The US Senate Report on the Mass Shooting at Ft. Hood

Dale · Wednesday at 8:37 PM

Recently, there was a mass shooting at Ft. Stewart, in south Georgia, which injured five soldiers. This happened on the morning of August 6. Mass shootings on military bases are thankfully rare. It calls to mind the massacre at Ft. Hood by Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, on November 5, 2009. That attack left 13 dead and 32 wounded. That’s 45 casualties.

A committee of the US Senate issued a 91 page Report on the Ft. Hood shooting in early 2011. It is a most peculiar document.

The Senate report talks about “radical Islam” but it did not discuss weapons. The words “gun,” “pistol,” “revolver,” “rifle,” and “caliber” do not appear. The word “weapon” is used only in “weapons of mass destruction.” The Committee did not ask whether the crime was committed with a gun issued by the Army, or a gun bought legally, or a gun bought illegally. Apparently the National Rifle Association doesn’t want guns to be mentioned. Do they expect us to believe this crime was committed with a kitchen knife?

Fortunately this information is available from other sources. The gun Hasan used was a FN Herstal 5.7 semiautomatic pistol. This is a gun favored by Mexican drug cartels and it has been called a “cop-killer.” (Newsweek, November 13, 2009) The gun was sold legally, although some sources say that Hasan did not give his real name, so he may have used a straw purchaser.

“It is widely accepted among medical and public health professionals that the likelihood of death in an assault increases with the power of the gun.” This is from an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), July 27, 2018. Doctors do not agree with those who try to sweep the role of guns under the table. The fact is that larger bullets make larger holes and heavier bullets carry more momentum and do more damage.

The Report by a Committee of the US Senate:

Title: A TICKING TIME BOMB
Subtitle:COUNTERTERRORISM LESSONS FROM THE U.S. GOVERNMENT’S FAILURE TO PREVENT THE FORT HOOD ATTACK
Attack date:November 5, 2009
Report IssuedFebruary 3, 2011

Available at:

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/Fort_Hood/FortHoodReport.pdf

BobRyan · Thursday at 7:04 AM

Dale said:
Recently, there was a mass shooting at Ft. Stewart, in south Georgia, which injured five soldiers. This happened on the morning of August 6. Mass shootings on military bases are thankfully rare. It calls to mind the massacre at Ft. Hood by Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, on November 5, 2009. That attack left 13 dead and 32 wounded. That’s 45 casualties.

A committee of the US Senate issued a 91 page Report on the Ft. Hood shooting in early 2011. It is a most peculiar document.

The Senate report talks about “radical Islam” but it did not discuss weapons. The words “gun,” “pistol,” “revolver,” “rifle,” and “caliber” do not appear. The word “weapon” is used only in “weapons of mass destruction.” The Committee did not ask whether the crime was committed with a gun issued by the Army, or a gun bought legally, or a gun bought illegally. Apparently the National Rifle Association doesn’t want guns to be mentioned. Do they expect us to believe this crime was committed with a kitchen knife?

I don't think anyone thought that a gun or a knife walked on to the military base and started killing people.

Even if the crime were committed with a bow and arrow or a hand grenade, that could not be used as an argument against the military having guns, or knives, or bows and arrows on a military base.

The weapon is not the criminal. The human is.

Dale said:
Fortunately this information is available from other sources. The gun Hasan used was a FN Herstal 5.7 semiautomatic pistol. This is a gun favored by Mexican drug cartels

I suspect that a great many weapons that are on military bases today would be welcomed by drug cartels. what is the point?

Dale said:
The gun was sold legally

This gets back to the question of whether violent crime is more common in places with very strict gun control laws like D.C. or in other areas .

Dale said:
“It is widely accepted among medical and public health professionals that the likelihood of death in an assault increases with the power of the gun.”

I suppose that is yet another reason why military bases prefer to have guns that kill available on base.

Dale · Thursday at 4:57 PM

One useful item from the Report is that the military police did a good job. As soon as they were called, they arrived promptly on the scene, went in without hesitation and took the shooter down with great efficiency. If this were not true the carnage could have been much worse.

Dale · Thursday at 5:00 PM

BobRyan said:
I don't think anyone thought that a gun or a knife walked on to the military base and started killing people.

Even if the crime were committed with a bow and arrow or a hand grenade, that could not be used as an argument against the military having guns, or knives, or bows and arrows on a military base.

The weapon is not the criminal. The human is.

I suspect that a great many weapons that are on military bases today would be welcomed by drug cartels. what is the point?

This gets back to the question of whether violent crime is more common in places with very strict gun control laws like D.C. or in other areas .

I suppose that is yet another reason why military bases prefer to have guns that kill available on base.

BobRyan: << I don't think anyone thought that a gun or a knife walked on to the military base and started killing people. >>

Why was the Senate Committee, or its Chairman, afraid to acknowledge the role of the gun? What if someone wrote a report on the 9/11 attacks and refused to mention hijacked airplanes? It would be nonsense.

BobRyan: << I suppose that is yet another reason why military bases prefer to have guns that kill available on base. >>

Military bases do have restrictions on who can carry guns, when they can carry them, and what guns are allowed.

<< … many locations do not allow any personal firearms to be brought on the installation or stored in base housing or barracks. Troops living in barracks or other similar quarters who own personal weapons typically must register and store them in a base firearms storage facility. >>

<< In 2016, President Donald Trump suggested that troops should be permitted to carry concealed weapons on base. But then-Lt. Gen. Mark Milley, who was then Army chief of staff and is now chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress that he did not support the idea.

"I don't think soldiers should have concealed weapons on base," he said. >>

This article is from 2019. General Mark Milley was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at that time.

Source:
Can You Carry a Gun on a Military Base?

On what weapons are allowed, or prohibited, on a military base:

<< Weapons are a tool of the trade in the U.S. military, yet possession of weapons on installations is more restricted. >>

<< There are some weapons, however, that are illegal on base and cannot be brought onto the installation under any circumstances. These include switchblade and butterfly knives, brass knuckles, tear gas and dispensers, sawed-off shotguns, automatic weapons, silencers, knives or shooting weapons hidden inside other objects and weapons improvised from other devices. >>

Source:
https://www.militarynews.com/peninsula-warrior/news/air_force_news/weapons-on-base-know-proper-protocol/article_023a9fe6-ff1a-5e39-9f7e-69311cef00a8.html

Tuur · Thursday at 5:39 PM

Dale said:
Recently, there was a mass shooting at Ft. Stewart, in south Georgia, which injured five soldiers. This happened on the morning of August 6. Mass shootings on military bases are thankfully rare. It calls to mind the massacre at Ft. Hood by Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, on November 5, 2009. That attack left 13 dead and 32 wounded. That’s 45 casualties.

A committee of the US Senate issued a 91 page Report on the Ft. Hood shooting in early 2011. It is a most peculiar document.

The Senate report talks about “radical Islam” but it did not discuss weapons. The words “gun,” “pistol,” “revolver,” “rifle,” and “caliber” do not appear. The word “weapon” is used only in “weapons of mass destruction.” The Committee did not ask whether the crime was committed with a gun issued by the Army, or a gun bought legally, or a gun bought illegally. Apparently the National Rifle Association doesn’t want guns to be mentioned. Do they expect us to believe this crime was committed with a kitchen knife?

Fortunately this information is available from other sources. The gun Hasan used was a FN Herstal 5.7 semiautomatic pistol. This is a gun favored by Mexican drug cartels and it has been called a “cop-killer.” (Newsweek, November 13, 2009) The gun was sold legally, although some sources say that Hasan did not give his real name, so he may have used a straw purchaser.

“It is widely accepted among medical and public health professionals that the likelihood of death in an assault increases with the power of the gun.” This is from an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), July 27, 2018. Doctors do not agree with those who try to sweep the role of guns under the table. The fact is that larger bullets make larger holes and heavier bullets carry more momentum and do more damage.

The Report by a Committee of the US Senate:

Title: A TICKING TIME BOMB
Subtitle:COUNTERTERRORISM LESSONS FROM THE U.S. GOVERNMENT’S FAILURE TO PREVENT THE FORT HOOD ATTACK
Attack date:November 5, 2009
Report IssuedFebruary 3, 2011

Available at:

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/Fort_Hood/FortHoodReport.pdf

Um…

Okay. Let’s look at the cartridge round. It’s uncommon enough that the 5.7 x 28 didn’t ring a bell. What Newsweek called it really means very little. Frankly, their journalists don’t seem that familiar with firearms. It’s not like they’re Guns and Ammo. 5.7 mm put a little larger than a .22 or .223. Note that the more common 9nn is close to .35, and the venerable .45 is a little larger than a 10 mm. The 9mm, .38 Special, 10mm, and .45 are all bigger than the 5.7. A check has a good average weight for the 5.7 bullet at 40gr. A 9mm weighs in at 124gr; a .38 Special about 130gr; a 10mm about 180gr; and a .45 at about 230gr. The 5.7 is the smallest and lightest of the bunch, which makes the comment about larger and heavier bullets ironic.

Kinetic energy, though is 0.5 x mass x velocity^2, so the faster you push it, the more energy it has. The 5.7 still doesn’t seem all that impressive. One cartridge I looked at has a muzzle energy of 288 ft lbs. A 9mm I looked at has 333 ft lbs muzzle energy; .38 Special about 245 ft lbs; 10mm about 529 ft lbs; and the .45 about 676 ft lbs. Only the .38 Special comes up with less muzzle energy. It’s a tapered bullet, which improved aerodynamics, but that’s less of an issue with pistols.

“Favored by Mexican cartels,” even on the off chance that’s true, means next to nothing. Think of the young thugs who fire a pistol horizontally, maybe because that’s how it comes in the box. A quick check shows that rifles seem to the thing of the moment. Believe it or not, the .38 Special may be popular among some of the cartel. Another that comes up is the .22.

Honestly, the way such things work depends on the available ammo. My guess is that this will be the 9mm, which has become popular.

Since Newsweek isn’t a firearms magazine and firearm specifics isn’t something they deal with on a regular basis, them labeling the round a “cop killer” means very little. My guess is they referred to a coated round that would go through Kevlar ™ According to Wikipedia, the civilian 5.7 x 28 round isn’t armor piercing.

Like the .223, the 5.7 x 28 has a tendency to tumble, which can cause more damage. OTOH, I once found a .54 Minie ball that had keyholed (hit sideways) something. That meant that bullet had tumbled.

All these particulars mean exactly nothing. Why? Because arms are strictly controlled on military bases. Unless you’re required to have one at that moment, you don’t carry one. If you have a person weapon, you’re required to keep it secure. I think this is a central location on base, but not sure on that point. The issue is that not once, but twice, the shooter managed to bring their own weapon onto a military base, and not once, but twice, a shooter put it to use. It doesn’t matter if it’s a 5.7 x 28 or a .44 Magnum loaded with rounds from Buffalo Bore. The problem is that they had any unauthorized weapon on base.

Tuur · Thursday at 5:46 PM

Dale said:
Why was the Senate Committee, or its Chairman, afraid to acknowledge the role of the gun? What if someone wrote a report on the 9/11 attacks and refused to mention hijacked airplanes? It would be nonsense.

"The role of the gun." This wasn't Fritz Lieber's firearm in The Automatic Pistol, where said firearm was hinted at being a familiar. Once more: unauthorized carrying of weapons is not allowed on a military base. Yet both were carrying personal weapons.

Dale · 2025-08-23T17:54:55-0500

Tuur said:
Um…

Okay. Let’s look at the cartridge round. It’s uncommon enough that the 5.7 x 28 didn’t ring a bell. What Newsweek called it really means very little. Frankly, their journalists don’t seem that familiar with firearms. It’s not like they’re Guns and Ammo. 5.7 mm put a little larger than a .22 or .223. Note that the more common 9nn is close to .35, and the venerable .45 is a little larger than a 10 mm. The 9mm, .38 Special, 10mm, and .45 are all bigger than the 5.7. A check has a good average weight for the 5.7 bullet at 40gr. A 9mm weighs in at 124gr; a .38 Special about 130gr; a 10mm about 180gr; and a .45 at about 230gr. The 5.7 is the smallest and lightest of the bunch, which makes the comment about larger and heavier bullets ironic.

Kinetic energy, though is 0.5 x mass x velocity^2, so the faster you push it, the more energy it has. The 5.7 still doesn’t seem all that impressive. One cartridge I looked at has a muzzle energy of 288 ft lbs. A 9mm I looked at has 333 ft lbs muzzle energy; .38 Special about 245 ft lbs; 10mm about 529 ft lbs; and the .45 about 676 ft lbs. Only the .38 Special comes up with less muzzle energy. It’s a tapered bullet, which improved aerodynamics, but that’s less of an issue with pistols.

“Favored by Mexican cartels,” even on the off chance that’s true, means next to nothing. Think of the young thugs who fire a pistol horizontally, maybe because that’s how it comes in the box. A quick check shows that rifles seem to the thing of the moment. Believe it or not, the .38 Special may be popular among some of the cartel. Another that comes up is the .22.

Honestly, the way such things work depends on the available ammo. My guess is that this will be the 9mm, which has become popular.

Since Newsweek isn’t a firearms magazine and firearm specifics isn’t something they deal with on a regular basis, them labeling the round a “cop killer” means very little. My guess is they referred to a coated round that would go through Kevlar ™ According to Wikipedia, the civilian 5.7 x 28 round isn’t armor piercing.

Like the .223, the 5.7 x 28 has a tendency to tumble, which can cause more damage. OTOH, I once found a .54 Minie ball that had keyholed (hit sideways) something. That meant that bullet had tumbled.

All these particulars mean exactly nothing. Why? Because arms are strictly controlled on military bases. Unless you’re required to have one at that moment, you don’t carry one. If you have a person weapon, you’re required to keep it secure. I think this is a central location on base, but not sure on that point. The issue is that not once, but twice, the shooter managed to bring their own weapon onto a military base, and not once, but twice, a shooter put it to use. It doesn’t matter if it’s a 5.7 x 28 or a .44 Magnum loaded with rounds from Buffalo Bore. The problem is that they had any unauthorized weapon on base.

Turr: “Because arms are strictly controlled on military bases. Unless you’re required to have one at that moment, you don’t carry one.”

Good point.

Turr: “The issue is that not once, but twice, the shooter managed to bring their own weapon onto a military base, and not once, but twice, a shooter put it to use.”

By “twice,” I assume you mean the shootings at Ft. Hood and at Ft. Stewart.

Turr: ““Favored by Mexican cartels,” even on the off chance that’s true, means next to nothing. ”
You mentioned Wikipedia, so let’s see what it says.

“The most common smuggled firearms include AR-15 and AK-47 type rifles, and FN 5.7 caliber semi-automatic pistols. Many firearms are purchased in the United States in a semi-automatic configuration before being converted to fire as select fire machine guns.”

I am not sure if you think Mexican cartels matter. I do think they matter and I care where they get their guns, especially if they come from the US.

“Research has shown that many weapons and arms trafficked into Mexico are from gun dealers in the United States via straw purchasers.[103] In response to a 2009 GAO report, the DHS pointed out that the "majority" were 3,480 U.S. origin guns of 4,000 successfully traceable by ATF. These were the arms investigated out a total of 30,000 firearms seized in Mexico 2004 to 2008.[104] Most of the weapons end up in the hands of cartels.”

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smuggling_of_firearms_into_Mexico

Search

Search

The US Senate Report on the Mass Shooting at Ft. Hood

Dale

Senior Veteran

More options

BobRyan

Junior Member

More options

Dale

Senior Veteran

More options

Dale

Senior Veteran

More options

Tuur

Well-Known Member

More options

Tuur

Well-Known Member

More options

Dale

Senior Veteran

More options

Similar threads