Accidental discharge at recruiting station, was this bound to happen? Price of protection at recruiting stations?

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:12:02 -0400

With hundreds of volunteers standing guard at recruiting stations nationwide, was an AD bound to happen? Does this change the view of quality or value of the efforts these volunteers are making? Does this mark the end of their efforts amongst many requests for them to vacate their properties housing recruiting stations?

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/23/recruiting-center-shot-fired.html

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 25 at 2015 12:17 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:17:20 -0400

Two things here. The weapon should have had the safety on. Second keep your darn finger off the trigger unless you mean to discharge the weapon... Common sense people. Sadly this is what happens when unqualified people, whatever their intention, handle firearms

Response by TSgt David L. made Jul 25 at 2015 12:21 PM

TSgt David L. — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:21:42 -0400

I said this before in another topic, but the law of averages says there will be a ND. It will likely be one reason the military disallows volunteer guards.

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Jul 25 at 2015 12:59 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:59:34 -0400

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member This is what happens when you have civilians trying to help that don't understand all the precautions that we in the military take to make sure we don't accidently discharge weapons. I think with the clearing barrels downrange the emphasis we put on safety in combat as well as the ranges while in garrison makes us more aware of the problems and issues with accidental discharges. Yea is still happens and we issue Article 15s, but civilian don't have that level of training. I think this worked against us in arming professional soldiers at recruiting stations. Just my opinion on the matter!

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Jul 25 at 2015 1:33 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 13:33:04 -0400

This is the same thing that I fear will happen when arming recruiters. Military service does not equal weapons proficiency and I heard about enough NDs in Afghanistan to know better. On one of my pre-deployment rotations through CRC at Fort Benning, we had an active duty LTC who could not qualify with the M9 pistol. I think recruiting stations will continue to be soft targets because it will be very difficult to have armed recruiters do their jobs at high schools and other events and even with trained civilians, that is not a long term sustainable force protection measure.

Response by SGT Aaron Barbee made Jul 25 at 2015 1:47 PM

SGT Aaron Barbee — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 13:47:47 -0400

On one hand, yes, it was bound to happen (LoA's always win in the end). On the other hand, it was completely and totally avoidable; but, then again, most NDs are. Does this mean we shouldn't arm recruiters? Certainly not the case. They are in a career that is emotionally exhausting, as well as potentially physically threatening in and out of the office. That being said, I'm all for recruiters being armed, clearing barrels being placed in front of the offices, and MP/SP personnel assigned and attached to each office to serve as security. In the mean time, I say if civilians want to guard our recruiters, they need to take some tips from the vets and attend a couple weapons safety and handling courses.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jul 25 at 2015 2:52 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 14:52:38 -0400

No such thing as accidental discharges. Negligent Discharges are prevented by the five safety rules. If only there was an organization that taught this to people from the moment they joined and provided most with extensive training in both weapons safety and employment. Maybe this organization could even have members experienced in this regular shooting, maybe even in combat.... we could call them the Armed Forces.
Maybe we could arm them.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/arm-the-armed-forces

Arm the Armed Forces! | RallyPoint

The outcome of the discussion "Concealed carry for CAC holders?" by [~222148:SGT Bernard Boyer III]. Below follows my skeleton letter to congress, based on the edits RP members have suggested to the 10 points. Anyone and everyone is welcome to edit and personalize the letter for their own use in writing to their congressional representatives. We sent a mass email on 3 January, the swearing in of the new congress, now it's a free for all. You...

Response by SGT Joe Sabedra made Jul 25 at 2015 3:11 PM

SGT Joe Sabedra — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 15:11:49 -0400

While I agree with all the previous comments there is the flip side where I have a problem with military command and weapons with ammo. I have been on many a guard station (Ammo Depots, Base security) and was not allowed to have ammo for my weapon. The Sgt of the guard had it but would have to run it out to me if there was a problem.

A balance would be a loaded magazine in the well on an empty barrel. I would rather have that and take me a second then no ammo.

Response by SFC Tyrone Almendarez made Jul 25 at 2015 3:39 PM

SFC Tyrone Almendarez — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 15:39:35 -0400

There more of a nuisance then help. Wanna help the recruiters? Enlist!

Response by LTC Ed Ross made Jul 25 at 2015 4:39 PM

LTC Ed Ross — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 16:39:12 -0400

If the military is going to allow servicemembers to carry weapons on post then three things have to happened. First there must be a carefully thought out policy on who carries under what circumstances. Second, those authorized to carry a firearm must have extra training. Simply qualifying with the weapon is insufficient. Third they should be authorized to carry only the service issued side arm, not their personal weapons. This last provision is intended to prevent many different kinds of weapons with different calibers of ammunition--inter-operability.

Response by SFC Walter Mack made Jul 25 at 2015 6:52 PM

SFC Walter Mack — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 18:52:14 -0400

We are not children. We are grown men and women who are expected to kill people for a living if it should come to that. Soldiers act like children because we treat them that way. If we treat them like adults, the opposite may be true. It's worth a shot. Service members are professionals. Treat them as such.

You will never eliminate NDs or any other negative aspect of our profession. We need to do our best to train Soldiers, without over training in a check the block fashion (which is ALL we do), then accept that bad things will happen.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 26 at 2015 1:37 AM

COL Charles Williams — Sun, 26 Jul 2015 01:37:39 -0400

Yes, negligent discharges happen.... we need to work thru this. Most Soldiers are not used to dealing with weapons 24/7.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 26 at 2015 10:15 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:15:29 -0400

“Reed told police that he was holding his rifle outside the recruitment center when someone asked if he could take a look at it. Reed agreed, and while he was trying to clear the ammunition from the weapon, he accidentally fired one shot into the asphalt pavement.”

Reed. Reed. Reed. So, someone you didn’t know just walked up to you and asked if he could take a look at it, and you let him? Are you kidding me?

Also, I’ve had more than my share of experience with the M-4, M-16, and the AR-15. They don’t accidentally discharge when you’re clearing them. Regardless, it wasn’t an accident. Getting hit by a meteor is an accident. Negligent discharges are made because someone can’t handle the weapon.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 31 at 2015 2:17 AM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 31 Jul 2015 02:17:09 -0400

Am I the only one who noticed that this was not the first time this "civilian guard" has had an ND? I'm extremely pro Second Amendment but take this man's guns away PRONTO!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2015 10:39 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:39:44 -0400

Hello, sir.

A bunch of armed civilians gathering together for an otherwise noble cause. Yes, it was absolutely bound to happen.

Reed handed off his AR-15 when “someone asked if he could take a look at it.” Really? Someone he didn’t know just walks up to him and asks to see his weapon, and he let them?

Racking the bolt to the rear and letting it slam forward will not discharge a round. It’s designed to do that. It will eject the round in the chamber and seat another one (assuming the magazine is still in place), but it really shouldn’t discharge. Someone, Reed or the stranger he handed his weapon to, pulled the trigger.

Getting hit by a meteor is an accident. That was just negligent weapon handling.