Fort Hood: Unanswered Questions
By Mas Ayoob. I also wonder why there were, initially, several ‘confirmed’ reports of multiple shooters.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
November 9th, 2009 at 10:31 am
I don’t know, but I suspect that the two guns used had different sounds and this may have been part of it. There could’ve been echoing or other sound distortions, or the efforts of the early responders could have been mistaken for being those of the shooter. We do need an answer, but there seems to me to be a decent chance that it’s just reasonable confusion.
What I’d like to know is why this guy wasn’t picked up ahead of time. Who made the ultimate decision? Was this a policy change that came from the new administration? I could believe that there either wasn’t enough hard evidence at the time or that there was the belief that the shooter wasn’t violent and might help them discover other possible sympathizers. While inexcusable, it could also be simple bureaucratic inefficiency.
I don’t have a problem with a general policy of not having every soldier be armed 24/7 while stateside; there are enough reasons out there. At the same time, though, some of them should be. Have some officers and NCOs, and perhaps some MPs, always around. That no one in the area was armed is inexcusable.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:10 am
My initial thoughts were that there were an awful lot of people in that room of the type to run toward gunfire instead of away. As such, some could have been mistakenly thought as shooters instead of responders.
This is a risk for anyone who is proactive in a shooting. If you’re not running away or cowering in fear, you tend to stand out and witnesses under stress jump to conclusions.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
My guess, and this is only wild speculation, is the possibility of a couple of good old boys doing some (against the rules) on-base concealed carry; they may have pulled their weapons when they heard the shooting and were spotted, or they may have been discovered during a post shooting “pat down” of everyone in the area.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Beyond what KJB said, remember that initial reports are always wrong, and “confirmed” from an anonymous report means nothing other than they talked to someone who said “it’s totally so”.