‘I think it is an abomination’: Glenn reacts to the shooting at Fort Hood

Three people were killed and 16 others wounded in a shooting at Fort Hood Army base in Texas on Wednesday. The suspected shooter, who has been identified by several news organizations as 34-year-old Specialist Ivan Lopez, is also dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. Lopez served in Iraq in 2011. According to the AP, a Ft. Hood official says he was at the Army base to be assessed for whether he had PTSD.

The shooting, which is being described as “soldier-on-soldier” violence, comes four and half years after Army Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at Ft. Hood killing 13 people and six months after Department of Defense contractor Aaron Alexis opened fire at the Washington Navy Yard. On radio this morning, Glenn chose to focus on the state of our military and the support (or lack thereof) it receives. Glenn believes it is absolutely imperative to overturn the policy that forbids most military personnel from carrying firearms on military bases.

“I was in the movie theater yesterday and somebody taps me on the shoulder and says, ‘Mr. Beck, did you hear about the Fort Hood shooting?’ And so I walk out in the lobby and get the news, and my first thought is not about the shooter, not about terror… it was solely about the victims and all of the people at Fort Hood,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “My first thought was: Have they killed the guy? Have they stopped it? What else has to happen to our soldiers? What else has to happen to Fort Hood?”

While many believe the unarming of our bases came under former President Bill Clinton’s administration, a report from TheBlaze’s Oliver Darcy last fall discovered the policy was actually enacted in February 1992 by Donald J. Atwood. Atwood served as deputy secretary of defense under President George H. W. Bush. The directive appears to have been reissued in April 2011 by Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III.

Department of Defense Directive 5210.56 states that it is a “DoD Policy” to “limit and control the carrying of firearms by DoD military and civilian personnel.”

Furthermore, it says “the authorization to carry firearms shall be issued only to qualified personnel when there is a reasonable expectation that life or DoD assets will be jeopardized if firearms are not carried.”

With that in mind, Glenn passionately explained how vital it is to provide our servicemen and women with the resources they need. We have left too many of these people out to dry, and Glenn laid out the two things “our forces need”: Our respect and support and the right to keep and bear arms.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

1. Support and respect

“Our forces need… respect when they come home… We’re paying for people who refuse to work, who hate the damn country. We are giving all kinds of services to people who aren’t even here legally,” Glenn said exasperatedly. “And yet the people who put on our uniform and go out and fight a war… we don’t help them get well. When they come back, we say, ‘Go to Fort Hood. We’ll look into it.’ Then you are kind of lost in the shuffle. Nobody even knew who this guy was.”

Over the last several months, Glenn has been working with some of the brightest minds in the field at the Carrick Brain Center in Dallas to help manage his own chronic pain. He has witnessed firsthand the incredible services they offer, but are our soldiers able to seek out that same type of care?

“I’m doing work right now with the Carrick Brain Center here in Dallas, Texas… These guys are absolutely incredible… I have gone to the best doctors in the world… nobody has an answer. I go to these guys, boom. They have an answer for me,” Glenn explained. “Why are they working on a schlep like me when they should be working on our soldiers… Don’t we owe it to them? We give them the VA. Would you want your kid sitting in the VA? Do you know anything about the VA?”

2. The right to bear arms

“The other thing our troops need, besides the love and medical attention that they deserve (paid for by us)… is a gun. I know we can disagree on whether or not guys like me should have a gun, but… they have a right to defend themselves,” Glenn said. “I don’t understand a country that disarms the military… You can trust them in a snap decision walking in the streets in some other country… but you can’t trust them to carry a gun in our own country? It’s insane.”

While it would be nice to think so much has changed since the return of the Vietnam War veterans in the 1960s, there is no two ways about it: We are still not providing our veterans with the care they need. Glenn encouraged his listeners to call their senators and representatives and demand the overturning of DoD Directive 5210.56.

“I think it is an abomination, quite honestly. I think it is a real, true abomination what this country is doing, and I refuse to put my name on it. I stand firmly in defense of the military. I stand firmly in their right to keep and bear arms,” Glenn concluded. “Which one of us is insane? Those on the military base or those in Washington that say, ‘Well, we have to disarm the Army’? By the way, it’s not just those in Washington. It is all of us. We need to tell our representatives in Congress and in the Senate and in the White House. You need to call today and say: Enough is enough.”

If you are interested in doing your part to support active military members and veterans – including those affected by the recent Fort Hood shooting, those suffering from PTSD, and those who have been otherwise injured serving our country – consider donating to the Mercury One Active Duty/Veterans Support Fund.

Learn more about the fund HERE.

  • Emily Smith


    ☭☭☭ ☭�☭☭ ☭☭☭ ☭☭☭� ☭☭☭We are still not providing our veterans with the care they need.

    • lil’ will

      Don’t you ever get tired of trying to scam people? Enough of you selling your B.S. on Becks letters!

  • Guest

    It is all of us. We need to tell our representatives in Congress and in the Senate and in the White House.

    • BlueMN

      Better title for this story would be: “Beck Blames Americans for Ft Hood Shootings”

  • Anonymous

    Beck may think Americans don’t respect our veterans, but I’ve never met anyone who thinks like that. It’s estimated the American public will spend one trillion dollars on care for veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our leaders should think twice about charging into wars like Iraq.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72EnfFysPFE Connor

      No just you liberals.

    • BlueMN

      Remember what bad shape the chickenhawk Bush administration left Walter Reed Hospital in? Closing VA hospitals while sending troops into two wars? Their only value to them is as pawns in their wars and as props for re-election campaigns.

      • smokehill

        If you actually believed most of that crap about Walter Reed, you’ve probably never been near any military post or hospital. Having worked there years ago, I could smell the B.S. in the Washington Post muckraking, but ANYONE should have been able to figure it out.

        Not all wounded vets are Boy Scouts, and ditto for their families. The basic problem in that off-post (but government-leased) housing was that a few of the occupants were trashing the place, getting drunk or stoned, havin g local lowlifes in as “visitors” to party, and the main reason some of them were complaining about being in pain was that they were selling their pain meds and/or trading them for other drugs. This was only a few of them, and sometimes it was their spouse or family doing it (since they lived there, too), but it only takes a few to mess up everything & make a family building look like a D.C. crackhouse. This WAS reported in the Post articles, but largely buried down below the more exciting attacks blaming the Army. A rotten situation, unfortunately caused when Walter Reed tried to do a good thing for wounded soldiers and their families. And of course the amount of control over the families is negligible without throwing the worst out & getting hammered by Congressmen & reporters about how badly they’re treating soldiers’ families.

        Blaming the Army or Walter Reed for that mess is absurd, and blaming Bush is even dumber. It just shows that you know nothing about the incident.

        Having spent time in the Army Medical Dept I know that they’re often just well-meaning bunglers who do medicine well, but administration badly — but this was nowhere near the way it was presented by an ignorant yellow press.

        But then, being just the usual knee-jerk liberal puke, we expect no less.

  • Melanie

    Disarming the military is not new. 1977 to 1979 I was stationed in Frankfurt am Main with the 3rd Armored Division, which was tasked with keeping the Soviets from coming through Fulda Gap. I stood guard on the gate to Edwards Kaserne with a night stick. They told us not to let any Soviet vehicles in the gate. Hah!

    • Anonymous

      Try 1967. I was a crew chief on a C-130E in Vietnam. Our guns were locked up in a cabinet up front and the AC had the key. I also did three months in the Congo and had the same deal, no gun. But I did have a nice crash axe.

  • Boo2

    I could not believe this when I heard it on the news last night! For that to happen again is just not right. Ivan Lopez??! It sounds made up! I’ll bet you that when the truth comes out this will be another person with a questionable background. I’ll be surprised it it isn’t!

    • Bob Compton

      Notice that there has been no mention at all about his political affiliation. To me, that can mean only one thing – he was a democrat. Otherwise, the msm would be screaming to high heaven about the ‘right-winger, gun-crazy nut case’. The ’emperor’, as usual, showed his true colors by issuing a short generic statement, then rushing off to a 1/2 million dollar fund-raiser, much the same as with Benghazi. This shooting must have warmed his ‘heart’, because he can use it as anti-gun propaganda, and it got rid of several of the military people that he loathes. I don’t know how he kept from grinning when he gave his condolences speech.

  • Deckard426

    Eventually, the government will allow military personnel to carry arms on their bases. They just won’t be allowed to carry any bullets.

  • Anonymous

    One of the problems I see is people in the service have to spend time with one another no matter how they are being treated by co-harts, they can’t walk away. Respect needs to start within the unit. I have noticed that the people coming out of the military, they are put into leadership roles, treat people like their Iranian citizens that can’t be trusted, these military people are traumatized. Why aren’t they reminded they are home, and who to trust and not trust, and that they can walk away from people who they don’t like the way they are treating them and that person can do the same, so treat people with respect. The person in charge of my group, like to go clubbing and if people didn’t go after work to parties with him, he told them they were jerks. He still had that, we’re in the service and we have to spend time together. They don’t understand the freedom of choice clause and what it means.

  • Deborah Woolley

    I’ve called my Senators and my congress men to complain about disarming our military! They’re STILL disarmed! What can we do now??!!

    • Alan Elsass

      Make an issue that is seen by those senators and congressmen that says “Get in line or lose next vote !” That should be done by every person that sees this. Here in Illinois it takes 18 identical letters except for name and address to make the point. What if each rep got 1000 letters like that from 1000 different people. It cost me roughly $10. That is cheap compared to losing our Liberties. American people have got to get active, or just slump down and accept socialism or dictatorship.

      • Anonymous

        Letters are not enough. They can, and are, ignored. A march outside Washington is not enough. The only people that win anything here, are the bus companies and the hotel owners. Want change? Support The STATES RIGHTS amendment movement to amend direct election of Senators. Demand an amendment for a BALANCED BUDGET, not by expecting your current Senators to introduce the measure, but by The STATES introducing the measure. There is no other way….short of Revolution. This is the last chance.

    • Joe Crowe

      Perhaps the states should send an armed militia to defend the military. It’s so inefficient, I’m surprised the geniuses in the current administration haven’t thought of that. Then replace them with armed guards. Then disarm the guards. Then send in private security to defend the armed guards. Then disarm the private security and send in private security assembled from former groups of enemy combatants from overseas who have undergone a 3-hour ‘sensitivity training video’ to defend the now-unarmed guards. Once the inevitable takes place they should bring in specialists to guard the guards guarding the guards guarding the guards. Then give the specialists one single bullet – Barney Fife style. Then exchange that bullet for a rubber bullet. Then, because they aren’t being stupid enough, the administration should trade all that security in for a dog whistle and some locally-produced and eco-friendly lemon juice or better yet, a card for free mental health counseling, printed with soy ink to be handed out at the first sign of trouble. They must have something even more stupid in mind.

  • DBwatchman

    This is a microcosm of the larger civilian world. Bad people or nuts will always get a gun, ALWAYS! Only normal, good people that are armed can stop the nuts quickly with the saving of many innocent lives. It is unconscionable to requires normal good people to be disarmed and helpless, at the mercy of crazies. It takes a good person with a gun to stop a bad person with a gun. It is just, that, simple.

    • pawley

      excellent point, only if those in Wash. had such good reasoning

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72EnfFysPFE Connor

    I have to say this. This whole shooting could’ve been prevented by doing two things. First off better mental health system so we could actually help one of these people before the snap. Two make sure our military can carry weapons around in base for if the first thing failed than at least they could defend themselves. We trust these men and women with protecting our freedom but yet for some crazy reason we do not trust these same men and women with guns on their own military bases?

  • http://www.speakthewordnow.com/ Karen Rose

    Did you know that they make our troops lock up their guns in their sleeping quarters in the middle east? Yes, because the enemy does not like the troops with guns. Have you ever heard of something so STUPID?

    • Justin Hutchinson

      No I didn’t hear that nor did I see that. I spent 9 years in Iraq and Afghanistan training the Marines as a civilian and they had their weapons on them all the time. Where did you hear that?

      • http://www.speakthewordnow.com/ Karen Rose

        I heard the father and mother of one of the Seal Team Six that were killed, say it. On the Michael Savage Website and it was on WND website. You will have to watch this video, this father also tells the story of another father who received a letter from his son stating that he didn’t feel safe and was most likely going to die, because they lock up their guns at night…Seal Team 6 Families Demand Justice For Their Fallen: Part 4 …http://youtu.be/z3s4dAaEYLY

        • pawley

          Oh My God in heaven

      • Guest


  • BigD

    Shooting on military bases wasn’t an issue back during George bush senior was in office all the way through his son! It started once Obama got into office! Is it just a coinsident? I’m not sure. Gulf war syndrome now know as PTSD started as from the name then but why was there no issues then because when military members returned home they were taken care of I’m guess so don’t quote me on that or dealt with it differently as time has gone on that’s gone down and down and down! But what got it to the point of people coming on bases and shooting people! Growing up on military bases only MP’s at the gate but it seems like we’re phasing MP’s off the front gate and contracting in security officers I’m not saying that’s bad or that’s what happened at FT. Hood MP’s driving around also carried weapons because we didn’t need to worry! So when these issues started they came as a surprise because we were safe! I’m guessing we aren’t anymore! So who should be authorized to carry weapons. I’m thinking in every building on base should have sleeper 1 officer and one enlisted officer should he allowed depending on how large the building is! I think we’ve come to this! It’s sad but it looks like it needs to be done. Specially at the large major bases. Just my opinion.im guessing also unmarked MP cars need to be roaming.

    • Charlie

      First off, your anti-Obama rant, isn’t solving the problem, or making things any better…your understanding of modern American history, and its neglect of the military, is quite puerile and partisan…there are thousands of veterans, lingering in the streets of virtually every American city, dating back to the early 1970’s…Vietnam, the 1st Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan, all have its long lines of hungry, forlorn, ignored, unheralded, and unappreciated veterans, who’s only crime was taking up arms for a country that has wholeheartedly ignored it…there were shootings on military bases during the Bush Administration, Clinton, Big George, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, etc…this didn’t just begin with Obama, our soldiers were being spat on by Americans citizens in 1975, on returning home from Vietnam…no one man, or administration, is at fault for this, it is an entire nation, that has chosen to live a Peter Pan existence, being totally myopic about what really goes on in the world, instead of indulging in selfish, and self-loathing pursuits…there are an estimated 22 suicide per day, from members of our armed forces, they all can’t be blamed on anti-depressants, pseudo-jihad wannabes, Obama’s ineptitude, etc…the fault can squarely be blamed on the American citizen, who in 1975, called our young men in uniform “babykillers”, but now, in 2014, when they return home, greet them in cold, Siberian silence…
      Sometimes, silence is the greatest insult of all…

  • Anonymous

    We re talking military not girl scouts

  • Anonymous

    All this talk about how we should be “supporting” the troops is all just a smokescreen for military spending as a means of corporate handouts. when it comes down to it, the people who control the purse strings don’t really care about soldiers once they have no longer serve a purpose to them. They see wounded vets as a cost and a liability, this explains the poor care.

    • Anonymous

      You have just described the libotard demorat party

  • Wisdom Seeker

    Our troops need to be armed again. The misguided Progressives have turned our military installations into shooting galleries just as they have our schools. If we don’t trust them with weapons; they should not be in uniform. No more gun free zones.

    Semper Fi

  • Shay

    Somehow, this is worse than bad. We take these brave, strong, trained people and force them to become defenseless wimps in their own homes. They are good enough to sleep with an automatic weapon, but they can’t have a handgun with a CCP at home? Then we cry for them when they get mowed down at home.

    • smokehill

      No reason they shouldn’t be allowed to own privately-owned weapons in their family housing, or even the barracks (with probably some restrictions), but get ready for the inevitable accidents when the soldier or his wife fails to secure the gun and some kid gets it. The sheer numbers of troops makes it a statistical certainty, causing the also inevitable outcry from the Usual Suspects, like the Bradys.

      When I was on active duty we even had an Infantry armorer (the gunsmith who spends all day handling weapons) shoot himself in the leg with a .45 pistol that was supposedly unloaded. Screwups will ALWAYS happen when you are dealing with hundreds of thousands of people (millions, counting their families).

      We can improve this absurd situation, but it has to be done carefully.

  • Anonymous

    One of the first things out of the General’s mouth went something like…The soldier was being treated for psychological disorders brought about by his having served in Afghanistan. Maybe it’s the “present” military Psychologists methods that should be criticized.
    Or maybe it’s the psychological war that’s being waged against our soldiers In-Theater by the powers-that-be? There’s nothing much worse than being fired at while having to obey a Stand-Down Order or the silly ROE’s our soldiers have to endure. That would snap a wire in anybody’s knoggin!

    • Anonymous

      To answer the question: If a soldier is trusted with a firearm on the battlefield he should be trusted with a firearm anytime anywhere.

      • smokehill

        But most of our troops do NOT have any actual combat experience, unless you count riding in a truck through an area where they MIGHT be attacked by an IED.

        You really want to arm the doctors, nurses, lab geeks, computer programmers, drivers & mechanics who get to shoot a rifle once a year, MAYBE? And how many of them have fired a pistol in the past few years?

        Just passing out pistols to anyone in uniform is not just dumb — it’s way beyond that.

        Allowing SOME troops to carry, either openly or concealed, would larrgely solve the problem caused by our current STUPID policy, which amounts to a gun ban on post

        Those areas where guns are forbidden are ALWAYS where these attacks take place. For good reason.

  • Anonymous

    This administration simply doesn’t care about dead Americans: ft.hood,Benghazi,ft. Hood. Off to another fund raiser. Obama’s heart and mind are cold as stone.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t care who issued the directive to disarm the military on military bases. It should be rescinded so our troops can protect themselves from crazies and criminals. If Bush I did, it was dumb or if Clinton did it it was dumb. Gun free zones are nothing more than killing zones.

    • pawley

      What happens when the president visits such military bases. Is he not protected with firearms.

  • Anonymous

    Even Barney Fife with his one bullet could’ve stopped the shooter in his tracks.

  • batmanroxus

    Hey it’s shooting fish in a barrel… (sarcasm:(

  • Ralph Moore

    I was in the army from 1984-1987…an infantry unit ..I was in charge of the arms room and you had to present your weapon card and ID to sign out your weapon…ammunition (if needed) as issued elsewhere… realize the odds of a surprise attack on a military base are tiny,but in the time it took to issue weapons and then separately issue ammunition anything could happen

  • ramrod

    every soldier should show up friday armed to the teeth evryone wtf they gonna do this is disgraceful

  • Anonymous

    A military base is by far the least defended place next to a school. Only the military police carry side arms uless there is a detail to guard something important or of value and then the guards are only given a limited amount of ammunition. Sometimes not even that, you may get a club. It’s a joke really, one would think a military base in any branch would be armed to the teeth but thats far from the truth. Most weapons and ammunition are stored in two separte locations. By the time anyone was able to unlock the weapons, get ammo and set up a defense it would be pointless by then.

  • fred bannon

    My wife works in a health care facility and just recently she had a referral for a 24 year old vetran who overdosed , for what reason who knows, but we could all guess why.But the point is that she has no health care coverage,i can’t stand this government for what they are doing to our service people.IT IS DISTGUSTING,AND DEPLORABLE WHY THIS IS HAPPENING!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Glenn, that policy predates Bush Sr., it predates Reagan (I was a Marine under Ronaldus Magnus), it predates Carter…it goes all the back to at least the end of World War II (when my father was in the Navy). And it’s in place for one simple reason: the unit commander is responsible for everything that happens in his command, good or bad. One negligent discharge can end a commander’s career, particularly if someone else gets hurt.

    If you allow the troops to carry weapons even when their duties do not specifically require them to be armed, you’re going to have to inflict the consequences of an ND on the guy toting the weapon . . . and no one else. And I’m not sure that would be a good thing. Command must rest on accountability; you cannot run the military any other way.

  • Anonymous

    I remember the troops being effectively disarmed by being ordered to place all weapons outside the tent when Pinetta visited Camp Leatherneck, then return to the tent. The lame explanation was that this was out of respect for the Afghan – and other – troops who are never (??) permitted to carry weapons into an event.
    See: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/14/u-s-troops-asked-to-lay-down-weapons-before-meeting-panetta-at-afghan-base/ -The usual Insanity by some of our chicken s__t commanders.
    The last great real military leader we had , and probably will ever have, was Gen. Norman Shwartzkopf. Enough said…

    • smokehill

      Since there was obviously no reason the troops needed those weapons inside the tent, I don’t understand your objection.

      You think we don’t have ANY troops who don’t have a screw loose, or are careless? Granted, we’re talking about a fraction of one percent, but why tempt some loony, unnecessarily, when some VIP is visiting? If you walked the President, or some foreign leader, or Miley Cyrus, or Al Pacino past a couple of hundred thousand armed troops, you don’t think the odds of some loon taking a shot are insignificant?

      Look back at all the troops you’ve ever worked with. Every unit has its share of incompetents, hotheads, disgruntled corporals, or divorce victims or spurned boyfriends — any of whom can develop a short fuze, or want to go out in a blaze of glory to “make a statement.” Or just do something stupid and discharge their loaded weapon accidentally.

      Arming everyone, always, with no exception, is just as dumb as banning all weapons.

  • Anonymous

    Col. West had the best idea, arm a portion of the cadre at Fort Hood each day and rotate he duty. You really don’t want everybody on base armed, but armed NCO’s and Officers should be visible throughout the facility.

  • Anonymous

    Start with PTSD not being the cause of murder. Then allow common sense then rule recommendations for remedy.

  • fire lion

    Everybody being armed would not have saved those people. Never has a mass shooting been stopped by a civilian with a gun.

    SPC Ivan bought a gun legally and shot alot of people.

    People think you can just have a gun and shoot someone and be a hero

    Do you know how many friendly fire incidents the Army has? Now imagine everyone having their gun out. Who is the shooter? No communication ? no command and control? UH OH you just shot another legal gun owner. This is why cops have guns.

  • Steven Cornette

    I’m armed and staying that way till death. We have them 10-1. I kill three I’ve done my part.

  • smokehill

    I’m a retired Army Master Sergeant.

    Most of the people commenting here don’t realize that troops in the U.S. have not been carrying loaded weapons around base since back in the Indian Wars and even in combat zones weapons are often locked in arms rooms unless you are right in the battle zone (which admittedly gets fuzzy nowadays). . In general, up to the 1960s you could carry one in your car or your briefcase back before the anti-gun nuts went berserk. and even up into the 70s or 80s it wasn’t uncommon to find pistols in glove compartments or trunks, and on most Army bases you could keep privately-owned weapons in your home, though they were supposed to be registered with the local Provost Marshal (MP Hq).

    Pressure from the Brady Bunch & their puppets in Congress has increased the restrictions since then, but only in the past twenty years or so has it been very safe to pull off a shooting on an Army base (not sure about the other Services).

    Most troops are so unfamiliar with firearms, especially pistols, that allowing ALL of them to pack heat would be dangerous. Unless you are in a Combat Arms field it’s unlikely you have had any training since Basic (which isn’t much and is usually only on rifles or MGs), and otherwise you MAY get to shoot one magazine off at the range once a year — but limited number of ranges & range time and high cost of ammo tend to get a lot of that annual shooting waivered — and again, we’re talking just RIFLE shooting, not pistol for most troops.

    You don’t want to just hand out pistols to Army doctors, nurses, cooks, personnel clerks, truckdrivers, or those weenies over in Finance, or the computer geeks — in most places any rifle skills they may have once had are vestigial, and most couldn’t carry or use a semi-auto pistol safely. You would probably have more accidental deaths & injuries (not to mention lost or stolen pistols), over time, than from any likely mass shooting.

    Those troops that own their own pistols and request a carry permit should, in general, should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. In some dress-type uniforms this is impractical, but they can carry in a briefcase or purse, and you can always keep it in your office desk at work. This level of protection would certainly discourage all but the looniest attacker, and obviously make all our troops — and their families — safer.

    Let’s allow some troops to carry weapons, but let’s not do anything foolish by permitting everyone to do it.

  • Jonathan Leibowitz

    In this related article, yet another example of the importance of a vigorous, active, armed self-defense: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Zabel-teacher-Death-Taylor-162200815.html

The 411 From Glenn

Sign up for Glenn’s newsletter

In five minutes or less, keep track of the most important news of the day.