When you accuse a military unit of "panic fire" when it most likely wasn't, *I* consider that "vilifying"..

It's just the soldier in me, I guess..

Michale.....

It's so typical of wingnuts to vilify others for things they haven't done.

That's a hit ratio of 18%. Most of the fire was panic-fire.

Or, more likely, the Guardsmen went out of their way NOT to shoot anyone...

You play the new FPS, MODERN WARFARE II???

It's so typical of the Left to vilify those trying to restore order...

However, credit where credit is due...

CW went out of his way to avoid casting blame, noting that there is enough blame to go around for all...

Michale.....

The first thing I was taught about firearms is that you never aim a weapon at someone unless you intend to shoot them or you just may scare them into killing you.

That's what happened at Kent State. The Governor thought he could use armed troops to quell a disturbance even though he had no intention of shooting anyone. And the students, even though unarmed, managed to scare the guardsman enough that the guardsmen killed people.

While I certainly agree the development of less lethal weapons goes a long way toward safeguarding lives, reducing the chance of another Kent State, I also abhor the term "non-lethal weapon."

Anything non-lethal makes a poor weapon, just about any weapon can be lethal, and any weapon will scare people (with potentially lethal consequences.) Thinking weapons "non-lethal" could easily lead to a repeat of the mistakes that resulted in Kent State.

As for cutting military spending--Yes. Its got to happen. The military can use as much as it can get and we'd be wise to give it all that we can afford but the real impediment to saner funding levels isn't military.

Military R&D, operations, and funding all all to often exceed their sell-by date because we, the public can be depended upon for knee-jerk responses to claims of "soft on defense," "soft on terrorism," or soft on ant threat, real or imagined.

Its unfortunate that our system of government is a little too well designed. It works as intended with the obligatory unintended consequences.

We keep waiting for government to lead but in reality we've a representative government and it doesn't really lead, it follows. Problem is we're quick to loudly demand what we want but rarely even seriously consider, much less demand, what we need.

We can't afford the defense budget. All too much of it is pure waste. But we'll crucify the politician who cuts it at the polls while $400 wrenches and $1,000 toilet seats only upset us for a news cycle or two.

We keep blaming our bought and paid for government. But the real problem is that we are marionettes to hot-button issues and our government won't stop the knee-jerk responses and act responsibly until we do.

(1) Live ammunition locked and loaded

(2) Poor practical knowledge of the terrain

(3) Piss-poor leadership

It's the same recipe for any military disaster. While I am not apologizing for the Guardsmen's actions either, I'd like to take special note of the tally: sixty rounds fired, eleven hit.

That's a hit ratio of 18%. Most of the fire was panic-fire.

It's the sort of scenario you expect from people doing a job for which they have no training under leaders who don't know the terrain. The live ammo is just that final safety-failure. Kent State was a brilliant example of Murphy's Law at work in its human dimension.