New Reports say that Soldiers Killed by Muslim Terrorists Sacrificed themselves to Save Others

The latest news breaking on the investigation into the recent Muslim terrorist attack in Chattanooga, Tennessee indicates that Lt. Cmdr. Timothy White, who was the commanding officer at the Navy Operation Support Center in Chattanooga, may have engaged the terrorist in a firefight with his personal firearm. Other reports indicate that at least one other officer who was killed may have acted in a similar manner. If true (which seems likely), the officers acted in such a way as to draw the attention of the Muslim murderer allowing other unarmed citizens to flee for safety.

It was yet another heroic act by heroic men who chose to sacrifice their own safety and eventually lives in an effort to protect innocent life from the violent coward of a criminal who attacked their facility.

Via the New York Times:

Some of the Marines who were shot to death last week in Chattanooga, Tenn., effectively sacrificed themselves to save the lives of others, diverting the gunman away from a larger group of potential victims, according to a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation into the killings.

Trending: Toronto Mayor: No More Asylum Seekers!

“This could have been a lot worse,” said the official, who did not want to be identified because he was not authorized to discuss the investigation. “It could have been a horrible, horrible massacre — so much worse.”

The horrible violence perpetrated on our soldiers has prompted calls that our government should allow soldiers to carry firearms while on duty here at home.

However, there is a fine line between allowing soldiers the ability to defend themselves while serving here in the USA and taking care that our military does not become an occupying force. Our founding fathers were very wary of the military’s power and we should be too.

There are various legal and constitutional questions to allowing them to be armed while on military bases and during interactions with the public – but allowing them their sidearms does not seem as though it should violate law. The difficulty is that while wanting our soldiers to be able to defend themselves from violent criminals – we also do not want soldiers marching through our streets and carrying their rifles.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend