Pentagon will allow more troops to be armed following Chattanooga attack. Your thoughts?

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:15:13 -0400

Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter will allow more U.S. troops to be armed while stateside and called for other security measures to be put in place following the attack in Chattanooga, Tenn., that killed five service members.

The decision was outlined in a two-page memo released at the Pentagon on Thursday. Carter in the memo said the ambush, in which an armed gunman opened fire at two military facilities, illustrates the threat posed to the service members in the United States by homegrown violent extremists.

“This incident and the ongoing threat underscore the need for DoD to revise its force protection and security policies, programs, and procedures, particularly for off-installation DoD facilities,” Carter said in the memo, signed Wednesday.

The secretary’s decision comes after a review in which each of the services was directed to submit recommendations on how it would bolster security following the shooting. Carter called for it amid an outcry — and proposed legislation from several congressional lawmakers — to better protect service members working in small, unguarded facilities like the recruiting station and naval reserve center attacked in Tennessee.

Carter’s memo authorizes commanders and civilian directors to “arm qualified DoD personnel for security, law enforcement and counterintelligence duties.” But it adds that those who are not engaged in law enforcement, such as military police, also may be armed “based on the threat and the immediate need to protect DoD assets and lives.”

Read more at ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/07/30/defense-secretary-will-allow-more-troops-to-be-armed-following-chattanooga-attack/?hpid=z5

Pentagon will allow more troops to be armed following Chattanooga attack

'This incident and the ongoing threat underscore the need for DoD to revise its force protection,' Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jul 30 at 2015 3:24 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:24:36 -0400

Good...deterrence is the best option.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2015 3:29 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:29:05 -0400

I'm confused by the memo. Installation commanders are already allowed to arm additional forces based on threat. So what is the actual change?

Response by SSgt Terry P. made Jul 30 at 2015 3:41 PM

SSgt Terry P. — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:41:48 -0400

Just a thought--but shouldn't the recruiters themselves be armed since they are very high profile military and just on the qualifications of their job be proficient in the use of firearms?

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jul 30 at 2015 3:53 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:53:24 -0400

I find it interesting GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad that the memo by SECDEF Carter refers to "the threat posed to the service members in the United States by homegrown violent extremists." The memo seems to deliberately leave out the threats from internationally inspired violent extremists, non-state actor terrorists, and others who are not "homegrown." Homegrown sounds more like a marijuana reference than a violent extremist reference :-)
This memo contains typical bureaucrat language with caveats like "those who are not engaged in law enforcement, such as military police, also may be armed “based on the threat and the immediate need to protect DoD assets and lives.” I am not sure what the legal meaning of "may also be armed" really means. I hope that there is more clear guidance and directives in the DoD, National Guard Bureau, and DHS secure message channels that authorizes all remote facilities with active duty personnel to be armed contingent on verification of training on the specific weapons they are authorized to carry.

Response by MAJ Matthew Arnold made Jul 31 at 2015 1:41 AM

MAJ Matthew Arnold — Fri, 31 Jul 2015 01:41:31 -0400

I certainly hope so. I work in many countries in Africa where the officers and Sr. NCOs are armed all the time. If they can trust their servicemen then we certainly can too.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 31 at 2015 2:53 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jul 2015 02:53:43 -0400

This just falls into line with what I believe anyways, everyone (who is of sound mind and not off the wall insane) should have access to a firearm for self defense. Lets not forget that it is a constitutional right, no matter how politicians may want to make it look.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Aug 2 at 2015 12:54 AM

PO1 John Miller — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 00:54:34 -0400

Looks like a great idea on paper, but I get the idea that SECDEF is leaving the actual planning up to commanders. I see that being "nuked."

I think the best solution is to assign MA's, MP's, and SF (Air Force Security Forces) types to recruiting centers.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Aug 2 at 2015 2:55 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 02:55:06 -0400

All troops should have the option of being armed if they so desire.