoulder holster.  But I guess the fact that I remember the .45 shows my age.

this is going to let them push again. they will start with something like kalifornia is about to pass.....banning any semi auto which can accept magazines of more than 10 rounds. it doesn't matter that a rifle wasn't used. they'll try that. they'll go after any shotgun more than a double barrel. after all, who needs more than 2 shots with a shotgun, right? they will go after ANY pistol which can accept a magazine of more than 10 rounds. this is all where they will start.

 

 when they finish, they'll probably have our so called "assault" firearms illegalized. they'll have pistols down to 5 rounds, with revolvers being the only exceptions. they'll categorize semi-auto shotguns, AND pump shotguns in as "assault" weapons.

 

 because they're going to do this, there will be a worse ammo shortage, and all things firearms will go stupidly expensive almost overnight.

Bloomberg is always ranting that illegal gun come from va. This gun was bought legally in va. I really think background checks is the target

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Bloomberg is always ranting that illegal gun come from va. This gun was bought legally in va. I really think background checks is the target

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I agree. And is it such a bad target? I doubt they will address the real issue. Instead they will close the so-called gun show loophole.

 

Alexis isn't a guy who was normal and law abiding one day and loony the next. He had been arrested on two separate occasions in two different states for incidents involving unlawful discharge of a firearm. He was being treated by the navy for mental illness. Yet, he passed both the employment background check that put him on the property AND the nics check at the point of sale. How and why is this possible? The same goes for loughner, Holmes and cho. None of them used a loophole. They passed their checks. All while under active treatment.

 

 

I read a report that Alexis rented an ar at sharpshooters and tried to buy it but a law prohibited an out of state resident from buying the ar15. What law is this? Is that true?

 

The gun show loop hole is a bull crap example of misinformation. It's just a private sale. And I don't want to give that right up.

I've bought ar's out of state. But not sure about va laws

I'm not aware of any laws but I have heard some states refuse to sell to NJ residents because of our laws.