Weapons in the hands of U.S. Military members on U.S. soil

Weapons in the hands of U.S. Military members on U.S. soil

The following few paragraphs are excerpts from this story: From Tenn. to Times Square, military recruiting centers prove easy targets.

After the shooting at a Chattanooga, Tenn., U.S. military recruitment center, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno said security at military recruiting and reserve centers will be reviewed. The Washington Post’s Dan

“While we expect our sailors and Marines to go into harm’s way, and they do so without hesitation, an attack at home, in our community, is insidious and unfathomable,” said Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in a statement.

Aside from the center in Chattanooga, the Army’s recruiting stations remained open for “business as usual,” Brian Lepley, a spokesman for U.S. Army Recruiting Command, told the Military Times. He added that the Army trains recruiters every year on how to deal with active shooting scenarios.

Harry Houck, a former NYPD detective, told CNN that it was time to change the military’s “gun-free zone” mindset for recruitment and reserve centers.

“I’m a Marine. And this really is hitting me a little harder here than normal that [these Marines] weren’t able to protect themselves at the time this occurred,” he said. “We need people that are armed.”

Personally, I find it utterly ridiculous that our military members are not armed while on duty, in uniform, in THIS nation.

As much as no one in the Obama administration wants to admit it, the fact of the matter is this; we ARE at war with members of the Muslim religion, they are called Jihadists and their goal is to kill as many non-Muslims as can be found and to do so in ANY manner necessary, collateral damage be damned.

I just don’t understand this *soft target* BS that our military bases and recruiting centers suffer. Our troops go all over the world to take care of business and they are well armed, yet the *powers that be* render them helpless at home.

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but don’t Israeli military members carry weapons pretty much at all times when in uniform? It seems Israel sees and recognizes the need for an immediate response to Muslim scum. 

I’m fairly certain that there will be yet another long and drawn out battle over guns, this time for the military and not just civilians, and I am just as sure that as long as the Obama regime is in charge of the Department of Defense the Joint Chiefs will all be ORDERED to stand down and not arm the troops on American soil, save for a few Military Police Officers on Gate Duty, loaded nuclear flight line duty and the like. 

Heaven knows, we can’t do anything to offend Obama’s Muslim brothers.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

This entry was posted in America 1st and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Weapons in the hands of U.S. Military members on U.S. soil

  1. You can expect nothing less from this Muslim sympathizer that occupies the white house.. Until he is thrown out on his ass…status quo….

    The liberals are loving it…

    It’s time to call to arms..

  2. minuteman26 says:

    Fred, the no guns on base policy all started with H.W. Bush and Clinton. Was in part a response to some terrorist attacks during the early 80s. One at Ft Dix N.J. sticks in my mind. Prior to that most bases were open and service members were free to have personal weapons in their quarters and vehicles. Was on active duty from 66 thru 86 and never had a problem. Security was then increased and more bases became closed with armed security. Funny during the Vietnam War we didn’t have any problems but then the public for the most part was pro American. Now with all the political correctness going on you don’t know where people’s loyalties lie. It’s past time to allow the troops to arm up and defend themselves.

    • the unit says:

      Yep, I was in the Reserves (Navy), two years active duty at Lejeune in ’66-68. Had base housing. No problem with my guns in house or vehicle. Base coordinated in season deer hunts, and there were areas uncoordinated for small game hunting, free to have gun and hunt in. Rarely on occasion base exit gate would do a little search to check that one was not taking government property out, but no search coming in.
      Even took my personal 1911 to the shooting range and was given .45 ammo. Actually still have some of that. Those were the times which are long gone.

    • BobF says:

      On military installations, people can still keep their personal firearms in base housing. Single troops in the barracks are required to keep them in the armory and sign them out. Having them in private vehicles is a BIG NO-NO. In the mid-90’s when I was stationed in Montana, we could have them in our vehicles as the base followed state law concerning transportation of firearms but that’s changed since 9/11. When I recently purchased a handgun on base, yes they sell them at the PX and BX, I had to sign a statement stating I will immediately take the gun to my quarters or leave the instillation by the most direct route.

  3. Wayne says:

    Political correctness has no affiliation whatsoever with common sense. In fact, common sense has direct links to conservatism and we all know how progressives (marxists) feel about republicans. No, it will take another act of congress to put the arms back in the hands of those who volunteer to defend the country. The way congress is moving right along, I hope it happens before the next attack. Great post Fred.

  4. BobF says:

    My military career spans three decades 70’s – 90’s and NEVER have military personnel, other than Security Police, been able to carry firearms on base. The only exception to this that I know of were a few select maintenance Senior NCO’s and Officers who carried sidearms during nuclear generations where all our B-52’s were uploaded with nukes.

    In 1975 I was stationed at Griffiss AFB, NY, single and living in the barracks. I kept my shotgun at a married friends house off base. Leaving for a long weekend and planning on going hunting, I picked up my shotgun and headed to work on base. On my way out the gate that night, they were having a 100% vehicle inspection. Seeing my shotgun, they confiscated it because it wasn’t registered on base; barracks personnel with firearms are always required to register and store all firearms with the armory. It ruined my weekend plans for hunting. I had to see my commander and explain what happened, how it won’t happen again and get a letter so I could have my gun back.

    When our B-52’s and crews deployed for Desert Storm, none of the aircrew were issued sidearms. The decision was made up above not to arm the aircrews in the event of a bailout over enemy territory. Our Bomb Squadron Commander told his aircrews to bring their own sidearms and keep them in the aircraft during the deployment. Our local gun shop had a hard time keeping up with the orders from the crewmembers.

    What I’m saying is not arming the GI’s stateside isn’t an Obama, Clinton, or Bush decision. It’s always been that way. Unfortunately, times have changed and the enemy is now living within our borders and our stateside troops are soft targets and are being attacked. I not sure we have to arm all GI’s but I believe at least E-6’s and above should be issued sidearms and provided the necessary training.

  5. dekare@aol.com says:

    I am sure this gun nonsense is a federal thing. Back when I was a city cop for a reasonably sized city, we were issued our guns, and told simply to not shoot ourselves or anyone else, unless we meant to. We could keep our firearms in our personal locker, or bring them home, or keep them in our vehicles, or carry them both while on duty or off. We would check our ammo in the locker room with other cops around, swap out magazines, unload and rack in a new rounds, and no one flipped out, and not one was mistakenly shot. We were trained in everything a responsible gun owner would do. Of course, we were trained in the use of firearms and more importantly, the safety of them. In all the years I was there…we never had an accidental misfire or was anyone ever harmed who was not intended. We could all take our guns home, clean them, add sights to them if we wanted, or flashlights or lasers, anything. Hell, we were even allowed to carry a backup weapon from our own personal stash as long as they were approved and we qualified with them at the range and passed.

    We were issued rifles in our cars, including AR15’s and/or shotguns, again, as long as we qualified with them.

    Later, I worked for a federal VA hospital (not as a cop) but within that agency. The cops there were trained way more than we were at the city. In fact, the only thing more important than training, was documenting it…over and over and over. The procedures for issuing and turning-in firearms was insane. I have to say…OMG, you would think the cops were being issued viles of the smallpox virus.

    First, cops were NOT allowed to take their guns home. They were not allowed to bring a personal gun on property. They are not allowed to carry their weapon while off property, or in civilian clothing, or in their POV. All firearms were kept in a safelike locker system in a locked armory. Every cop had to be escorted into the armory with no more than two officers and an armorer at one time. The armorer checked out the weapon, as well as three magazines, that were all pre-loaded by the armorer. He would then give the firearm to the officer, without any of the magazines inserted. The officer had to go to a some barrel chamber and insert his firearm into it while inserting the magazine and racking the round into the chamber then remove his firearm and carefully place the it in his super secure holster that requires twelve steps in drawing the weapon. Then, at the end of shift, reverse all of this when turning the firearm in. Then, there is the annotating and documenting each and everytime the officer is issued and turns in his firearm. The procedure in the SOP was over 10 steps each for issuance and for turn in.

    And if the officer ever had to draw his weapon, even for a second, and without ever firing a shot, not only was he expected to put this in his report (as would be typical with any law enforcement agency), but there was special forms that needed to be filled out as well, with committee reviews, and all kinds of investigating as to whether or not this was proper for the officer under the circumstances. Most officers, in drawing their weapons, were more afraid of the review board than they were of the person who might do them harm.

    The officers were NEVER allowed to clean their own guns. They could NOT carry a back up. The ONLY time they were allowed to handle their weapons, was during training, and that under close supervision. When I was a fresh young new cop, I would “play” with my duty firearm while at home, safely of course, and you know, just get to know it intamately. Get comfortable with it…maybe put on some soft music, candlelights. Kidding of course, but there was that phase of just getting to know my weapon, and feel comfortable with it, at home, seeing how it worked, looking at it, and maybe even a twirl or two like they did in the old west, all without strict scrutiny. I am sure I am not the only cop that did this when first issued his weapon. Just plain old get to know your weapon type stuff. The federal cops do not get this.

    Also, these cops were not allowed to carry tasers, and rifles were strictly forbidden. Also, these officers trained A LOT on active shooter situations, and I will admit, they were very well trained, and I think if there should ever be a situation where some shitbag thinks the place would make an easy target, he would find out, that these guys are ready for him. Sadly, however, the cops are armed only with 9mm pistols. Rifles, or the talk ever getting them, even if they were secured and issued only when absolutely necessary, were strictly verboten. All that training, and all that preparation, and with guys who are willing to face death and protect those around them, and they were being sent out with 9mm pistols. Versus what, AK-47’s, AR15’s, or any other rifles that are the weapons of choice by those that want to do lots of harm to innocent people everywhere. How is this not unlike that scene from the movie Gallipoli. An active shooter threat, and the higher ups blow the whistle and send our boys across the field to an enemy who is better armed and ready to kill them. All in the name of liberal mindset against firearms.

    I would like to say that this will only change once our boys are killed due to this idiotic policy, but it HAS happened, and nothing has changed. I would not shame a single officer, if ever that situation arose, and they were being sent off to fight an enemy iwth superior firepower, and they told their higher ups to piss off. It’s one thing to train for this. But it is an entirely different matter when it becomes reality. No job with worth dying. Not when the deck is purposefully stacked against those that are supposed to protect us. Now, I am not saying that our cops would do this, and no one can say for sure unless it actually happens. I am just trying to point out, that we have the means of equipping these guys properly, so that they have a decent fighting chance and better odds of not only surviving, but taking out these scumbags, and there are those in our govt that choose not to.

    I bet those that made these rules for these federal facilities, do not have the same rules in place for those protecting them personally. I bet our politicians have the best damn protection taxpayer money can provide. They would provide their security detail with a tank if they thought it necessary. But for those lowly soldiers and peasantry citizens, well, they shouldn’t expect to live forever, now should they.

    You could tell that whoever wrote the firearms procedures manual, was liberal minded and thought of guns as a dangerous and horrible thing and believed that they could hurt people all by themselves. Aderal level than we had at the city and county level.

    And don’t even get me started on the policy against veteran patients who bring a pocket knife to the hospital. I am not talking about full blown Rambo knives here…but the kind of pocket knife that any boy who grew up before the 1960’s carried with him wherever he went. Small little bone handled 2-3inch blades and a finger- nail cleaner. The kind your grandfather kept in his pocket. If a veteran was found to be carrying one, you would think he brought an M14 the way most of the hospital staff acted when it was discoverd. And of course, when the veteran goes to get an x-ray or MRI or other such care, he is asked to empty his pockets. And if a staff worker sees this god awful weapon of destruction, the procedure put in place, is only two levels down from total lockdown security protocol. The police of called in, the veteran is questioned and made to feel like a criminal, the knife it confiscated, and the paperwork is ridiculous. And all of this is documented in the veteran’s file, and if it happens more than once, the veteran could be required on subsequent visits to have to check in with the police dept first and be escorted to his appointment. How degrading is this. Anything to program America veterans and civilians against having anything to protect themselves with.

    This is the mindset of the federal system. I have to say, I can not help but feel that our federal govt is terrified of armed citizens and armed veterans.

    I wonder what the policy is for the secret service protecting these liberal twits in office. I mean, on one hand they want to be protected, but they are probably just as worried about some of their own praetorian guard taking them out Ceasar style.

    Anyway, as long as the politicians themselves are well protected, the hell with everyone else. It is more important that they themselves feel safe, than we ourselves and our own servicemen and women actually being safe. How sad is it that those that are trained the best in weapons, safety, and how to use them, are the ones least trusted. The security at your local pawn shop is better than any military base or similar type military facility. Our soldiers are sent overseas to protect foreigners, but are denied the right to protect themselves on their own soil. There is something horribly wrong with that.

    The lack of trust by our betters in an armed society is either ghastly ignorant, or, more likely, they are simply terrified of a free-thinking patriot with the power to do them harm. They have this incredible need to distance themselves from this ultimate check and balance of tyrannical power….I wonder why!

    Nothing changed after Fort Hood, and I am sure nothing will change today. This country is in need of some real commons sense leadership. When and why were the rules changed to begin with. I am sure at one time, our military was sufficiently armed while on duty and/or in uniform. George Washington, as commander in chief, trusted his men around him weapons. When did this change? Which president was the first to stop trusting his men and disarm them? I bet obama would piss his pants if here were to be surrounded but our finest soldiers carrying loaded weapons. I am starting to feel that maybe, just maybe, military service may be a requirement for political office. I have to think that one thru before I decide.

    I can only imagine how either angry or sad our founding fathers would be if they were alive today. More than likely, they would simply bow and shake their heads in disappointment and walk away. They gave us the blueprint on how things should be. The rules were short and concise and easy to follow. They were not lengthy pages of fine print in legalese. Simple and direct, and all of these rules depended on each other to work in conjunction. And here we are, with half our leadership and damn near half the country not only willing, but desperately fighting to do away with the one amendment that makes sure all of the others stay in place.

    People are not allowed to protect themselves, they are shamed if they exercise their right to protect themselves and their families, and we are indoctrinating our youth to hate or be afraid of the 2bd amendment. Saddest of all, is our own military is not allowed to do the one thing they were trained to do and do for everyone else in the world, and that is…protect themselves.

  6. Bunkerville says:

    How can civilians have concealed carry and our military denied the same right as “too dangerous”? I tried my hardest to find the video of that jackass military Chairman say on T.V. that too many people would get shot by accident. Smiling the whole time.

  7. Capt Ron says:

    I’m with you, Fred. On the quarterdeck, I always had a .45 and two magazines. The magazines stayed on a mag holster, the .45 in a pistol holster. Loading the .45 is quick.
    I don’t know why the recruitment stations didn’t get armed after 9/11.

  8. This is in reply to dekare but food for thought for everyone…

    And I don’t want to bring this subject up again on this blog right now, but it is necessary:

    dekare ask: Which president was the first to stop trusting his men and disarm them?

    The answer is Rutherford B. Hayes and his enactment of the Posse Comitatus Act, a compromise with the southern states that ended reconstruction.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

    There is an article on Foxnews today with Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond T. Odierno where he states:

    [Military leaders are in part hamstrung by a 19th century law that bars the federal government from using the military for law enforcement purposes.]

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/21/exclusive-odierno-clarifies-remarks-says-army-considering-arming-recruiters/

    While Posse Comitatus was the right thing to do in the 19th century, and is still good for the country today, I think that after 150 years, old laws should at least be modified to fit our modern day army and the new threats that threaten all of us. This situation has to be corrected.

  9. It’s no more complicated than this. Until we begin to give our military personnel stateside the proverbial “fighting chance,” fewer and fewer persons are going to be motivated to join the services. Obama already drained the generals and admirals who disagreed with him. His goal is to make the United States “on par” with other less powerful nations. I am totally convinced of this.

    And why does he continually favor Muslims? a) Because of his upbringing, and b) Valerie Jarrett, born in Iran, is constantly chirping in his ear, daily, hourly.

    BZ

  10. Greg Schmidt says:

    The Posse Comitatus was amended in 2006 and then the amendments were repealed in 2008. Either way, under the current climate there is no reason why any of our armed personnel should not be armed. I would especially add the recruiters, since they are some of the most visible members of the armed forces and come into contact with all manner of the public everyday. Ironically, the Coast Guard is not subject to the limitations of the Posse Comitatus, since they fall under the jurisdiction of Homeland Security.

Comments are closed.