A gunman dressed in military apparel opened fire on military personnel and civilian workers in the Naval yard at the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington D.C. It has been reported that at least 12 people were killed in this attack at the largest of the Navy’s five system commands.
You might think that military bases like the one in Washington D.C. are full of armed military men and women everywhere. But the truth is that these brave men and women of the US armed forces at the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command have been disarmed by a 1993 ban on guns at military bases. This is the same ban that enabled Nidal Hasan to shoot and kill 13 and wound 30 at Fort Hood.
In 1993, President Bill Clinton decreed that US military personnel were to surrender the Second Amendment rights that they swear an oath to support and defend. According to The Libertarian,
One of the first executive actions undertaken by then president Bill Clinton was to disarm the soldiers and employees of the nation’s military bases. In the spring of 1993, President Clinton issued orders barring members of the military and the civilians who work for them from carrying their personal firearms on base, and making it prohibitively difficult for commanding officers to issue firearms to their own soldiers in the United States. Thinking himself to be providing for the security of U.S. soldiers by government means, Clinton deigned to require Military Police officers to carry weapons on the job, but their presence has been stretched increasingly thin by huge demand for military police in the country’s growing number of war zones.
Thanks to President Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they started shooting at a local
Starbucks Dunkin Doughnuts than at a military base. Even in the Fort Hood shootings it was an OFF base policewoman that shot Hasan and ended his massacre.
Until lawmakers start to see the trend of shootings in gun-free zones they will never be able to see the true tragedy of these events. And that is the fact that these shootings could have been prevented. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families involved in the Naval Base shooting. And even as our own President seeks to score political points in exploiting such tragedies, it should be our number one goal to make sure our military men and women are not defenseless against terrorists at home.
A Washington Times article summed it up best after the Fort Hood shootings:
Everyone wants to keep people safe – and no one denies Mr. Clinton’s good intentions. The problem is that law-abiding good citizens, not criminals, are the ones who obey those laws. Bans end up disarming potential victims and not criminals. Rather than making places safe for victims, we unintentionally make them safe for the criminal – or in this case, the terrorist.
The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Fort Hood understands all too well. In an interview on CNN Monday night, Anchor John Roberts asked Mandy Foster how she felt about her husband’s upcoming deployment to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: “At least he’s safe there and he can fire back, right?”