raimius

It's a tragedy, and my prayers and condolences go out to those affected by it. I know it hurts losing a friend to an active shooter. "I wish someone was there to stop him" crossed my mind pretty quickly, when I heard about a similar situation with someone I knew. I know some people don't like the scenario-playing that some people do after these events, but I think that it is useful for people who do carry. Not having a plan seldom leads to the best results. This case was particularly ugly for those responding. It would be bad enough as the armed good-guy in the room, but even worse trying to make it to the scene with hardly any info but bleeding people running out of the theater as the gunfire continues. I doubt I would have taken the shot, based on where I usually sit (upper middle), where a crowd would have to run to exit, lighting, adrenalin, tear gas, and incoming fire. I honestly doubt I could make accurate head-shots at 30ish yards, against a moving, shooting enemy, in a dark, gas filled room, with a crowd of people between me and him. I know my accuracy isn't that great with lots of adrenaline, and when my fundamentals break down, I shoot low. I'd be more likely to try to hustle the people next to me toward the exit than take a shot with a greater probability of shooting a movie-goer than disabling the shooter, unless they zeroed in on me. I'd feel pretty awful if I hit some random person and didn't stop the shooter. Perhaps, the option to close the distance without him noticing would exist, and that would improve the odds of a stop and decrease the risk to innocents quite a bit. It's a tactically awful situation. For those with good accuracy, and perhaps less distance and fewer innocents in the line of fire, maybe they should take the shot. It's kind of unlikely, anyway, as that cinema company tends to post "no carry" signs at all their theaters.

The kazoo army...

There's some style points.

There was a DoD instruction that strongly recommended not allowing CCW for anyone on base for quite some time. Which AF policy changed the CC's discretion? I never really found that one (granted, I only looked for an hour or two).

Nope. That's probably why he had to shoot himself before being hauled away. No CCW is the intent of DoD policy.

Not having the system randomly reboot to the main page and erase the data I just entered would be nice. Kill the pop-ups. Have a more logical flow. I hate trying to remember which sub-menu something is in, because they aren't labeled in a fashion that makes sense to someone who doesn't spend all their time using DTS. I like WABoom's idea to link it to an actual form, so you can tell if stuff makes sense.

This guy whining about not getting combat medals while facing zero physical risk. Count me as unsympathetic...unless the monitors explode and kill people when the Predator crashes. The bit about being in more danger because of the potential for an Al-Qaeda assassination in the US is just ridiculous. Why would anyone with any self-respect say that after the number of "green on blue" incidents we've had?

Anyone who could safely carry out an injured crew would, of course. That's not really the point. The bird with the primary responsibility isn't capable more than half the time...that's a major screw up. ...and dang we got off topic!

UH-72s are just not built to carry much at all, even at sea level. They generate some funny stories for the TH-1 crews at Rucker though.

I'm guessing the randomness of more than a few Christmas-treed forms probably skews the results into a pretty useless jumble. That's what happens when you sit down a bunch of cadets and tell them the survey isn't required, but they are required to sit there while it is handed out...

I wonder why so many of these complaints appear to start by going to an outside group. Is it really that hard to say, "Sir, this could be taken the wrong way. We should fix it" or am I missing something?

No.

Rucker 12-05 HH-60G x 2 CV-22 TH-1 FAIP UH-1N Congrats!

I knew Justin from the zoo, as well...

Really!? A guy asks for help to get new stuff issued to his troops and you criticize him? ...and we complain about bureaucracy and crap?

Rule #247: Don't trash talk your own team. Nice work!

The link doesn't work for me. Can somebody post the title, so I can search the site?

Like I tried to say before, I'm not too concerned about this situation. The guy video taped his ideas and plans. It was obvious what side he was on, and that he was committing treason. I don't have a problem that he was blown up. I do have some concerns over the procedures used, and how they will set the pseudo-precedence for less clear-cut situations in the future. Obviously, I don't sit on the NSC, so there is a lot of information and procedural stuff I don't see. I have to go off what I can read in the media, which is far less than perfect.

I disagree. I think this case presents some serious questions. When does one forfeit their 5th Amendment rights? The right not to be deprived of life without due process is a pretty serious one. Am I sad to see Awlaki offed? Hell no. I am concerned about the precedent though.

If you wind up wearing glasses in UPT, I recommend actually flying with the giant issued ones. Those big lenses let you look around more (helpful in form).

XL 12-06 track T-38: 7 T-1: 17 T-44: 3 UH-1: 1 (One of those T-1s might be a -38. I couldn't hear the announcer very well.)

You can't put the genie back in the bottle! Dropping the bombs saved a lot of Americans (and probably Japanese).

What a shame. Glad everyone made it out.

Respect.

Which case do you base that on, or are you using the 14th Amendment as the basis of the Constitutionality of such an order?