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

I too, was Security Forces (Security Police-Security Specialist) when I was serving. We had a Security Augmentee support group. They had their primary AFSC, but would be weapon trained and certified to assist us in the event we need them. The majority of Air Force personnel do not receive weapons training after Basic. Does a Cook or Doctor need to be trained on weapons? Probably not, especially if enough other groups are. There might be exceptions for AF Personnel stationed in hostile war zones. I've been out for some time, so I'm not sure about recent changes, if any.

I went in the Air Force in 1966. We had a couple days training during basic and we qualified with M-16’s. Then while in Germany I qualified again with M-1 (antique).

Remember windage and elevation.

I think the AF is remiss if the culture condones lack of marksmanship skills. If weapons are issued, it is imperative to know how to operate them. That should be common sense. The AF will emplace airfields in the safest locations possible. However against near peer militaries, safety will diminish.

I can't speak to the current USAF situation regarding firearms training, only during my career. As an RN and then a Nurse Anesthetist, I was on mobility teams, except during my time stationed in the UK. I was required to be qualified on the handgun in use at the time. I qualified on both the 38 revolver and the 9mm Berretta. Additionally, I was able to take an enlisted spot, if there was an opening, and qualify on the M-16.
Our enlisted personnel on mobility qualified with the M-16, the officers with a handgun. Even then I believed that officers should also be qualified on the M-16. The purpose of our being qualified was for the protection of ourselves and our patients in a combat zone, not perimeter security. That was to be provided by our security forces, as it was explained to me.

Yep, the services should take a page out of the Marines training philosophy every service member a rifleman first and foremost or at least that was the way it was and i doubt it has changed. One never knows when they will be called out to hold the line. VIRIS ET HONOS

Coming from the active Army I thought it was really strange that the only time you went to the range was when getting ready to deploy.

In case an airman is being fired on, best bet is to call in the Army 11BangBangs or find the nearest Marine.

All joking aside, it's disgusting. Even the support MOS's in the army have to qualify with a rifle once a year. Riflemen (infantry/ marines) can't be everywhere. No one is expecting an air force cargo specialist to go out kicking doors and clearing floors, but at the very least, you should be able to return fire to save your own ass.

BTW, it's not just air force. I know navy personnel that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn at 10 meters

Have you asked leaders and others who served about this?

Myself in USAF boot camp (aka BMT) 12/1964-3/1965..
Briefly..
3/1965-7/1965 tech school, then PCS' (7/1965-10/1967) to McChord AFB, WA..then PCS to Udorn, Thailand, 10/1967-10/1968, then my DD-214.
During my/our BMT (again..12/1964-3/1965), we fired the M-1, wood stock carbine...a VERY nice weapon. To my knowledge..an airman couldn't pass boot camp unless he DID qualify/pass rifle range.
I know women didn't fire back then, because my wife was also USAF, BMT 1966, and she told me so.
Once a troop was PCS, they STILL had to qualify/pass rifle training/firing...once a year as I recall.
Overseas...no 'qualifying'...only the 'real thing' if and when it happened'.

Bottom line...
I know USAF life has REALLY changed, and in MY opinion...NOT all for the GOOD. ..for one thing FAR too much PC crap.
As far as NO more rifle range/qualifying in boot camp, and PCS thereafter...MY questions would be, as another poster questioned...
- WHY...NO rifle qualifying in BMT, and yearly after PCS?
- What happened to troop readiness?
- What the Hell has HAPPENED to the USAF?

I have a LOT more questions regarding the USAF (today), but not for this forum.

Pete