Should Military personnel be allowed to carry firearms on Millitary Installations?

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:45:08 -0400

Response by SPC Thomas Baldwin made Jun 14 at 2015 8:51 PM

SPC Thomas Baldwin — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:51:08 -0400

I thin it needs to be considered with the incidents recently. But this has to have a policy and standardsr that has to be enforced stringently.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Jun 14 at 2015 9:10 PM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 21:10:30 -0400

I don't see why they wouldn't, its not like there aren't a lot of people doing it anyway. Camp Lejeune has an area on base for hunting.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Jun 14 at 2015 10:28 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 22:28:07 -0400

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 LTC Kevin B. made Jun 14 at 2015 11:28 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 23:28:13 -0400

Seems like an easy answer at first, but keep in mind that this policy change would also put weapons into the hands of latent service members with the mindset of Nidal Hasan, Aaron Alexis, and Hasan Akbar. While having service members being armed could minimize the damage of individual incidents, putting weapons into the hands of more people just might lead to more incidents. The net effect may or may not be positive. I'm not advocating against this idea; I'm just saying that 2nd and 3rd order effects also need to be considered.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 15 at 2015 8:08 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:08:07 -0400

Based on my MOS, training, the amount of guns I own, and being a concealed carry license holder I want to say yes, absolutely. However, there is a huge BUT coming. Based on the fact that I am on month 10 of my 1SG time in Afghanistan at a senior level staff and I have seen close to 10 negligent discharges makes me say absolutely not without some other form of approval/training.

Here is an example why with a little background info. I work on a staff that isn't a unit, it only exists here in theater and is both Joint and Coalition. Though a SOF headquarters the majority fills are conventional staff Officers/NCOS and there are plenty of reservists. We have Berettas as well as Glock 19s for sidearms along with some Sigs and 1911s.

"Hey 1SG, I want to swap my Beretta for a Glock"
"Why?"
"I like the Glock better and the guy I replaced had one."
"So? Have you been trained and or qualified on it?"
"Well, I own one and I've shot it before."
"So you want me to give you a pistol you haven't been trained on that you don't have organic to your unit because you own one and like it?"
"Well, yeah."
"Get out of my office."

So, Chief, while it makes total sense you and I it has such disaster potential when you factor in negligence and entitlement.

Response by SN Aaron Horsley made Jun 15 at 2015 7:34 PM

SN Aaron Horsley — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:34:48 -0400

Yes I do, who else is more qualified?

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 15 at 2015 9:17 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 21:17:10 -0400

I think so 100%. More good guys armed = more bullets in people trying to do what Maj Hasan did. We have carried our weapons for the past 10+ years in the fwd locations, I dont see why it is not a good idea here.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 16 at 2015 4:23 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 04:23:14 -0400

There is a high probability that it will not occur anytime soon on CONUS military bases. Civilian law enforcement in addition to Military police are considered to be sufficient for any violations of law that may occur on CONUS military bases. Although every American soldier possess the required skills to handle a military firearm, not all soldiers possess the maturity to maintain a military firearm in their possession on base nor within the surrounding civilian communities. With that said, any soldier can go off post and apply for a civilian concealed weapons permit at the local city hall. After applying at city hall, there is an approximate 30 day waiting period where the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducts a criminal records check. Once cleared, the city hall will approve a concealed weapons permit for nearly any soldier that provides weapons proficiency evidence; usually a military ID card or a DD-214 is enough. The civilian concealed weapons permit is for personal protection purposes within civilian communities and does not permit the soldier to carry the weapon on post. In closing, the recent shootings on a few CONUS military bases occurred simply because of the availability of firearms.

Response by SrA Jonathan Carbonaro made Jun 16 at 2015 8:35 AM

SrA Jonathan Carbonaro — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 08:35:28 -0400

Personally I'm all for it.

That being said, I'm an Air Force Combat Arms Instructor, and I can't count the times I've been flagged with a weapon on the line. Or I had a student almost flag another student. And that can't count how many stories I've heard of people pointing pistols at instructors finger on the trigger saying the gun isn't firing because its ON SAFE. And these aren't just Airman, these are E-7's and up.

Personally I think that to phase in Carrying on base (For Air Force) IT should start with Category A Arming group, and depending on how that works move to B and later C arming groups. Have to have a State Concealed Carry license, or LEOSA, and should not be DNA'd.

I know this post is going to draw some hate, but the current law needs to change we just need to be realistic on how we phase it in. Making it based on Rank so E-6's and above is a horrible idea, just because you've been in 15 years doesn't mean you know the first thing about weapons, how to shoot them, or have prepared yourself mentally if you ever have to use it. Making it based off of MOS/AFSC first makes sense.

Response by SFC Henry Bartosik made Jun 16 at 2015 11:23 AM

SFC Henry Bartosik — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:23:31 -0400

Bad idea. Too many domestic disputes, and too many incidents where drugs and alcohol have been a factor and have had personnel shot or shooting themselves. Also MP's are overtaxed as is and makes people nervous. Personally I carry and am prior law enforcement. Long as someone is mature and responsible I don't have a problem in public. But not on post.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 18 at 2015 8:21 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Jun 2015 20:21:40 -0400

Yes, especially if they have a valid carry-conceal permit and/or are required to drive long distances for their training. I would even be willing to have to be required to complete an annual qualification.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 10 at 2015 9:35 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:35:43 -0400

yes, it should be open carry unless cleared by the MP's office for concealed. and you have to have annual traqining for that style of weapon (i.e. you cant carry a pistol unless you have qualified with a pistol in the last year). this barring any marine with a domestic abuse, mental health issue or assault charge of course, and should only be afforded to NCO's and up.

Response by SGT Scott Henderson made Dec 1 at 2015 11:11 PM

SGT Scott Henderson — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 23:11:41 -0500

Yes, yes, and yes. I was at Hood (deployed) when Hassan went all Allah Akbar but even before that I kept my POW in the storage compartment behind the back seat of my truck.

Response by TSgt George Rodriguez made May 28 at 2017 8:20 PM

TSgt George Rodriguez — Sun, 28 May 2017 20:20:41 -0400

We trust them to carry arms in a nation at war for their own protection and protection of the installation their on. Why not openly carry on US installations for the same reasons? Yes additional training is mandatory above and beyond that which concealed carry classes afforded to the civilians. Qualifying range time to prove they are capable of handling an issued sidearm. This would enhance the security of all military installations. Don't just talk about it. DO IT....

Response by SSG Jeffrey Monk made Jul 20 at 2019 7:41 PM

SSG Jeffrey Monk — Sat, 20 Jul 2019 19:41:29 -0400

Personally I feel it should be at least at the conceal carry level. But the military has never given a hoot what I think no matter how often we sensing sessions I went through.

Response by 1LT Voyle Smith made Jan 5 at 2021 9:39 PM

1LT Voyle Smith — Tue, 05 Jan 2021 21:39:45 -0500

In my opinion, military personnel should definitely be allowed to carry weapons on military installations. You’ve had the best training available and you’ve qualified in the proper employment of your weapon and in its safety features; and you have demonstrated your skill in effective marksmanship. Military personnel are a tremendous untapped resource for installation security.