Arming National Guardsman, is this the answer?

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:06:43 -0400

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/guard-reserve/2015/07/18/florida-governor-orders-guard-recruiters-work-armory/30343993/

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jul 18 at 2015 5:10 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:10:54 -0400

Knee jerk reaction to a bigger problem...

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 18 at 2015 5:13 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:13:23 -0400

He took steps to allow them to protect themselves. More than others have done and he did it quickly. If we cannot trust folks in the military with firearms who can we trust?

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Jul 18 at 2015 5:18 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:18:27 -0400

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member It shows a lot of confidence in the military by these governors and let's see if other states start following in line right behind them. This is what happens when big government doesn't know what to do or say in light of the (5) individuals that lost their lives. State governments start working it out themselves.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 18 at 2015 5:20 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:20:23 -0400

The only difference between him and the other states that are now arms is that he relocated recruiting facilities into armories that are better protected. Oklahoma has had all of their recruitment out of armories for several years now. I think that is just good management.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 18 at 2015 5:21 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 17:21:17 -0400

It is a solution for the National Guard. I like it. I am in the National Guard and we come together one weekend a month to an Armory were we really don't have any self defense measure. Where else could to go to a remote area and find upward to 200 soldiers and know none of them are armed. It would make a suitable target. We have many cops in the National Guard so may letting them carry while in uniform be a step in the right direction or allow those with a CCW to carry during drill.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 18 at 2015 10:01 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Jul 2015 22:01:55 -0400

Not really. Armed or not those recruiters were going to die. That's how ambushes work. Having a rifle, pistol and even an M2 means nothing against a well executed ambush.

What those recruiters needed was better Intel so that the appropriate channels could have dealt with the situation. Not recruiters.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 19 at 2015 12:00 AM

COL Charles Williams — Sun, 19 Jul 2015 00:00:04 -0400

OK... that makes no sense...

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jul 19 at 2015 2:42 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:42:25 -0400

The answer is arming the entire Armed Forces https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/arm-the-armed-forces

Response by SGT Beau Thomas made Jul 19 at 2015 10:31 PM

SGT Beau Thomas — Sun, 19 Jul 2015 22:31:02 -0400

I can tell you as a National Guard soldier that at least half the soldiers have been carrying weapons to drill for years. In Texas, everyone is allowed to keep a gun in their POV and many have a CCL. We also have many Peace officers who carry. It's a good idea that at least a few carry weapons imho because it's a pretty target rich environment having 200-300 unarmed soldiers forming up outside an armory, pretty much defenseless.

Response by MSG Morgan Fiszel, CPCM, CFCM made Jul 20 at 2015 7:43 AM

MSG Morgan Fiszel, CPCM, CFCM — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 07:43:15 -0400

It is only part of the answer. Those guys had no chance in a soft store front. If they were armed with pistols it would have made zero difference. What would they have done, return fire with pistols into a parking lot, beyond that a busy road? All uniformed personnel should have a side arm, at minimum. Increased presence and a stronger looking force would go a long way. The average Guardsman is far from proficient with firearms though; range time either quarterly or at least semi-annually would be a must have.

Response by SGT(P) Bruce Van Havermaet made Jul 20 at 2015 3:20 PM

SGT(P) Bruce Van Havermaet — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:20:20 -0400

I am for that every state should do this

Response by SSG Dennis Ward made Jul 20 at 2015 6:26 PM

SSG Dennis Ward — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:26:52 -0400

I think having armed personnel on the duty roster would be a starting point. Duty such as SDNCO/ OFF should be an armed position, as well as gate guards.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 20 at 2015 6:31 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:31:16 -0400

We need to do something. I'm not sure what it is but our troops should afforded the best protection. They face enough worry in a combat zone.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jul 21 at 2015 3:56 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:56:03 -0400

If things keep going the way they are, we will soon need to adopt the Israeli Defense Force's policy on carrying weapons on and off duty.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 22 at 2015 12:18 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:18:08 -0400

I was a recruiter for the national guard in texas about ten years ago. I worked in a very country area. Right before I started the Texas republic group (a radical group that believes Texas should be it's own country) had cornered a army recruiter on one of the back roads and beat him bloody for trying to get one of their kids into a federal army. Yes, I feel that we should have been allowed to carry many years ago. We go to people's houses, in rough neighbors hoods every day and have no protection. I carried a knife everywhere I went, but if someone had ever pulled a gun on me, I'd be in trouble. Recruiters have been sitting ducks for years, and is time we allowed them to protect themselves! Across all services, not just the guard (who is apparently the most sane, intelligent and caring about their soldiers!

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 7:41 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:41:25 -0400

For some reason,NH reaffirmed, today, that it is unlawful for us to have POF on our persons or vehicles. Live free or die

Response by SGT Glenn E Moody made Jul 23 at 2015 10:42 PM

SGT Glenn E Moody — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:42:39 -0400

yes what are they waiting for its about time

Response by CPL Steve Connolly made Jul 26 at 2015 3:46 PM

CPL Steve Connolly — Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:46:11 -0400

I can't tell you how many times I pulled guard duty or security for the Esplanade and I either had no weapon or a weapon without rounds! I spent a year in Iraq with a weapon and real rounds and one hand tired behind our backs with redicules ROE. It has never made any sense to me why we would not be allowed to protect ourselves the reality of that insanity has come home for 5 service members on American soil!

Response by SPC David Willis made Feb 27 at 2018 4:47 PM

SPC David Willis — Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:47:49 -0500

Indiana pushed it through, there are quite a few hoops to jump through though. You cant just qualify expert and carry one around.