Many news outlets are calling it "the worst shooting to take place on a U.S. military base", and then compare it to Fort Hood.  Yet, I'm left to wonder, what exactly is the basis for that comparison?  By that I mean, at Fort Hood there were thirteen casualties.  While there were also thirteen casualties at the D.C. Navy Yard.  However, in the D.C. Navy yard, the shooter is actually among the thirteen casualties, meaning only twelver were innocent bystanders; while at Fort Hood, the shooter went on to be tried in a court of law, stating that all thirteen deaths at Fort Hood were innocent bystanders.  Now, if the comparison was being made under the ratio of military personnel versus civilian, that perhaps there was more military than civilian killed at Fort Hood, maybe I could understand the comparison... but as far as I know, they're not releasing information on the victims of the D.C. Navy Yard shooting yet, so it wouldn't be possible to be able to make even that kind of comparison??  *shrugs*
   As much as I'd love to see better gun regulations put into play (note: not as the extreme gun activists think, not to take away all firearms from everybody, just better safety precautions) like psychological screenings for firearms, etc... there's still the chance it might not fully resolve all issues.