Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?

In the first 1/3 of my career I was a law enforcement specialist in Security Police before cross training. In Basic we all had m16 familiarization. For most people that was it. I was given training more extensively with the m16, ar 15, M60, .38 S&W Combat Masterpiece etc. but that was only for inside the wire. The Army worked the outside wire areas. Not to cast dispersion on any one, but if given the choice of only the experienced trained brothers in Security Police or people with only familiarization of weapons to support my 6. I'd have to stick with my brothers.

I myself was in a Combat Comm unit. I think that the only reason that many of us didn't have problems was that we were into firearms outside of the AF and most of us had our own AR's. I have seen what you are talking about with many of the younger airmen coming in and it's really disturbing for exactly the reasons you mentioned. Other than the biennial requal on the M16, most (younger airmen) didn't touch any firearms outside of the unit.

While in Air Force I was classified as Expert on Carbine would that be same as in Army and Marines?

All the civil engineering prime beef airmen are M-16 qualified. Officers also qualify using a handgun. I qualified expert each time I went to he range between 1971- 1980.

Two dynamics at play here. When I grew up, dads and granddads taught weapons safety to boys and sometimes girls. We learned the proper way to handle a weapon, the safety rules, different types of ammunition, how to safely clean a weapon and reassemble. The only pressure was "What you gonna do if a big old buck comes into view and you have a misfire or a jam of the bolt?". One dynamic is that fewer families actually have weapons in the home so younger service members do not get the foundation prior to military service. The second is that USAF has traditionally not been a combat arms specialty requiring the stunning reality of what can happen to the ill-prepared or poorly trained. I say everyone should be required to demonstrate marksman level proficiency with both the M4 (in my day it was M-16) and the handgun of choice. Weapons drills would help overcome the reticence to learn the weapon once you've drilled so long that muscle memory takes over.

Its funny I was stationed at a nuke base as SF when the base went into excersise to upload b52s the entire base was mobilized and used wd had a HUMV with a cook in it who decided to play with his m14 like a toy a round was fired next to the drivers ear, there is no simple answer here because every base has a different mission and different needs all i know is weapons training in basic is not dnough

I was qualified with rifle and pistal when I was in the US Air Force. Since 1969 to 1991. My primary AFSC was Aircraft Structural repair. I was also a crew chief on A-10A 77-0270 for four years at RAF Wood bridge, Egland. I was part of bas e security with a rifle several times and at differant bases. This was only a very few job assignments I had when I was in the Air Force. I don't know what people do these days. I guess they might just do a 9 to 5 job schedule now for all I know. We worked 72 hours at a time many times.

My units was very strict on weapons qualifications because we deployed a lot. if you failed after the third try, you could kiss your career good buy even if you were a outstanding Airmen. This was around the time like last year when the military was cutting back on the needed soldiers to save on cost, so if you failed in a certain area they would find away to get rid of you and my fate was failure of weapons qualification.

Many units are starting to get stricter, and if you can't shoot you become useless. I enlisted in 2012 and was honorable discharge around November of 2015. I passed PT and CDC'S but Failed CBT'S and Weapons Training with M4 Rifle so a decision was made to cut the rest of my contract short. I should have took extra lessons outside of my unit after my failures their were no excuses because the area Lived around had plenty of shooting ranges including some with m4 rentals. I guess the moral to the story is you live and you learn .

Sorry to Say my fellow veterans, but Airmen now into today's Airforce must qualify at least in the Airguard unit I was in. I know for fact. I fail qualifications three times due to my own fault and was one of the main reasons why I got the boot besides not getting the CBT'S done on time. I was discharge under honorable all because I didn't take weapons qualifications seriously by practicing at the local range after failing.

I think it's because of the role the Air Force is expected to play. The whole point of aircraft is to launch them from safe areas and fly them into combat. If the enemy is "knocking at your door", then your aircraft are already at risk. For combat vehicles, they're much more fragile than your average Abrams tank or MRAP. It doesn't take much to put an aircraft out of commission.

Bottom line, if your average Air Force personnelist or comm guy has become part of your front line force, you have more problems than whether or not they are qualified to shoot.