Sgt. Carson A. Holmquist … PO2 Randall Smith … GySgt. Thomas Sullivan … LCpl. Squire K. Wells … SSgt. David A. Wyatt. Four Marines and one Navy Petty Officer, five American servicemen who died at the hands of a foreign-born enemy combatant, an avowed Islamist who wanted to kill Americans. Only this wasn’t on the battlefields of Iraq or Afghanistan. If that had been the case, at least the Americans would’ve been allowed to defend themselves. No, the battleground of which I speak is a quiet little corner of the American heartland, a side street in Chattanooga, Tennessee. And as per the policy of the federal government, those servicemen were stripped of the ability to perform their basic function as members of the armed forces of the United States—to protect this nation and kill the enemy. Their workplace, as is the norm for Obama’s politically correct agenda, was a “Gun-Free Zone.”
Since the beginning of the War on Terror, there have been a series of attacks on military installations on US soil, most notably Ft. Hood, in Texas. Since Nidal Hassan killed thirteen and wounded thirty-two at the Fort in November, 2009 (an act that was termed “workplace violence” by the Obama administration), at least twenty-one more have died on American military installations, including the five who died in Chattanooga. This doesn’t include acts of common murder, such as domestic violence or drunken confrontation. One common thread runs through the mass attacks at Ft. Hood, the Washington Navy Yard, and in Tennessee: Americans needlessly died because those best prepared and best trained to defend themselves and others were denied the right to do so by their Commander-in-Chief.
As details of the Chattanooga attack began to emerge, it became obvious to everyone … well, everyone who isn’t a member of Obama’s administration or the Mainstream Media (I know, that’s a distinction without a difference) that the shooter, Kuwaiti-born Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez was conducting a planned, intentional, terrorist attack upon Marines and Sailors at two widely separated locations, both of which were, of course, posted as gun-free. Surprisingly however, having decided to kill in the name of Allah, Abdulazeez was untroubled by the signs informing him that his firearms weren’t welcome (please insert sarcasm here).
Nor is it just government buildings and schools that choose to advertise the helpless vulnerability of those therein. Restaurants, shopping malls, and most notably in recent years movie theaters have rushed to adopt the modern, liberal version of the white flag of surrender. So when those who seek to commit mass murder, whether for reasons psychotic, terroristic, or both, look for somewhere to carry out these acts, where do they prefer to go? Government buildings, schools, restaurants, shopping malls, and as once again demonstrated just days after the shootings in Tennessee, movie theaters.
For those private businesses and corporations who choose to post their buildings as gun-free-zones … well, that’s their choice, one they have a right to exercise as they see fit. Just as I, as a gun owner, have a right to choose whether I patronize their businesses.
But for our men and women in uniform, those who risk their lives on foreign battlefields to keep us safe here at home, that choice has been taken away; or rather, reduced to a choice between being defenseless in their own installations, or, as was apparently the case in Chattanooga, violate federal law and arm themselves. According to news reports, at least two servicemen fought back with weapons their commander-in-chief doesn’t think they should have. What does Obama recommend that our uniformed men and women do in the event of another such attack? His advice is to ditch their uniforms and close the blinds. One can almost hear the demeaning sarcasm in those words.
Fortunately, there are others more concerned with the welfare of the American military than the man who commands them. The governors of seven states—Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin—have ordered their National Guard units to be armed, and where allowed by law, armed citizens have volunteered to stand post outside recruiting stations, determined to protect those who protect us.
The so-called “Gun-Free Zone” isn’t a creation of the military bureaucracy, it’s merely a symptom of the pervasive liberalism that has invaded the upper echelons of the Pentagon. Liberals at every level of government love declaring public buildings and facilities gun-free, ignoring the fact that those who seek to commit crimes of violence, or acts of terror, aren’t likely to be deterred by a sign on a door. The only ones who will obey such a sign are those we would want to be armed … those law-abiding citizens who have chosen to accept the responsibility for their own defense and the defense of others. All that a gun-free zone accomplishes is to insure that, when the wolves enter the fold, the sheepdogs will have been defanged, and the sheep will be ripe for the slaughter.
Comments will be approved before showing up.