Posted on Jul 24, 2015
The North Carolina National Guard approach. Would you rather have an MP instead of arming a recruiter as an option?
23K
165
77
24
24
0
The North Carolina took a different approach with the security of their recruiting stations. Instead of arming their recruiters they sent armed Military Police soldiers instead. I am not trying to be bias but I think this is the best means of securing a recruiting station. They are already trained in Law Enforcement Operations and escalation of force. They are the most qualified soldier that could accomplish this mission by far. Most of the recruiters that are serving in various offices may not be well trained in small arms. We found this out with the Navy Recruiter shooting him while handling his personal weapon.
Benefits of having an armed National Guard Soldier is that they can be sworn by the jurisdiction which they are in with a mutual aid agreement. It would give them additional abilities to deal with civilians. This could only happen with National Guard Troops. I don't believe that Federal Troops could do this due to their Federal status.
But at the location in the Cary Towne Mall there is also other military recruiting offices near by. Could this be a detail that the National Guard could pick up to provide security for these offices nation wide. I don't know if a National Guard that doesn't have MPs or a training area for them. In some states, like Vermont, you don't have much a military presence at all. But even there they have MPs. Would this be a good option and an addition mission for the Guard.
Benefits of having an armed National Guard Soldier is that they can be sworn by the jurisdiction which they are in with a mutual aid agreement. It would give them additional abilities to deal with civilians. This could only happen with National Guard Troops. I don't believe that Federal Troops could do this due to their Federal status.
But at the location in the Cary Towne Mall there is also other military recruiting offices near by. Could this be a detail that the National Guard could pick up to provide security for these offices nation wide. I don't know if a National Guard that doesn't have MPs or a training area for them. In some states, like Vermont, you don't have much a military presence at all. But even there they have MPs. Would this be a good option and an addition mission for the Guard.
Army National Guard
Security
Military police
North Carolina ARNG
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 39
This doesn't seem sustainable. Is the military going to put a permanent MP every hour that a recruiting station is open in the thousands of stations around the country? One doesn't need to be a logistics wizard to know that can't possibly work. Also, what happens when the next attack is at a MEPS station? Get a couple thousand more MPs to guard those? How about every national guard building in the country? Get thousands more MPs? Once you harden those targets, what about ROTC centers? MPs would soon become the majority of the military. Pretending that we can use MPs to guard everything we care about in the military is not a sustainable solution
If you can't trust our NCOs with firearms, then I would say THAT is the problem. It is a huge national problem if we can't trust our military members... That is what should be fixed. The only way to fix it is to let service members actually be trained in proper firearm use and handling... And that does sound like quite a reasonable idea to me.
If you can't trust our NCOs with firearms, then I would say THAT is the problem. It is a huge national problem if we can't trust our military members... That is what should be fixed. The only way to fix it is to let service members actually be trained in proper firearm use and handling... And that does sound like quite a reasonable idea to me.
(15)
(0)
SMSgt Thor Merich
Before I switched over to Blue, I was a active duty Army MP. We were told that MP actually stood for Multi Purpose. With that thought in mind, You could make an entire Army out of MP's... Seriously though, the Air Force uses armed DOD Police and Security Guards to assist Security Forces as some instillations. An armed DOD Security Guard could be a more feasible solution than M.P.'s.
(0)
(0)
SSG Ricardo Marcial
Placing MP on Title 32 orders makes sense. Let the recruiters concentrate on their job, recruiting. Placing MP's allows for a more vigilant approach to protecting the recruiters vs placing the burden on local LEO's and the communities. Why take a cop off their patrols on the community where they will be static and not have a bigger presence in their community, which what they are there for, to protect the community as a whole vs one building or individual. If the governor of a state thinks this is a feasible short term idea, then it should at least be given the chance to see if it works and two is it cost effective. Some folks will ask about funding for this, well there are a limited amount of options, armed civilians, local LEO, state police, of MP's. or you can just arm the recruiters, every single one of them. Not one in the office, but all of them.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Since they are using the National Guard, it may only require use, or an increase, to the Unit's PERSTEMPO to place MP's on orders to assist with the mission.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
4
4
0
While I like the MP option, I think that there are more locations than MPs..... It would be easier to arm the NCOs and Officers.
(4)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
True. I think this is able to work in NC as there are a lot of MP units and not that many NG recruiting offices.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Or we could make a bill similar to LEOSA for the military in general to be allowed to carry concealed.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google