Posted on Jan 11, 2021
Should service members be able to bring personal weapons on deployment?
12.2K
139
82
20
20
0
During my 2nd Iraq tour, our E7 platoon Sergeant got into a lot of trouble for bringing his own shotgun and AR15. He was removed from our company and we don't know the details of his punishment beyond that. But it got me thinking... Wouldn't it be a good idea to let senior NCO's and officers bring their own personal firearms on deployments? I certainly think so. What are your thoughts?
Firearms and Guns
Deployment
Small Arms
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 38
9
9
0
Personally I am for it, but higher up generally have a cow about it, but on the other side of the coin, who doesn't think that they might be carrying their own, and think that it's ok SPC July Macias
(9)
(0)
8
8
0
I recall my career Marine brother served in Korea with a S&W Combat Masterpiece revolver. I was rather young at the time, but I think it was a popular personal weapon among the troops. It might have been the advantage of a double-action sidearm in speed of firing, in contrast to a .45 with regulations stating the chamber had to be empty.
(8)
(0)
Cpl Mark McMiller
A 1911 is faster than a revolver for most people. And back then they carried it with a round in the chamber. But revolvers were considered more reliable than autos because if a revolver malfunctions all you have to do is squeeze the trigger and fire the next round but a malfunctioning auto has to be cleared before firing another round. For decades, Navy Seals and Marine Recon carried revolvers for that very reason.
(1)
(0)
CW3 Harvey K.
Cpl Mark McMiller - I would ask "What changed" in weapons technology to cause that change, but I know there was no such "magic" to change the practice. Things today re revolvers and pistols are still as you describe them.
It seems to be a matter of the evaluation of pistols that can take dirt, dust, mud etc. and still function. while revolvers are more sensitive to the harsh conditions of the battlefield. Better to have a sidearm that can take that punishment and still shoot, than something that is more reliable under ideal conditions.
It seems to be a matter of the evaluation of pistols that can take dirt, dust, mud etc. and still function. while revolvers are more sensitive to the harsh conditions of the battlefield. Better to have a sidearm that can take that punishment and still shoot, than something that is more reliable under ideal conditions.
(1)
(0)
Cpl Mark McMiller
CW3 Harvey K. - I think it's also that people have a hard time hitting what they're shooting at with revolvers because the double-action long trigger pull makes it harder to keep the sights on target. Same with double-action autos on the first shot. That's why I love the 1911 with its single-action short, crisp trigger pull.
(2)
(0)
CW3 Harvey K.
Cpl Mark McMiller - Then again, you can (usually) cock the hammer of a revolver (or pistol) for more precise shooting. DA only for close combat.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Perhaps some of our friends more familiar with current regs could speak on problems therein, however, I know some of our squadron brought their personal firearms to VN. It seems it would be even more simple if you were deployed with your unit and could get the CO's permission.
(6)
(0)
(2)
(0)
LtCol Robert Quinter
SSgt Thomas L. - Don't remember anyone checking our weapons in VN, just what you brought home
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
From the first touch of the 1911 I fell in love. It was military issue and broke my heart when I had to leave it behind. The thing is, I was opened up to all sorts of new weapons that I never would have experienced had I used my own.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
A few years ago this wouldn't even be a thought in anyones head (that had common sense) as it was just a big common sense "NO" but I guess testing the bounders includes throwing away your career now.
(5)
(0)
1SG Dennis Hicks
Big NO-NO after Vietnam, though a few tried and paid the price. This led to brave souls trying to bring home assorted toys as well.
(1)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden Passed 7/29/2025
1SG Dennis Hicks I left 7th Signal Company at Camp Casey for CONUS in 1955 with a “Combat Loss” 1911 45 cal. Once I saw the four foot square bins your gear was dumped in for ease of them searching for contraband, the pistol disappeared, some gxxx employee undoubtedly had a route of ‘hide’ areas he checked regularly.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Isn’t kind of ridiculous that you can carry a gun to defend your so called country but not to protect yourself
(4)
(0)
PO1 Mary Vermont
Ok but if military members at Fort Hood had been armed wouldn’t that have been a good thingMAJ Eugene Chu
(1)
(0)
PO1 Mary Vermont
It happens so to avoid maybe a friendly fire we keep our troop unarmed and subject to enemy fire without protection
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Sgt Jordan Foster
No the problem with him taking an unserialized weapon on deployment is its not needed. 1 we have nato laws for war.
2nd problem is that it’s an unserialized weapon what if it goes missing? An E-7 should be more familiar with his gear than his personal.PO1 Mary Vermont
2nd problem is that it’s an unserialized weapon what if it goes missing? An E-7 should be more familiar with his gear than his personal.PO1 Mary Vermont
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Senior NCOs are not more mature or reliable simply based on their rank. In Iraq in 2010, my 1SG would pull his military issued 45 on Soldiers as a joke (seriously?). One day, he drew his weapon on a Soldier in anger. He pulled it in such a way to show it did not hold a clip, but the bolt was forward so there was no proof that it did have a round chambered. Let’s have a show of hands of those who think that he, a senior NCO, can be trusted bringing his own weapon on a deployment.
(3)
(0)
SFC Kathy Pepper
SSG Robert Perrotto - The CSM did relieve him, but he was retained in the company in Iraq for over a month; the Company Commander banished the Soldier from the company. We were a Reserve company in a Regular Army battalion that was assembled for about a six-year assignment in Iraq. The Reserves are so messed up that I have reason to believe he was later promoted to CSM.
(2)
(0)
(3)
(0)
SFC Kathy Pepper
CW3 Harvey K. - Agreed. However, I was responding to SPC Macias' implication (or rather, my inference) that officers and senior NCOs are mature enough to carry personal weapons on deployment.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Just wait until you're there and use some of the commandeered weapons you find instead. Plenty of ammo laying around for those things too. Then just dump them in a river before you redeploy.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
SPC July Macias
Could you give us some examples? I'm not sure what you mean by "good ones" and "not so good."
(2)
(0)
SSG Paul Headlee
SPC July Macias Generally, yes. I'll never use anyone's name on here. I've known soldiers old enough to know better who we're convicted of rape, sodomy, black marketing, dui, theft of property (enough to go to Leavenworth), etc. These things denote a very serious lack of self control and judgement.
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
No. The weapons issued are standardized to enable logistic support. Ammunition and parts are in the supply system to support the issued weapons. (Or they should be). Personal weapons shouldn’t be supported by government logistics system because it puts an undue burden on the system. Also it may be a violation of host country laws to import firearms without permission, licenses or in some places at all.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google