Posted on Apr 3, 2014
How can the military best reduce active shooter threats (like Fort Hood)?
27.8K
416
172
16
16
0
Given the recent active shooter tragedy that happened at Fort Hood, how do you believe the military should best respond to help prevent future events from happening, and also casualties should they happen?
Posted in these groups: 
Active Shooter
Security
Active Shooter Security
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 77
0
0
0
It is hard to prevent such a tragedy. But I am curious why the Armed Forces treat PTSD and Sleep Disorder with Ambien medication. It is now for a many side effects including Hallucination, violent mood changes, suicide thoughts and you name many other side effects. I think should be an investigation not to how to prevented because that it is pretty much cover between discussion and Base Commander briefing, but why such a medication is giving to Mentally Stress brothers. What do you think?
P.D. Check the Ambien Medication side effects
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
My Suggestion is to do the following:
1. Arm BDE and BN SDO and SDNCOs with unit
provided M9s and Ammo.
2.
SDO/ SDNCO personnel will account for
the firearms and ammunition during shift change through established
accountability procedures. (DA Form 2062)
3.
SDO/ SDNCO
personnel will also wear a black Duty Brassard on his or her left shoulder
denoting duty position (SDO/ SDNCO) while on duty.
4.
Personnel determined by Mental Health Professionals as a threat to themselves
or others will not be allowed (as they shouldn’t be currently) to perform SDO/
SDNCO duties.
My point in
the discussion is that we already issue weapons and ammunition for AHA guard,
why not to the Staff Duty Officers and Staff Duty NCOs in an accountable manner
in order to confront threats within their unit footprint. I am not talking a
blanket issue of firearms and ammunition to every Soldier.
This divisive
issue has Firearms Control advocates calling for stricter screening to identify
military members with PTSD to prevent these personnel from firearms purchuse.
(Laughable because you could argue anyone deployed has some form of PTSD. Top
that off with the fact you can suffer PTSD as a civilian etc...) Others are
calling for the federal Government to respect State/ County Concealed Carry
Permits on post. While I have no issue personally with that (given the
background check and process to get a CCP) I do realize that is a bridge too
far as you could wonder the effect that would have with a combination of type A
personalities and some members that lack the maturity to follow common sense
firearms handling practices. However, with four shootings on Military
Installations since 2009, something must be done. In the shooting just prior to
this one, a Shore Patrolman lost his life, however his armed shipmate on the
ship was able to limit loss of life due to his proximity. I feel we should give
the same chance to our Soldiers.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Imagine if this guy had walked into the PX on Fort Jackson on family day. (If you've ever been here you know what I'm talking about. Think Black Friday at Walmart, once a week) It would literally be a killing spree. The scary fact is that ANYONE could do it. They could load up a ton of weapons in the trunk of their car, walk in there and just start blazing. It doesn't take a genius or a master mind to pull it off. Just some pissed off lunatic. It is THAT easy.
Here's what's even dumber. Out of all of those thousands of folks in the PX, not a single one has anything to defend themselves with. We'd just have to wait until he ran out of ammo. (Actually the do sell guns there, so we could run over there and try and get the locks off of them, but you know what I mean)
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
I guess this question cripples the police. Maybe that's why they leave there guns in the car just in case they can't get a clear shot. Is that a serious question?
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
The thing you are assuming is that just because people can they will. Not so. In Colorado, it's open carry. When I go in Target does everyone have a gun on their hip? Nope. Maybe 1 person. So if all of a sudden we are allowed to carry on post will every person in the PX have a gun on their hip? Nope. Well I'd bed not 500 like you propose. But maybe 10 or 20, and I think that'd be quite nice.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
Here's my main point. What happened the SECOND this shooter yesterday was confronted by someone else who happened to have a gun too??? He blew his own head off. He was a coward. I think that just about sums it up.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
No one is saying arm everyone on post. What they are saying is allow everyone on post to be armed, just like anywhere else in this Country. That is a HUGE difference as made in my previous point.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The Army, along with the sister branches must overcome the stigma of mental health issues. Seeking treatment for mental and behavioral health concerns CAN be a career-ender despite all those Power Point briefings we have all attended. Soldiers are reluctant to seek help for a multitude of reasons such as fear of adverse action, fear of judgement by others, and even a fear of admitting that they aren't in complete control of their thoughts and actions. If the stereotypes and stigmas can be reduced or removed, I think the mental health screening and treatment process would improve exponentially.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Allow trusted individuals to conceal carry. Must be mentally stable of course and be able to hold a security clearance. Also take a conceal carry class. Not all states require that.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Leaders should be allowed to conceal a weapon if they have a license to do so in that state they are in. On a military post is the only place where I don't carry because I like job. The world is full of crazy people and I have a family to go home to so
I would like a fighting chance if someone decides to go homicidal!
I would like a fighting chance if someone decides to go homicidal!
0
0
0
MAJ Weiss,
We must remember that not do we need to improve mental health services, but I honestly believe that we must affect a change in our atmosphere. Recently, the military has been trying to reduce the stigma of seeking or receiving mental health; however, there are commands who still attach the stigma to it. Yes, some of the generations today are ill-equipped to deal with military life. However, when a Service Member decides that (s)he will want to visit combat stress, mental health, or whatever the DoD want to call it, and Commanders refuse to let those Service Members do it because it needs to be done on their "free" time...it is unacceptable I agree with 1SG Hansen and the need to improve pre-screening but I will add that we must also hold those accountable who refuse to allow Service Members the chance to visit mental health and possibly help to prevent a shooting.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Master Resiliency Training and Unit Resiliency Training Assistance, without question would have had a major impact on this event. This course is currently being implemented Army wide and its doctrine is focused on the individual, their characteristics, and their own personal thought patterns. It creates a sense of optimism that enables psychological health benefits and productivity. If every Soldier was able to harness these techniques and use them daily our military not only would become healthier, but their outlook on life and the lives of others would be a benevolent self assessment. It will become mandatory within a few years, but in the meantime there isn't enough awareness in the military of the legitimate case studied benefits (over 1,200 studies in the last 15 years) of resiliency training though, It should have it's own month. I would bet my ridiculous salary if that Ft.Hood Soldier was in a climate where this instruction was taught. He would have second guessed the thoughts that were influencing his emotions/actions.
This course even teaches you how to "combat breath" to lower your heart rate (pulse) and become more relaxed in "stressful conditions" or even when having negative thoughts, as those are the ones that we tend to blow out of proportion and those are the ones that fuel our emotions/acts. Combat breathing is just an example but are used all time for... i.e. sniper shots, combat situations, arguments with spouses, disobedient children, insubordinate Soldiers, or just the daily hectics of life. Where's the Secretary of the Army in these forums I need to solicit to him!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
We will never know how many shootings DON'T happen because the person (Soldier or not) had to drive to their residence and retrieve their weapon. Having even 5 minutes to think it over makes a difference, versus the one second reaction of reaching to your hip. I bet at least once a week there is a gun sitting in a glove compartment or stashed under a seat that was originally intended to cause the harm or death of another person...until the would be shooter thought it over. You probably know someone that this is true of; you may have been the target and never knew it.
When I relieved my section NCOIC in Iraq, he lay in wait for me planning to shoot me. He fell asleep (an 18 hour shift is not unusual for me). Had he not fallen asleep, laying in the dark, me silhouetted, how many shots could he get off from his M-4, before I could draw my 9mm - even if it was loaded (which it wasn't). My weapon wouldn't have saved me. He wouldn't have shot anyone else (other than maybe himself). And really, that is the case in most shootings that you don't hear about: there is usually a target and a very specific motive. So while your "plan" to arm everyone would limit the number of victims in the very, very small minority of shooting cases (probably 1% or less of shootings are mass shootings), it would more than likely increase the number of "typical" shootings.
Why did I vote to improve mental health services? Because I pushed for a command referral to the Combat Stress clinic for that Soldier and within 3 hours he was back at the unit.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
I think if this were the case, people would be getting shot at the range every other day.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I do not have a fundamental distrust of the Soldiers around me. Wanting to carry a firearm to protect myself on post from other Soldiers is actually the exact definition of a "fundamental distrust of the Soldiers around you."
SSG Burns, the range is a great example of a completely controlled environment where everyone is being careful and there are people ensuring safety. That's how we handle weapons on post. Why bother with all of that if everyone is just going to be allowed to walk around with loaded weapons at the ready? Why can't we just be trusted to be trained professionals? And for the record, there have been shootings at the ranges, both intentional and unintentional even with all of those safety measures in place.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I have carried a firearm for years not because of a fundamental distrust of anyone, but because of the reality that there will always be those who wish to do evil. It's the same reason I have a fire extinguisher in my house and my car. Neither are there because I want to use them. Both are because I know there could come a time I have to use them either to protect myself, those I love, or even a complete stranger.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG Schroeder you hit the nail on the head with the fire extinguisher analogy. I carry concealed whenever legally possible. It makes no sense whatsoever that somebody that has been properly trained, certified and vetted to legally carry a concealed weapon has to then disarm him/herself based on the arbitrary border of the military installation. You are telling people when they come on post that they give up their constitutional right to defend themselves. And yes, I get that we all give up some rights in order to defend those rights for others, but when it comes to being killed just for being at work, things have gone TOO FAR.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
You could let soldiers carry privately owned weapons on post under the concealed weapons law but there is no mental screening process for someone to get a ccl so someone who could possibly be an active shooter could be carrying and then you have to take into consideration ptsd if someone starts shooting another service member who might be carrying could snap as well. All that considered you have to think about cross fire as well if you have to many weapons firing at the same target you could end up with a lot of collateral damage at the end of the incident. I am currently stationed at fort hood and there is just too many soldiers for that to b feasible without some kind of backlash or a mistake being made.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
In that case those ccl carriers should be up to discretion of post commander I know with Florida I got mine by mailing in my application with a memo from my commander I didn't have to do any class our any evals.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
That is not the case in Texas. You still have to attend a full day course and submit fingerprint cards and undergo a complete background check before you CHL is issued by the state. The only thing that is waived for military is the actual range qualification and that is only if you can provide them with a valid military pistol qual scorecard.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google