this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
125 points (100.0% liked)

News

32664 readers
4211 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

FORT STEWART, Ga. (AP) — A sergeant shot five soldiers Wednesday at one the country’s largest Army bases before he was quickly tackled by other Fort Stewart troops, forcing a brief lockdown, officials said.

Few details were immediately available about what led to the gunfire, but officials said the shooter was Sgt. Quornelius Radford, 28, who used a personal handgun, not a military firearm.

Radford opened fire where he worked but officials wouldn’t speculate about a motive, authorities said.

The injured soldiers are stable and expected to recover, said Brig Gen. John Lubas. The soldiers who tackled Radford helped ensure his arrest, said Lubas, who commands the 3rd Infantry Division.

“These soldiers, without a doubt, prevented further casualties or wounded,” he said.

This latest act of violence on a U.S. military installation — sites that are supposed to be among the most secure in the country — again raised concerns about safety and security within the armed forces’ own walls.

The Army said it’s investigating the shooting. There were still many unanswered questions, including the scope of the injuries and the shooter’s motive.

all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"Well clearly we need more guns in our military bases..."

- Politicians who want to arm teachers.

[–] ssroxnak@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Never understood why Republicans think issuing guns to teachers is a good idea. Letting teachers conceal carry if they want to? Now that's something I think could work. Provided the teachers get some sort of extra certification that proves they're extra responsible and not a nut.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most teachers are amazing people that I trust completely. I still don't want them to be carrying guns around my kids. For one, there's always the remote possibility that the teacher flips out and uses it in anger on a student or another faculty. Secondly there's the possibility that a student gets their hands on it. The bad things that might happen are far more likely than the slim chance of an active shooter showing up and a teacher actually being able to stop them.

[–] ssroxnak@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh I agree, children are more likely to be killed by lightening then a suicidal person hellbent on taking others with them. There's a reason the news media gleefully shove those events in our faces, they're incredibly rare. The way I personally see it, a teacher is already trusted spend a lot of time with children. And a person with a concealed carry license is trusted, and routinely vetted, to carry a gun at the grocery store or bank or whatever. Not only that, concealed carriers are less likely to commit a crime than cops. If someone is both a teacher and a licensed concealed carrier, and is willing to spend their own time and money proving that they're extra responsible and of sound mind, why not give them the option to take their pistol out of their parked car and keep it on their person while at school? Make a system where individual teachers have to continuously prove they're responsible enough to be trusted with a pistol on school. That would most likely weed out a lot of teachers.

We already "trust" police departments to make one of their least competent cops stand around a school all day with a gun.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

a person with a concealed carry license is trusted, and routinely vetted, to carry a gun at the grocery store or bank or whatever.

I'm not sure where you live, but in my state the requirements for a CCW are ridiculously low. Literally anyone who can legally own a firearm can get one. You don't need to have any training at all. You just have to pass a background check and pay a fee. There is no "routine vetting".

Not only that, concealed carriers are less likely to commit a crime than cops.

I'd love a source for that. I know it's true that, statistically CCW holders are less likely to commit a crime than the general population. However, it's also true that there are thousands of documented cases of CCW holders using their weapon for murder or suicide (or both) rather than self defense over the last two decades: https://concealedcarrykillers.org/

There is no comprehensive list of instances where a CCW holder actually used their weapon in defense, so we really don't know what the statistics say about likelihood.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Looks like "if everybody was armed it could be prevented" doesn't work all that well, who could have known...

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

More than most soldiers on base aren't allowed to carry weapons, they weren't armed. You think they all had guns but resorted to tackling him for fun?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Huh, that's weird... So it's safe for everyone to concealed carry in our cities and neighborhoods, but not on military bases?

Weird.

[–] ssroxnak@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most soldiers are too young to conceal carry. Also, the federal government doesn't let anyone conceal carry on it's properties, with the only exception being outdoor recreation areas like National Forests or Parks.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Also, the federal government doesn't let anyone conceal carry on it's properties, with the only exception being outdoor recreation areas like National Forests or Parks.

I'm aware, I think it's just interesting that this is the case on military bases, which you'd think would have the potential to be the safest places to be in the country, based on the arguments of 2a folks.

More guns means more safe, right? Then why wouldn't they allow them to carry on base?

[–] ssroxnak@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most soldiers are too young. And military personnel technically can conceal carry on base, but it need's the base commander's approval. So it is effectively banned. Why? The military as a whole is incredibly (and paradoxically) risk averse. You have to wear your 3-5lb ballistic helmet when you're driving a tactical vehicle, even if you're just driving it to a different parking spot 10 feet over because Sergeant Major thinks it looks better over there. Amongst the officers and leadership, it's a very big CYA culture. If one soldier dies by suicide on base with their personal firearm, well their answer is to just ban guns on base. Don't need to increase access to mental health providers, that costs money. Now it's not the DoD's fault someone got shot, we don't let them have guns. A Marine rapes someone? We'll ban all Marines from going off base, and make them all watch a PowerPoint on why rape is bad. Can't be the DoD's fault, we told them rape is bad. Oh there was a DUI on base that resulted in a bunch of death's? Not the DoD's fault, we said they can't drink on base. A bunch of soldier's died in a flash flood, knowing there was an imminent storm on this area known for flash floods? Oh that can't be the DoD's fault for making them train anyway, the now dead sergeant should have checked the base's weather page that nobody knows about. It really doesn't matter if servicemembers die or get hurt, as long as the officer's in charged covered their ass.

If you still check out reddit, go check out /r/military, /r/army, or any of their US military focused sub's. You'll see complaints of leadership doing this kind of CYA, bare minimum bullshit over and over instead of actually fixing the problems.

TL;DR The head honchos in the US military don't care whether or not conceal carry on base has the potential to make things safer. They just don't want to look bad and get a black mark on their file.

[–] rhymeswithduck@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yall keep saying soldiers are too young to carry guns. Then why the fuck are they allowed to be soldiers??

[–] ssroxnak@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

In most states you have to be over 21 if you want to conceal carry a pistol.

The same reason most gun control explicitly excludes cops from having to follow the law.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

If an army base cannot stop this, what can possibly be expected from a kindergarten school?

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 months ago

the shooter was Sgt. Quornelius Radford, 28, who used a personal handgun, not a military firearm.

Well thank god they clarified that bit so I can sleep tonight.

[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Rude of him

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

If an army base cannot stop this, what can possibly be expected from a kindergarten school?

Ban guns in the US

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Soldiers are people to. They have the same potential to go postal as everybody else. They probably also have less access to mental healthcare due to stigma in the profession.