Posted on May 14, 2015
2
2
0
See here's where Im concerned, and I've raised this.
By hardening our installations, we make our Soldiers vulnerable during peak hours trying to get into the installation. Hundreds. HUNDREDS of Soldiers and civilians trying to get on post but are stuck in dead traffic with ZERO security around them.
I feel like we're missing the point severely and we're putting our Soldiers at risk. Here's the reality, Just because we're not surrounded by sand and rocky mountains, surrounded by our own citizens, and within our own borders does NOT mean we're safe. It's been proven in many other countries.
By hardening our installations, we make our Soldiers vulnerable during peak hours trying to get into the installation. Hundreds. HUNDREDS of Soldiers and civilians trying to get on post but are stuck in dead traffic with ZERO security around them.
I feel like we're missing the point severely and we're putting our Soldiers at risk. Here's the reality, Just because we're not surrounded by sand and rocky mountains, surrounded by our own citizens, and within our own borders does NOT mean we're safe. It's been proven in many other countries.
Posted in these groups: 
Defense
Defense
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
2
2
0
Instead of raising the FPCON level I propose an open carry policy for all SM on title 10 or title 32 orders. BOOM problem solved, your welcome sir, MERICA!!!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Taking action on American soil opens so many legal issues you wouldn't believe it. If you happen to know where one of these camps is though you could always call in a meth house and have the swat knock them out...
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SSG James Doherty
National guard belong to the state 99% of the time. The governor would have to activate them to go after the camps. Otherwise it is the same long complicated process to send active our reserve.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google