How can the military best reduce active shooter threats (like Fort Hood)?

Mental instability of the soldier has been determined to be a factor in both Fort Hood shootings. That and combined failure of command structure to follow up on observations. No commander wants to say that a soldier is unfit for duty and or make seeing a mental healthcare specialist/evaluation a part of a soldier's record. Failure to do this and passing the buck on to the soldier's next chain of command and hoping he/she will be ok is not an acceptable risk. We hold soldiers accountable and we should hold ourselves accountable as well.

It's hard to defend against active shootings, when it happens, it will happen. The best way to deal with the situation would be to educate members on how to respond.

It is not really an issue and it is a much lower priority than other causes of death. Far more warriors take themselves out unintentionally or deliberately than those injured during insider attacks (Ft Hood, Washington Navy Yard, Kuwait, FOB Danger, Camp Liberty, Camp Pendleton, etc) There are also a lot more warrior on warrior run-of-the-mill murders (love affair, robbery, hate crime, drunken brawl, etc) than terrorist attack or going postal.

Arming more people will put an end to the situation faster. It is hard to stop a lone gunman without a gun. Almost every one of them have to be shot to be stopped. We train and trust servicemembers with weapons at ranges, live fire excercises, in combat operations etc. Why don't we trust them in garrison?

The Army, in the Hasan case, had many warning signs he was being radicalized and senior leaders ignored them. I know you cannot punish somoene for something they have not done yet but he should have been run out of the Army based upon his sympathies, his communication with radicals and some of the papers he wrote supporting radicals etc.

This was a leadership failure coupled with no security mechanism to eliminate the threat once it was fully revealed. A lot of good people lost their lives over politically correct nonsense.

Why is it we have metal detectors at airports, court houses, and some high end corporate companies but can't find not one in any major areas on post except at the PX? 

I just came across this inquiry report today. The civilian cops at NOB Norfolk, the worlds largest Navy base, failed to stop this guy from coming on base. He ended up shooting and killing a Petty Officer on the Quarterdeck of the Mahan.

Why can't we have secure gates at our bases? This seems outrageous...

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/18/inquiry-base-gate-errors-were-main-factor-in-mahan-shooting.html?ESRC=navy-a.nl

Allow concealed (or open) carry in accordance with state laws of wherever the base is located.

As an aside, after that Ft. Hood shooting there were news and/or talk show personalities opining that less people would have died if that particular perpetrator had started shooting in just about any Walmart instead of a Military base. The reason being the high likelihood that there would have been at least one (legally) armed person to take him out.

Maybe I am going to get called all kinds of names for posting this, but I really think that part of the tragedy of the Fort Hood Shooting could of been lessened if folks did their jobs. First, there were plenty of warning signs, he should of been reported. Second, if we did not live in a 'my cell phone must be 2 inches in front of my face at all times', folks would have had situational awareness, maybe things might of been different. I carried an AK into a building, sat down, pulled it out and started shooting without anyone knowing. That is a bit harsh, my apologies, I may have not either. My point is the same...situational awareness, whether we want to believe or not, there are folks to want to do us harm even here at home.

Improve mental health services and early warning screenings while allowing more people to be armed when on duty

maybe a DoD conceal carry permit that includes a thorough mental health check, but definitely not a "duty" to carry a weapon.

I don't think arming SDOs/SDNCOs is a good idea, not because they can't handle the situation, but because it could give an active shooter a "first target", or just clue them in as to where not to start shooting; there's no SD desk at the PX or commissary.

Understanding this would be resource intensive, I would suggest a DA-developed, Post-run program in which each unit is covertly required to maintain a certain number of volunteer CCW holders (ex: 10 x shooters per battalion). Big Army could develop the POI, background check and qualification standards, while the Post ensures these standards are met. I definitely have my opinions on what those standards should be(potential rank, training requirements, etc.), but that's for another discussion.

A program like this would allow the Post to have trained, motivated first responders dispersed throughout the installation, while simultaneously giving them control over the selection and training regimen (Big Army would never rely on "civilian" CCW training standards). In addition, by having volunteers (and I'm sure they're be a lot), the concern of having unmotivated Soldiers who don't want the responsibility (like you might have in a SDO/SDNCO) would be mitigated.

Thoughts?