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

Anyone can point a gun and shoot. Whether or not ehy are accurate is another thing. And, it's the Air Force. We hardly ever go into positions that would require the use of a gun.

I had to volunteer to be an SP augmente before I was allowed to qualify. Even being on 'mobility' there wasn't enough priority on weapons training. Probably a good thing for most of my fellow Airmen, as most of them weren't that safe to begin with. Things changed with the first Gulf War. Nearly the entire base SP Force deployed suddenly. Most of us guarding the base were now augmentes. Sort of drove home the need for the training. They were so short of weapon qualified Airmen they were grasping at straws. If I hadn't already been grabbed for augmente duty, I would have been deployed. Took a lot of flack on that, being prepared, but already utilized, no good deed goes unpunished.
I just wanted to be prepared if needed, then I was. Not my fault there weren't enough of us.
Most of the Air Force probably shouldn't be armed on a regular basis, but those that can be should be encouraged to get/stay qualified, at the least.

After my Navy days, 67-71, I joined the Air National guard 79-2008. I was Civil Engineering heavy equipment operator. We had to qualify yearly with small arms, m-16 and 38cal/9 mm for cargo couriers. We backed up the SF’s for aircraft security during alerts.
We were responsible for Base Recovery After Attack( BRAAT) runway repair etc. with no Army or Marine detachments for protection. That all changed after Desert Storm of course, with joint force structure.
Engineers still had to stay current with small arms.

Two things, first as a member of the 10th Mtn Division Staff, during field exercises and deployments our Division Band was also our Division Security Force. So you had to trust that guy who played a trombone in a band to also be proficient in weapons qualification. Second, we used to have a specific time set aside during the week (usually Thursday AM - till noon) this was called Sergeants Time. NCO Leadership at platoon or company (section/flight) level identified areas that needed more training and improvement. We used this time to hone skills such as being proficient with our weapons. Perhaps you could recommend this to your leadership.

I was USAF, 1970-1974. Qualified on the M16 in Basic. About two years in, I was put on the "Tanker Mobility" list,and had to qualify on the .38 revolver. Aside from qualifying on each of these weapons at the range, I never touched them again. I was raised with guns, so I was quite comfortable around them. Some of the other members of my flight in Basic and people I worked with the rest of my time AD.... Mmmm.. I wasn't so sure about.

My son was USAF Security Forces. Spent nearly a year at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan. At one point, I said that he was Air Force, just like me. Later, he quietly corrected me by saying, "Dad, we in Security Forces don't really consider ourselves to be in the regular Air Force." As soon as he said it, I understood what he meant.

When he got back from Bagram, he told me about a training session they had. The question was asked, "You're in the chow hall. A 'bad guy' comes in and starts shooting. What do you do?" The correct answer was hit the floor!

When asked why, my son answered, "Because the room is filled with Airmen carrying loaded M16s that they haven't fired since they qualified. There will probably be more casualties from friendly fire than from the bad guy."

Do I think USAF members should receive more and regular firearms training? In principle, yes. In practice, that's a whooole bunch of people to train and cycle through a firing range on a regular basis. I think annual qualification would be minimum, six months would be better.

As a Marine (never a former or ex-Marine) I later chose a career in the AF. I was a Jet Engine Technician by MOS/AFSC and as I moved up the career ladder we always qualified at an indoor range once a year with the modified M-16 that shot .22 to save money. If you only handle a weapon once a year you're not going to be very proficient at it. I will say that everyone shot until they passed. They are not taught to quickly field strip a weapon as we were in the Marines but they must disassemble the weapon, clean it to the satisfaction of the Range Instructors and reassemble it, then put it away. Can they shoot? Yes. Can they shoot like a Marine? Hardly, but they can hit center mass and many have their own ARs at home so I think they'd do well enough in an emergency situation.
Retired First Sergeant

Air Force DEFINITELY should! The ROE has changed since Desert Storm and the enemy DOES NOT CARE what branch you serve! I tell my other half that I wished I was still in and the Training NCO for their squadron...I would piss them off with my sole mission is to keep them alive!

The 7.62 round is color blind, it only knows the color of your blood...red.

Why any airman wouldn't ever consider the possibility of having to use a weapon to either defend himself, the airbase, or both is unconscionable to me. As a retired soldier, I've reflected on this occasionally and always came up with the same answer, UNACCEPTABLE. Back in the days of the Cold War and living with the apprehension that Ivan might get a wild hair up his backside and come storming through the Fulda Gap, most Army units would be engaged in stopping that assault whilst air bases in Germany were ever vulnerable to Spetnatz and other commando type attacks. Air Force SP may be trained to engage these forces, but they are totally understrength to offer much deference. Even Army maintenance and other support units have the means to resist and offer up resistance. To have personnel without general knowledge of small arms, i.e., M4/M16, and sidearms is totally inexcusable. Don't even try that lame excuse, "we're technicians, not infantrymen" on me. Army mechanics, logisticians, and others, aren't either, but would put up quite a fight. You flyboys don't have to be John Wayne or Audie Murphy, but at least know how a magazine goes into your weapon and which end the bullet comes out of.

I was in the USAF from 1966 to 1970. We all had an extensive class on the M16 while in Basic Training. We handled it, stripped it and cleaned it. Then we spent a day on the range with it. Each year we were required to qualify with it. This was for everyone, at least everywhere I was stationed. I'm sure this was far, far less than members of the Army and Marines, but we were no strangers to this weapon. For those of us who grew up hunting, I would imagine we were also proficient with it.

I was Navy (weapons), then Army ( Cav Scout & ABN LRS-Det) , then Air Force Guard and Res. My other occupation during my Guard years was Law Enforcement, weapons and tactic instructor. My humble opinion is that the Air Force has spent the last 60 years trying to bury much its US ARMY beginnings. I noted an under-culture that looked down upon the nasty and dirty parts of war. Many support units treated bi-annual or tri-annual weapons qualifications like the Black Plague. If you started to talk to them about fire teams, then you might as well be speaking in ancient Icelandic. Of course things become real when your M-Pool vehicle mechanics find themselves acting as truck gunners on convoy duty. Some from our local Air Guard base did just that and they later stopped by the SP shop to say thanks.
If a self-defense culture is to be re-introduced into the Air Force, it will have to start in basic training, and be re-enforced via exercises in which the base is over-run and key facilities are targeted. ( and not relying on the SPs to arrive at the clinic to save the day. )
But as it stands now, any time for real training will likely be wasted on some sort of touchy-feely social engineering training.