A shooting at Ft. Hood that reportedly left three injured Wednesday was a "soldier on soldier" incident without any terrorism link, a senior Department of Homeland Security source told FoxNews.com.
A shooting at Ft. Hood that reportedly left three injured Wednesday was a "soldier on soldier" incident without any terrorism link, a senior Department of Homeland Security source told FoxNews.com.
LePetomane wrote:I've been following it too. The media will spin this. I'm curious as to why the anti gun nuts always bring up Newtown, the Colorado theater shooting, etc. and don't mention Nidal Hasan when promoting their agenda.
A shooting at Ft. Hood that reportedly left at least four dead -- including the shooter -- and 14 injured Wednesday was a "soldier on soldier" incident without any apparent terrorism link, a senior Department of Homeland Security source told FoxNews.com.
Earlier, Fort Hood ordered everyone at the base to "shelter in place." The order was sent on the base's Twitter feed and posted on its Facebook page.
The 1st Calvary Division, which is based at Fort Hood, had sent a Twitter alert telling people on base to close doors and stay away from windows.
An Iraq War veteran being treated for mental illness opened fire at Fort Hood Wednesday, killing three soldiers and injuring 16 before killing himself, in an attack the same base where a 2009 shooting left more than a dozen dead, authorities said.
Milley said he did not know any motive for the incident, but the shooter, who had served four months in combat in Iraq in 2011, had "behavioral and mental health issues" and was being treated for those.The gunman had been undergoing an assessment to determine whether he had post-traumatic stress disorder, Milley said.
Rmfcasey wrote:Why do we have gun free zone military bases? I would think that arming 10 to 20 % of serving personnel would put an end to this lunacy. We depend on these people to defend our country but not themselves or each other.
ttousi wrote:Rmfcasey wrote:Why do we have gun free zone military bases? I would think that arming 10 to 20 % of serving personnel would put an end to this lunacy. We depend on these people to defend our country but not themselves or each other.
this
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests