I read "Palestinian." Early reports identified his family as being Jordanian, though.

Because someone might get offended. Same reason Grandma Lindqvist gets strip searched at the airport.

We didn't do more because we live in a country and a society that does not kick in your door and search your stuff because you show "warning signs". It takes a bit more then that to get a warrent, and it should take more then that. Hell if we did kick in your door for showing some kind of warning sign, half the cellar would be on lock down tomorrow.

A lot of Christians and Jews think the same way, but our government gives them a chance to kill the baddies with societies thanks. It is an interesting dynamic. Using religion to prop up foreign policy is a dangerous business.

I'd say I'm a human first and an American second. It depends on what you see as universal. F'd up Moslems, Christians, Jews, or whatevers see their religion as universal so it trumps all else and justifies anything that suits their ends, just as super-patriots see their nation as the ultimate.:borg:

+1

Hmm. We are all part of something bigger, and our actions have consequences that reach beyond ourselves. I.e., no man is an island.

Agreed. I believe there are two different types of responsibility. The first type is simply being responsible for your own actions. When it comes down to it, if you make a bad decision, the responsibility is upon you and no one else. The second type is making rational decisions to prevent bad situations from arising. While I do not believe people should be held responsible for this, people, especially in leadership positions, should possess the insight to make rational, no emotional, decisions to prevent bad situations from happening. Basically being able to suck up your pride for the good of yourself and your surroundings.

Preventing mass shootings is extremely difficult if not impossible to prevent and psychopaths have no sense of responsibility so I don't think this is a great example.

Which makes the gun people's unstinting advocacy of concealed carriage of weapons both understandable and necessary.

And the bad Major was stopped by gunfire. The time to do that was as soon as possible.

And Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) thinks bad majors are caused by guns -- nothing new there. Nobody of Sen. Schumer's religion should have anything to do with promoting an essential precondition to a genocide, but Schumer does and always has, having grown up in an environment where the full play of Americans' civil and human rights is disallowed: NYC under the Sullivan Laws. Skews his perceptions, leaving him a hoplophobic advocate for extra crime and more genocide. Fuuu-uuckk. :headshake

Fort Hood slayings prompt full Pentagon review
Link

Doesn't this imply that it may be some type of terrorism? A point that no one wants to admit may be a possibility.

IMO. it is political expedient to call it an act of terrorism, particularly if one wants to further politicize the act.

It doesnt meet the legal definition of terrorism under US law any more so that a radical anti-abortionist killing a doctor or even a mother killing her kids because she was "directed by God" to do so.

These are acts of emotionally unstable individuals who find a self-serving religious justification for their actions. They are not terrorists.

Though terrorists themselves aren't invariably the poster boys for good mental hygiene. There's rattle room either way.

The big difference lies in strategy. Terrorists will kill people to try to shift the society's views and actions. Shooting sprees have no social strategy behind them. I do not see any strategy behind this shooting.

I agree.

Individuals acting on their own, rather than at the direction of a politically motivated organization are not terrorists. These individuals, in their own delusions, may believe they are supporting those organizations, but they are not "agents" of those organizations.

My greatest concern with calling all such acts "terrorism" is that its potentially gives the government more justification to act in response in ways that diminish the balance between individual rights and national security.

Easy solution... all military personnel must carry their weapons at all times, on and off duty.