4 killed, more than a dozen wounded in Fort Hood shooting rampage
F
ORT HOOD — A soldier being treated for mental health issues opened fire Wednesday at Fort Hood, killing three people and wounding 16 before fatally shooting himself at the same military base where 13 people died in a 2009 attack, authorities said.
The gunman was being evaluated for PTSD, but a diagnosis had not been confirmed, said Lt. Gen. Mark A. Milley, the senior officer on the base.
U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, identified the shooter as Ivan Lopez, 34. Fort Hood officials had not formally released his name, pending notification of next of kin.
Officials said Lopez, a military truck driver, was dressed in his standard-issue green camouflage uniform at the time of the attack. SOURCE
The first thing I have to do is say this; I want to extend my most sincere sympathies to the families of those that were killed in this attack and to the families of those wounded as well.
What I am about to write is NOT meant to be a denigration of the loved ones that were casualties of a mad man, I hope everyone understands that.
What I am is angry! It has taken me longer to write this piece than I would have ever imagined. I have had to go back and take out things, several times.
I am appalled at the actions of this shooter, Ivan Lopez, and what he brought down on those that were merely going about their day, in all probability they were getting ready to go home to their families, or maybe back to base housing and their buddies. I can only guess in that respect.
All I know for certain is that Ivan Lopez took everything these people had. He took their lives, their futures, their potential and everything that goes with it as he snuffed them out in some sort of *fit of rage*.
Ivan Lopez robbed the families of these people, he took their loved ones.
Milley said the shooter “had behavioral health and mental health issues.” He said the soldier, who had self-reported a traumatic brain injury and was taking anti-depressants, had been under examination to determine whether he had post-traumatic stress disorder. “We are digging deep into his background,” Milley said.
General, with ALL due respect; you can DIG until HELL freezes over, there’s nothing more the Army can do, the deed has been done and it’s too late for any of this to make sense.
What the Army needs to answer for, at least in MY opinion, is this; WHY was a man that had sought psychiatric help, a man that claimed to have PTSD, a man that was on some type of anti-depressants being allowed to walk around as if he were a fully functioning member of society?
Here is where *some* in the gun community may take issue with me. The Second Amendment do state, and I quote; “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” and I agree with that, but there are also laws that prohibit those that suffer *mental issues* from buying and/or possessing a firearm.
The Army had suspicions that Lopez was in some sort of trouble mentally, but given *patients’ rights* and HIPAA laws, the mental stability of Lopez could NOT be allowed to get out.
The Office for Civil Rights enforces the HIPAA Privacy Rule, which protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information; the HIPAA Security Rule, which sets national standards for the security of electronic protected health information; the HIPAA Breach Notification Rule, which requires covered entities and business associates to provide notification following a breach of unsecured protected health information; and the confidentiality provisions of the Patient Safety Rule, which protect identifiable information being used to analyze patient safety events and improve patient safety. SOURCE
There is the perfect *Catch 22* for you. The Constitution says yes indeed, we can all have guns, and that is as it should be, but Federal laws make it nearly impossible to place an individual on a *NO SALES* list, if such were to actually exist.
Why the rants about HIPAA and the Second Amendment you ask?
Milley said the soldier, who was assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command expeditionary unit, opened fire with a .45-caliber Smith & Wesson semiautomatic pistol that had been purchased recently but was not authorized to be brought on the base.
If Lopez was thought to be *unstable* and claimed to be suffering PTSD and was on some type of anti-depressants, whether that diagnosis of PTSD had been confirmed or not, the indicators were there. Lopez should not have been *recently* allowed to buy a gun, of ANY kind.
I’m only guessing here, but I would bet LARGE money that when Lopez bought this pistol, that when he filled out the sheet that gun dealers use to perform a cursory background check to find determine if you are allowed to buy a weapon or not, I am betting he checked NO in the box that asks if you are now suffering any type of mental illness.
And in ALL fairness, indicators or not, if Lopez was NOT in the system as a *NO SALE* individual he could buy any gun he could afford, no matter how crazy he may have been, and that is NOT the fault of the gun dealer.
I realize that it’s not practical but there has to some way of getting a comprehensive list, database, some sort of *shared information* regarding those under psychiatric care, and before anyone can say it, know this; I don’t trust the Feds to do it in any way, shape form or fashion, but something has to happen that keeps mental patients from buying guns.
I am open to suggestions!
President Barack Obama said he was “heartbroken that something like this might have happened again.” Speaking during a fundraising trip to Chicago, he pledged “to get to the bottom of exactly what happened.”
Just a thought; is Obama going to get to the bottom of this like he and his band of Merry Lawbreakers got to the bottom of Benghazi? OR, maybe he will find out that since this happened in Texas, George Bush caused it, allowed it to happen, helped make it happen or some other such Obama nonsense.
What do most mass shootings have in common (other than guns, bullets, and victims)? Mental illness and / or anti-depressant drugs.
I thought I heard over a year ago, after Sandy Hook, that Joe Biden was going to investigate the mental illness aspect of that shooting and how HIPAA might be changed to reflect such things.
The sad truth is that our current mental health reporting laws make it almost impossible to stop a REAL nut with a gun, a knife, or a broom handle.
Keep your powder dry
Exactly correct!
It’s very scary and terrible.
Here’s another angle, and I know we’ve discussed it before, Fred - military bases that belong to the US do not allow their personnel on board to carry their weapons with them, unless they are on guard duty or headed for the range.
Doesn’t matter who put that policy into place, it needs to change. Personnel on board any military base should, in fact, be armed.
You know what else these recent mass shootings have in common? They all occurred in “Gun Free” zones. Seems to me the criminals who did the shooting weren’t too concerned with the Gun Free rule, were they?
Lopez fully illustrates that not ALL members of the military are of sound mind, I am guessing that before anyone can carry on base some psych evaluation would have to be done, training and qualifications, background checks, a note from their Mama, and…. Oh wait, we already let them carry full auto weapons in *other* nations…
Yes indeed, our troops need to be armed… If they can’t be trusted with light weapons and sidearms HERE what right do we as a nation have to give them heavy weapons to use in other nations?
I agree with Cary.
As with any other “gun-free” zone, military bases are target rich environments.
Any individual who dons the armed services uniform and made it through boot camp has passed basic marksmanship qualifications which mean they are all proficient with weapons. Now, anti-gunners will argue weapons training makes military personnel dangerous. I’ll argue it also makes them safe… but only if they are armed. Because, if small arms carry is banned, the base personnel are as vulnerable as those elementary school kids in Newtown, CT.
The thing anti-gunners can’t seem to grasp is they will NEVER unarm the bad guys.
Excellent analysis Gary…
My condolences to the families of the victims. Fred, the army has the ball in their court on this one. Every service member has an ID card and with today’s technology it would be easy to encrypt on the magnetic strip an identifier to alert the gun dealer of any restrictions regarding a sale to military personnel. This would be unique to military only and could be altered again when the problem was resolved. If I had any say in the matter, I would lift the ban on soldiers and allow open carry on base. Most gun free zones should be eliminated and ccw should be honored in all states as are driver licenses.
There was a time when the Army got rid of their misfits in short order. Now, not so much, with all the liberal social engineering going on. Could make a good case for getting rid of all muslims, queers, and known gang bangers within the ranks but that won’t happen in this day and age.
What a waste. Lopez could’ve been counseled by Nissan Malik Hasan about work place violence way back when he went on active duty. Just needed a little multiculturalism ethnic encouraged and enforced.
Don’t know much about internet etticute , i.e. /sar and such. Drive ’79 Blazer, ’93 Ford Duelly, ’97 Silverado 1500 , finally bought 2013 Altima trading in 2004 Malibu as first foreign for wife to drive, now Nissan is recalled.
For as I know none of others recalled or if so I never knew, a few things went wrong and I got fixed. They all work great. My first was ’52 baby blue Ford coupe/white top with backseat for going to the drive-in, worked great too except windows fogged up so hard to see movie.
The Officers and the NCOs senior to Lopez failed him and failed the Fort Hood Military Community. Lopez should have been “flagged” while pending psychiatric review. Privately owned weapons should have been ordered to the Unit’s arms room. I performed these actions many times with subordinates during periods of crisis. They are temporary in nature but they let the person that someone cared. I am not saying that if the actions had been taken that the results would have been different, but at least Regulations would have been followed.
His superiors may not have known he had firearms. Being married he may have lived off base or in military family housing. I don’t know army regulations but when I lived in base housing with my family, I never registered my firearms and it wasn’t required by regulation.
There’s also a good chance his superiors didn’t know he was being mentally evaluated or the extent of his problem. As a supervisor, I was never informed when a subordinated was under mental evaluation. All I knew was that a troops retricted area access bad was pulled for medical reasons. Had a SSgt temporally assigned to my duty section to do a construction project for us; great guy and very hard worker. Didn’t show up one day. Our lieutenant found him at his house, of base, after he had put a 30-30 to his chest and pulled the trigger. Found out he was under mental evaluation and that’s why his badge was pulled.
When I, was on base at Ft. Hood, I was always armed with a “chest” holder and my 45 auto was in it.
Times have changed for the worse as far as I am concerned.
I also do not like that imposter illegal alien obama and mooch going there with alligator tears, and mucking it up more.
But that’s me, and I thank my lucky stars that I am allowed to say this.