Arming Citizens On Military Bases Saves Lives

The recent shootings at Fort Hood will become another cause celebre for Obama and the anti-gun crowd to blame guns for the actions of a person who clearly suffered from emotional problems.

Most liberals have never been closer to a firearm than a picture of one in a magazine or in a movie. We’ve witnessed Obama try to throw a baseball and ride a bicycle, can you imagine what he would look like handling and/or firing a firearm?

The people at Fort Hood died because thanks to government liberals the bad guy was allowed to have what liberal marplots reason trained military people are incapable of walking about with safely. Even though when they leave active military service many veterans obtain concealed carry permits.

It is an offense to our Founding Fathers for those who have never so much as held a firearm to systematically contrive reasons to strip us of our Second Amendment rights. I submit that once again Obama and his minions have the blood of innocent Americans on their hands – because once again Obama and his minions have theorized they know better than those in harm’s way. Our military personnel are expected to protect us when Obama and his ilk deny the military the ability to protect themselves. As the military becomes a collection of Corporal Klingers of MASH fame, complete with dress, hat, gloves, and rifle – it should be noted that even Klinger’s rifle had bullets in it.

Obama and Hillary Clinton are Neo-Leninist stinkards who have the blood on their hands of those murdered in Fast and Furious, Benghazi and now for the second time Fort Hood. And each time their actions are the same; Obama publicly promises to get to the bottom of things; Hillary runs for cover; and the families of the murdered and injured are left with hollow promises and no answers.

The idea that Military Police can respond better than armed military persons is a canard. For an effete liberal theorist to laud a 15-minute response time in situations such as the most recent at Fort Hood it is glaringly obvious they are clueless about reality. I’m not going to argue the illogic (at this point) of liberal anti-gun demands.

But I am going to argue we don’t have enough law-abiding citizens armed in public. Anti-gun zealots can argue all they want, but it is a fact that the safest place to be is where the greatest number of citizens are armed.

To argue that police are more prepared to handle life-threatening situations, such as the most recent at Fort Hood, demands answering the question of supposed for the sake of argument that is true; what do the people do during the 15-20 minutes or more that it takes said law enforcement to arrive? If our citizens are unable to fight back they are left for dead where they stand.

Liberal classroom theorists oppose guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens because they view the citizenry through a prism based upon their ignorance. Neo-Leninists oppose guns in the hands of law-abiding citizenry because they understand that an unarmed populace is easier to control and subdue than an armed one.