Arming our Service Members

And yet we managed to have weapons and mags on our person in theatre...
Click to expand...

Sure, and what happens in theatre stays in theatre, right? That is away from US civilians and away from US government.

It is a balancing act. Folks are afraid of the military and folks are afraid of the police and folks are afraid of the government using either one of them against us poor civilians. How do you reconcile all of that?
 
leadcounsel said:
Anyone agree that it's time that Service Members, at least the senior enlisted and officer corps, be allowed to carry weapons on duty.
Click to expand...
I agree with arming the troops, but it should not be limited to senior NCOs and officers.

Do police officers clear their weapons and turn in their ammo when they enter the station house? Didn't think so. In fact, in many states, police are considered to be "available" 24/7 and, as such, are required to carry even when off duty.
 
Do police officers clear their weapons and turn in their ammo when they enter the station house? Didn't think so. In fact, in many states, police are considered to be "available" 24/7 and, as such, are required to carry even when off duty.
Click to expand...
As pitiful as some law enforcement agencies firearm training is, it exceeds many military personnel's training.

It certainly makes no sense to limit NCO's or JO's from carrying sidearms when at bases.

All the military bases I have ever been on seemed to have plenty of armed MPs visible.
 
Let's not get sidetracked by my off-hand suggestion for senior NCOs and Officers.

First, it wasn't meant literally nor set in stone.

Next, junior Soldiers are generally less well trained, less responsible, and doing more manual labor in the motor pool, etc. where carrying a gun may not be as practical.

Just the senior NCOs and Officers would offer a good start for deterance and defense.
 
Next, junior Soldiers are generally less well trained, less responsible, and doing more manual labor in the motor pool, etc. where carrying a gun may not be as practical.]
Click to expand...

But it wouldn't that big of a task to designate qualified soldiers from each unit to swing by the arms room and arm up at the beginning of each day. I was an MP on active duty and a QM FOBit while in the reserves. I don't know what the daily routines are for Active/Guard/Reserve units such as medical, dental, finance, intelligence, signal, etc.- but I do suspect they can come up with someone who has experience with rotating schedules.

They are only less well trained if they are trained less.
 
I know from personal experience that negligent discharges are a problem. Back in the day, one of my fellow MPs "cleared" his loaded .45 by racking the slide and pulling the trigger. The bullet shattered on the tile floor directly between my feet. :eek:

Having said that, the M-9s and M-11s of today are much safer to carry fully loaded than the old 1911s. And I managed to survive 19+ years as a CID Special Agent carrying a loaded .38 Special virtually every waking moment without shooting at anything that didn't need shooting. :rolleyes:

Allowing all the troops to carry loaded weapons all the time is a recipe for disaster, but allowing (or even requiring) NCOs and commissioned officers to carry their issue sidearm would provide a significant enhancement to military police and security forces, plus allow for armed intervention at places like recruiting stations, where military law enforcement officer aren't routinely stationed. :cool:
 
I was Navy. Most of my sea duty was aboard Destroyers. Of a crew of about 400, Officers and enlisted there were perhaps 20 that were trained and skilled at small arms. I suspect today there would be less. When on shore duty as an instructor there were virtually no small arms on my base. On another base for other duties that had about 150 stationed there the percentage was much higher. The base was rather isolated. about 20 miles away there was a reserve army unit that was designated to provide security during an emergency. the time for them to assemble and reach us I suspect would be about a day. That is why larger Navy bases have Marine MPs as guards.
 
A perfectly reasonable policy would be to require sidearms for officers and NCOs, with a backup for CCW enlistees to carry their personal sidearm while on duty with authorization from the commander, if enough G.I. sidearms can't be found or not enough NCOs on a shift for a credible defense/reaction.
 
Fort Hood didn't have MPs, it had civilian rent-a-cops. That's who responded, that's who took down Major Hasan, but not before one of them was wounded in a way that ended her career in law enforcement. But, they were not able to respond quickly enough to prevent Major Hasan from killing 13 people and wounding 30 more. A few armed soldiers in the group could have ended the attack much quicker.
 
This issue came up after the Naval Yard shooting as well. A friend in the service described the challenges in keeping weapons accounted for and secure. It would be a logistical problem to have personal weapons thrown into the mix.

That said, allowing some service members to be armed and supervised would be a very good idea.
 
A friend in the service described the challenges in keeping weapons accounted for and secure
Click to expand...

I know from personal experience that negligent discharges are a problem.
Click to expand...

I'm always dumbfounded by this and similar arguments.

On the one hand, the US military is allegedly the best fighting force the world has ever seen.

On the other hand, we basically concede that we aren't well trained enough (I even said that, and it's frankly true), can't be trusted with guns because we'll ND and lose them, etc.

In my time in the Army, deployed and CONUS, I reviewed a staggering amount of investigations and was otherwise aware of a huge number of NDs (including very serious ones) and lost equipment including guns, all over the world. For example, young Soldiers play trust games and bang - dead Soldier. Another for instance, two Special Forces guys in a 3rd world urban market in a foreign nation left ALL THEIR GEAR including GUNS in the backseat of their civilian car while they went into a store. Everything stolen in an instant.

Time to reanalyze our fighting force and training if we can't even carry weapons and be trusted.
 
It would be a logistical problem to have personal weapons thrown into the mix.
Click to expand...
How so? Assuming the base/post commander can allow personal CCW in accordance with local laws (basically, mirror off-base regs, perhaps with slight modifications).

I don't think mandatory arming of everyone is a good idea. I have seen plenty to make me leery of that idea. I'd much rather have optional arming with personal weapons...aka personal CCW. If it took an extra training course for military security considerations, I'd support that, as well.

Having said that, the M-9s and M-11s of today are much safer to carry fully loaded than the old 1911s.
Click to expand...
How so? Were the 1911s not maintained well?
 
How so? Were the 1911s not maintained well?
Click to expand...

Never heard of one going off due to mechanical failure. As an MP at Ft. Bliss, we were issued .45s with 5-round magazines, to be inserted while on duty, but never chamber-loaded unless responding to an actual incident where deadly force might be required. End of shift SOP was to (1) drop the magazine, (2) rack the slide, and (3) pull the trigger to demonstrate the weapon was empty. Supposed to do these 3 steps at the clearing barrel, but since that was usually too much bother for some of our troopies, the drill was usually performed at the arms room window with the weapon pointed at the ceiling. Unfortunately, it was not all that unusual that the soldier performed steps 2 and 3 without performing step 1. It got to be so routine that if it happened on days or mids, the hapless halfwit would immediately report to the CO's office for his Article 15. Swings kabooms would have to wait for their Article 15s until the next morning.:rolleyes:

Remember also, that very few junior enlisted, even in combat MOSs receive any pistol training whatsoever. And allowing them to walk around routinely with their M-16s or M-4s would lead to a GIGANTIC problem with lost or stolen weapons, and if they had a negligent discharge, say in the Chattanooga mall, I shudder to think of the results if they had their weapon set on full auto.:eek:

Nowadays Americans tend to think of their armed forces members as heros, and I have to admit it's a lot better than being called a baby-killer, etc., during the Vietnam era; but the military has always had a problem with drugs in the ranks, and I really don't think we're ready for troopies walking around with loaded M-4s stoned to the gills. :(
 
I'm always dumbfounded by this and similar arguments.

On the one hand, the US military is allegedly the best fighting force the world has ever seen.

On the other hand, we basically concede that we aren't well trained enough (I even said that, and it's frankly true), can't be trusted with guns because we'll ND and lose them, etc.
Click to expand...

Being the best at fighting as a force doesn't mean having the greatest responsibility as an individuals. In totality, the military has a huge cross section of society, from the very responsible to the very irresponsible, from those who think before they act and those that act before they think, law abiding and those not so law abiding.

So no, a lot of them CANNOT be trusted with weapons outside of supervised situations or outside of theatre. That would create a lot of accountability issues.

Time to reanalyze our fighting force and training if we can't even carry weapons and be trusted.
Click to expand...

It may be time to reanalyze our selection process for individuals to be in the military.
 
In my 20 years in the military, All of it the services used the venerable 1911 as the standard issue sidearm. I never saw or heard of a real AD. A couple were recorded that way to save someones butt. They were not an AD. I saw a film once that had one with a blank in the chamber. It was in the standard configuration, "Cocked and Locked". They put in a vice and beat on the hammer attempting to get it to go off. It didn't happen. they stopped when the hammer was so deformed that the hammer was touching the slide above the firing pin and would go no further. The other test was done with again a blank in the chamber and the mag loaded with 5 dummy rounds made to have the same weight as real 230 gr loads. Dropped from several heights and positions. It never fired.

It's not the weapon. It is the person.

Training, training, TRAINING!

Practice, practice, PRACTICE!
 
If i remember correctly, Bill Clinton is the one who changed the law/rule for our military carrying loaded weapons while not in combat. Someone correct me if I am wrong
 
The reason that our military isn't armed generally speaking is that they don't want to appear as an occupying force on U.S. soil. They have no legal or policing ability in our communities. As such it was determined that they shouldn't be armed while among the populace.

The flip side to this argument is that if our military roamed the streets armed, the tin foil hat crowd would be freaking out about armed military personnel roaming our streets enforcing the "man's" will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top