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

I served 1968 to1989. As a CE Prime Beef member all CE airmen had to be M-16 qualified. As did Red Horse airmen. I was awarded the marksmanship medal my entire career while I was in CE.

I can't disagree with your position. I think every Airman needs to be able to defend themselves. Prior to deployment, many, not all go through training dependent upon where they are heading. I had the fortune of going through the Combat Skills course through AFRC before deploying on AEF Silver. It was a decent course but definitely not enough to feel competent so I trained on my own with my local IDPA for techniques. In my old retired Airman mind, I think having the skills to defend should be core Airmen skills so we don't get the snide comments or worse yet, dead Airmen.

SSgt, the same goes for most members in the Navy. In 1962 I was instructed in loading, shooting, and clearing an M1 Garland, then never touched a rifle or pistol again during my tour. This is because as an Aviation Electrician I was generally never in contact with the enemy. Of course there are exception, but this is the case for 98% of Navy personnel. Unless your a Gunners Mate we don’t pull triggers, but we make sure the weapons are functioning. Everything I know about side arms I learned after I was discharged and now consider myself an armature. gunsmith

I read a few answers to get a feel on others thoughts. First off, I am a Marine. I served for four years as a CH-53 mechanic/Crew Chief. My job was 100% helicopter maintenance. If I was put into a grunt outfit, they’d have to bust me down to E-nothing because I was almost clueless about infantry. I got the same basic training as every other Marine, as well as training on the M-16A1 and M-1911. There were very basic infantry skills taught, which I never used. After the Marine Corps, I joined the Air Force. I worked on UH-1, HH-3, HH-53 and HH-60 series helicopters as a mechanic/Crew Chief. I received zero basic training from the Air Force. I also did not receive any technical school from the Air Force until I was in for 7-8 months. The difference between the two services as it relates to my job was minimal. A torque wrench is a torque wrench. The same goes for every other tool used on helicopters. Uniforms were slightly different once we went to camouflage. Up till then my uniforms were standard AF green and 89th AW blue. I retired from the AF wearing the exact same pattern and style work uniform I wore in the Marines. Our coveralls and flight suits were exactly the same between services. I will tell you that it was this “sameness” that helped me make a successful career. Some things confused me (and still do). Dining In/Dining Out, Airman, NCO and SNCO academies and esprit de corps are different and even having attended all three... confusing when I’m in my “Marine mode”. There were other little things that caught me up short off and on for my 25 year career. But essentially, once a mechanic, always a mechanic.
Now to the point of the question. Being qualified on a weapon, in my opinion, should be mandatory for all AF members. The training and discipline needed to score well enough to pass will enhance job performance. A shooting badge signifying marksmanship enhances the uniform and provides a common thread between everyone, regardless of rank or AFSC (MOS). Having a force of qualified riflemen can only make for a safer, stronger force. It does not make a force of infantrymen. If it ever became necessary to arm up, the trained Air Force Riflemen would be a secondary force used to supplement our primary defenders, Security Forces. Arming up every Airman just makes perfectvsense.

I retired in 2012. Before that I was required to qualify once a year. When did that change? I was also part of a Red Horse squadron and was M-16 and 9 mil qualified.

I guess the Air Force has changed since I was in back in the 80's. Back then we were required to qualify with a .38 pistol and the M-16 rifle. We were also trained in Perimeter Defense. I was so proficient with the M-16 that I qualified as an expert, and while on duty in Turkey I had to re-qualify with the M-16 at a US Army shooting range and was awarded a Army Marksman Medal. Air Bases do come under attack from the ground and I feel all Air Force persons stationed overseas should be trained in defensive measures. Remember Da Nang!

You point out a very great reason for civilian firearm ownership (2nd amendment) witch would to some degree provide familiarity to people entering any branch of the military, i was lucky that I learned firearm responsibility from an early age and when I went to basic training was surprised at so many who had no clue with firearms.... I have always wondered if the no clue members were the first to take one because they really never learned.

I was qualified with M - 16 in Basic. When I arrived in Vietnam, I was issued an M - 2, without any info/training - not even a booklet. Yet, I can account for (fifty years later) every round I expended in country, in action.
My prior firearm experience was with a bolt action Winchester .22, and a BB gun.

Generally they are in the rear with the gear. If pilots need rifles to defend their planes they are already in a world of hurt Also it would be about the same as training all army line units to fly jets in support of grunts engaged needing close air support

USAF personnel were never expected to fight on the ground! We learn to march because it's an exercise in working as a team. Otherwise, it has no point. It's handy in getting people to buses or across base, but isn't used for much else. (Except drill teams, etc.)