Four Marines killed at Chattanooga Navy Op Support Ctr and Marine Reserve Ctr

[Boggit]

So now find his brothers, sisters, mother, father, uncles and aunties and cousins and make their life an unmentionable hell - make the next c*** think 'shit if I do this then that's what happens to my family' make it something to make them think twice - without and repercussions or reprisals they've nothing to lose but becoming a martyr with a hole in his face and that's what they want - I want them to sit in their little hovel before embarking on their holy mission and know some terrible shitstorm is coming to theirs

I can understand the sentiment behind this - and the logic of deterrence. On the flip side you criminalise people who weren't necessarily involved, and thus innocent. There is no certainty that family will share the same views  - witness in the UK the views of the husbands of women who left to IS with their children recently. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-sisters-feared-joined-islamic-5921046 I have no problem throwing the book at the guilty, but it is just wrong to take things out on the innocent, and is a slippery slope to despotic government for everyone. While the likes of IS will do that which you suggest, are you really sure that you'd want the unintended consequences?

Far better to catch the terrorists, find out as much as possible from them, then lock them up with no possibility of reprieve.

[JasonPratt]

Did I hear correctly that the guard post was unarmed?  ???

Also, I know I heard the recruitment post was a "gun-free zone" (right??), but I'd sure like someone to explain the legalities of that to me.

[LongBlade]

Did I hear correctly that the guard post was unarmed?  ???

Also, I know I heard the recruitment post was a "gun-free zone" (right??), but I'd sure like someone to explain the legalities of that to me.

I don't know about the guard post but that's probably correct.

As for the recruiting center, IIRC I saw Gen Odierno on TV explaining how they'd have to think about the policy. Apparently some of these stations are in malls. He was also concerned about accidental discharges.

Personally neither of those excuses makes much sense to me. That's probably why I'm unfit for leadership in DC.

[LongBlade]

Apparently the sailor and one of the Marines did return fire. In the link below it discusses how both used "personal weapons" to return fire. It's unclear exactly what that means.

At the bottom of the article is a paragraph explaining why the Marines were unarmed. More info at the link.

The ban is largely due to legal issues, such as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement. U.S. forces don't routinely carry guns when they are not in combat or on military bases. And Pentagon officials are sensitive to any appearance of armed troops within the United States.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/22/navy-officer-murdered-marine-fired-back-at-chattanooga-gunman/