Posted on Nov 4, 2014
Concealed carry for all current service members (CAC holders)?
295K
1.94K
846
350
344
6
Should uniformed military be allowed to conceal carry any were in the U.S. with a CAC as a license due to increased threats to military personnel?
Concealed Carry
Firearms and Guns
Gun Control
2nd Amendment
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 337
2
2
0
I tend to agree with LTC Paul Heinlein as long as the service member has a Concealed Carry Deadly Weapon License for the state they reside/stationed. Additionally, the service member should have a current weapon (handgun) qualification.....the chain of command should be notified of those that intend to carry. Mine license is through the state of KY and here's the requirements:
http://governors.e-archives.ky.gov/_govpatton/dec_2003/gov.state.ky.us/cabinets/kentuckystatepolice.org/conceal.htm
http://governors.e-archives.ky.gov/_govpatton/dec_2003/gov.state.ky.us/cabinets/kentuckystatepolice.org/conceal.htm
Kentucky State Police: Concealed Deadly Weapons
Kentucky State Police Concealed Carry of Deadly Weapons Information
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
CSM I agree, my only problem with the ccp is that it's not reciprocal with every state. I have a license in pa but I travel routinely and my ccp isn't honored every were.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I totally agree! I just had a discussion with the state of Washington about the CCW. They wanted to charge me 52.50 because I needed fingerprints. I told them that I currently have a TS/SCI clearance and my fingerprints were all over in the federal database. It didn't matter, it still cost me 52.50. I think we should fall under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act.
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Brother we should be incorporated into that law.......We're federal servants why are we not is my question?
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I keep my CAC in my wallet when I carry it. I don't know if that counts as concealed or not but I think I should be allowed to do that.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Good question...I think it's time to consider a federal CC license...that is truly the question...or solution. What other groups are being targeted though? Blacks, Chriatians, Jews, Muslims, do they all deserve to have CC license because of the increased threat? I do think we should always carry, sort of like a Sheriff or State Police, they are obligated to carry off-duty. We do need to realize however that there is much immaturity in the military and this should be limited to NCOS, Officers, Warrants, and exclude E1-E3...especially since a get 22 is the age to buy handguns in many states.
(2)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SSG(P) (Join to see) Good points about the possibility of further expansion! I want to try to keep our focus on the incremental improvement we here on RP might be able to have for ourselves and our families protection. would you mind taking a look at most above on the 9 point broad brush stroke ideas for letters to congress, help us improve the simple plan so we can get a message going and maybe make a change on something that should be obvious!
(1)
(0)
3
2
1
I'd say no. There are CHL/CCW procedures in most states. Some even have MIL discounts. I've seen way too many SMs with serious behavioral health issues (but no S3 profile) to support a generic CAC = CHL/CCW policy.
(3)
(1)
Capt Richard I P.
CPT (Join to see) Id like to second the invite from SSG(P) (Join to see) to check out the 9 points Im working on, I already added point 9 for you, take a look and see if you have more suggestions.
(2)
(0)
SSgt Lawrence Good
Lots of comments here on RallyPoint about the training level needed for military members to be allowed to carry concealed in whatever state they are stationed in, or on base.
First of all, all American have a basic right to self defense. This doesn't change in the military, even when we constrain some individual choices on how to do so for convenience of the 'system' an dfor mission effectiveness. The principle remains, the application varies a little.
You don't need to be a pistol "expert" to safely and effectively carry a pistol for self protection. I make my current living partly from firearms training. NRA Training counselor, NRA Pistol Trainer for 7 years now. I can confidently say that the *minimum* skills necessary to be safe in public can be taught in a day. The judgement for when to use it can be introduced in a day and requires lifelong commitment to master. We've all been exposed to most of this already.
It's honestly much harder to master the physical skills and judgement necessary for driving a car than to carry a pistol in public. Most people do benefit *quite a bit* from attending training, even most military folks need some brush-up on fundamentals of pistol safety and operation. They also need to explore the concept of carrying "concealed" as opposed to as part of their duty gear, and ROE for being in a civilian self-defense situation.
Would you rather have a modicum of trust for the judgement of a relatively untrained individual who felt the sheepdog call strongly enough to raise their right hand and sign a blank check to the people of the United States of America, or would you rather have them disarmed with a target on their chest for ISIL/Daeesh to aim at?
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
First of all, all American have a basic right to self defense. This doesn't change in the military, even when we constrain some individual choices on how to do so for convenience of the 'system' an dfor mission effectiveness. The principle remains, the application varies a little.
You don't need to be a pistol "expert" to safely and effectively carry a pistol for self protection. I make my current living partly from firearms training. NRA Training counselor, NRA Pistol Trainer for 7 years now. I can confidently say that the *minimum* skills necessary to be safe in public can be taught in a day. The judgement for when to use it can be introduced in a day and requires lifelong commitment to master. We've all been exposed to most of this already.
It's honestly much harder to master the physical skills and judgement necessary for driving a car than to carry a pistol in public. Most people do benefit *quite a bit* from attending training, even most military folks need some brush-up on fundamentals of pistol safety and operation. They also need to explore the concept of carrying "concealed" as opposed to as part of their duty gear, and ROE for being in a civilian self-defense situation.
Would you rather have a modicum of trust for the judgement of a relatively untrained individual who felt the sheepdog call strongly enough to raise their right hand and sign a blank check to the people of the United States of America, or would you rather have them disarmed with a target on their chest for ISIL/Daeesh to aim at?
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Lawrence Good
the *minimum* skills necessary to be safe in public can be taught in a day. The judgement for when to use it can be introduced in a day and requires lifelong commitment to master. We've all been exposed to most of this already.
It's honestly much harder to master the physical skills and judgement necessary for driving a car than to carry a pistol in public. Most people do benefit *quite a bit* from attending training, even most military folks need some brush-up on fundamentals of pistol safety and operation. They also need to explore the concept of carrying "concealed" as opposed to as part of their duty gear, and ROE for being in a civilian self-defense situation.
Would you rather have a modicum of trust for the judgement of a relatively untrained individual who felt the sheepdog call strongly enough to raise their right hand and sign a blank check to the people of the United States of America, or would you rather have them disarmed with a target on their chest for ISIL/Daeesh to aim at?
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
It's honestly much harder to master the physical skills and judgement necessary for driving a car than to carry a pistol in public. Most people do benefit *quite a bit* from attending training, even most military folks need some brush-up on fundamentals of pistol safety and operation. They also need to explore the concept of carrying "concealed" as opposed to as part of their duty gear, and ROE for being in a civilian self-defense situation.
Would you rather have a modicum of trust for the judgement of a relatively untrained individual who felt the sheepdog call strongly enough to raise their right hand and sign a blank check to the people of the United States of America, or would you rather have them disarmed with a target on their chest for ISIL/Daeesh to aim at?
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Lawrence Good
Would you rather have a modicum of trust for the judgement of a relatively untrained individual who felt the sheepdog call strongly enough to raise their right hand and sign a blank check to the people of the United States of America, or would you rather have them disarmed with a target on their chest for ISIL/Daeesh to aim at?
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
There will be mistakes. But we work in the Profession of Arms. We are meant to take risks on behalf of our society. More military members get killed in car accidents each year than die in the combat zones. The number of mistakes will be small, and everything comes with trade-offs.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Ok I've herd a lot of great comments...what if a cac card would be the basis accompanied along with a conceal carry/deadly force training. The cac card would be a federal ccp that way service members would be covered all over the USA since some ccp's not reciprocal to all states, the enemy is bringing the fight to us so we must stand ready to protect ourselves and end this the day before yesterday!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I would certainly hope that more than the CAC would be needed to establish that a person can operate a firearm without endangering themselves or (innocent) others. I know that many on here are in the Army and may be under the illusion that everyone in the military has had significant training/experience in safe operations of firearms. That is simply not correct.
Although I have become reasonably proficient in the last five years, during my first 14 years in the Navy Reserve I had fired 10 rounds from a pistol in Navy training. I had fired an additional 50+ rounds at a local firing range. I fired more pistol rounds the first day of weapons training at Camp Atterbury in 2009 than I had fired in the rest of my life. Camp Atterbury was also the first time I fired a rifle of any sort (not strictly applicable to the question of concealed carry, I realize).
I don't think it is unreasonable to use the CAC as a basis for establishing someone's status as responsible citizen, but I would hope there would be some certification of the ability to safely operate a weapon. There's also the question of whether one would extend this privilege to government employees and contractors who hold CACs.
Although I have become reasonably proficient in the last five years, during my first 14 years in the Navy Reserve I had fired 10 rounds from a pistol in Navy training. I had fired an additional 50+ rounds at a local firing range. I fired more pistol rounds the first day of weapons training at Camp Atterbury in 2009 than I had fired in the rest of my life. Camp Atterbury was also the first time I fired a rifle of any sort (not strictly applicable to the question of concealed carry, I realize).
I don't think it is unreasonable to use the CAC as a basis for establishing someone's status as responsible citizen, but I would hope there would be some certification of the ability to safely operate a weapon. There's also the question of whether one would extend this privilege to government employees and contractors who hold CACs.
(2)
(0)
How would this differ from Federal employees with CAC cards? I just recently joined the NRA and looking to take classes for CCP. My office building was just blocks from Navy Yard. The shooter stayed at the hotel next to my building. Perhaps if a federal employee with CCP could have helped
(2)
(0)
PV2 (Join to see)
Capt Richard I P. I think at first focus on the military active and reserve, and then expand it to Federal Civilians, but then again a part of me says to include feds all at once. I'm truly torn on this in light of the Navy Yard shooting.
(0)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
PV2 (Join to see) I definitely understand being torn on the topic. I want us all armed now, but I think you're right, politically exploiting the simplicity of "Arm the Armed Forces" is just too good to pass up, knowing after momentum builds we can expand it. Check out the 9 point post i made and see if there's anything you would want to add or take a way. Maybe in a few days or weeks we'll have a solid foundation to start writing some of our newly elected congress.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
If you are going to let every member of the armed forces have CCDW's I think there needs to be some sort of qualification for those members who aren't issued pistols. Make it at their own expense (US Gov't would never pay for everyone to pistol qual) but I don't agree with GIVING every servicemember a CCDW just on the merit that they are in the service. Just like there are limitations on civilian CCDW holders, there should be limits on servicemember's as well (basically have the same regulations).
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
True Sgt! Civilian side you get a license (at least in pa) as long as you don't have any convictions or psych problems
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
True...However I think it would be in the best interest in the Armed Services from a liability standpoint.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think we should after all we are the most qualified to do so because of our experiences with weapons. However with events such as Ft Hood I have to wonder if its a good idea. Oh yeah, here you go crazy, you can conceal a handgun.
(2)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
i do feel that we should be able to posses concealed handgun lics bc we are military and the potential threats that we face as current events states ISIS/ISIL are at large and we need to protect ourselves, however does anyone think this will actually be passed by congress? they are trying to restrict weapons as much as possible due to incidences all over the nation involving shootings. I guarantee a lot of people will be infuriated if this law of restricting weapons ever passes.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SPC (Join to see) I understand your pessimism, but there is cause for hope. 1. LEOSA has momentum, and keeps getting expanded. 2. A new Congress was just elected and the party of the majority claims to be pro gun rights and pro-military, lets make them put their money where their mouths are and 3. We have a strong community in the military and a representation of it here on RP, check out the 10 points and consider writing your congressmen based on it. The only way to guarantee it wont happen is to do nothing!
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google