Why Wasn’t Hasan Stopped?

(COLUMN BY JEFF NEFF)  Something needs to be said about the discussions concerning the killings at Ft. Hood, TX. In preface, I share the same sentiments as any other American, especially as a veteran, in anger and resentment towards the violent outburst of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who now faces 13 counts of premeditated murder. So many things could have prevented or reduced the loss of lives that day and anything less than capital punishment would be another failure.

Hasan, a devout Muslim, has made many mentions of disapproval of American involvement in the Middle East. He also has been found browsing various websites linked to terrorism. People around him now state that he was strong in his Muslim faith, and talked about his convictions all of the time, which had raised suspicion. Furthermore, he allegedly had contacts with a radical Imam, and several agencies knew of his curiosity. But the FBI concluded that his activity was not linked to terror.

Now the American media is in frenzy about why he was not stopped before the tragedy occurred, saying things like:

“If we knew about his activities, why wasn’t he arrested?”

“Who is responsible for allowing this to happen?”

Media is obsessed with why he was allowed to continue serving in the military after so many people knew these facts about him.

So the question remains: Why wasn’t Hasan stopped?

The answer to this question is that it shouldn’t be asked at all. The question should be aimed at why civilian police carried the burden of protecting a room full of unarmed soldiers, rather than focusing solely on Hasan.

To focus only on Hasan and overlook the way the military has been institutionally disarmed at home sets a dangerous precedent for the Liberty of all American citizens.

Months ago, The Department of Homeland Security released an unclassified study performed by its Office of Intelligence and Analysis which sarcastically ridiculed patriotic non-violent Americans for their pro-American stance. (Read it for yourself.)

Hasan was clearly not pro-American. But for those of us who are, be very troubled if the U.S. Government brings this military problem into our non-military lives. Americans should continue to be able to research, worship, and align themselves politically without fear of retribution from the government.

For the government to haggle, arrest, or even scrutinize any American that displayed dissention would be a seizure of the Constitution. This includes those devout in their faith, those who regularly view alternative news sources, and those who participated in the Tea Party protests. Even you may be a suspect.

To prevent another attack of this type, simply allow service members to carry their weapons when on duty at home, or designate some personnel to do so.  Regrettably, unless the current military assignment requires that weapons are displayed, they’re not. Hasan may have been stopped immediately or totally deterred from the start if this practice had been custom.

Just like others, there is certainly a lesson to be learned from this crisis. Arm the military.  Let’s keep individual freedom first, and then settle on a solution.