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

I believe that additional weapons training should be optional on AF or Joint installations. Going to Elite weapons training schools like Front Sight or Front Line should be optional for military members and should count as "extra curricular" achievements for those up for promotion.

The USAF is run by Pilots. To them, if it ain't flying, it ain't sh-t. Former USAF Security Police when we were the Bastards of the USAF. Now, thanks to the War On Terror, and the various Sand Boxes, I believe the Security Forces AFSC has more personnel than any other. I agree that everyone in the USAF needs to be taught the Warrior Spirit and maid to realize that there are no real Front Lines anymore, especially overseas you are always a target. Former Captain and Senior Special Agent in ICE. Nothing wrong with being taught some combat skills even as a 702.

The Air Force is one of our most expensive assets. It needs people of exceptional skill and intelligence, to keep everything running. The main fighting force of the Air Force is in the sky. We don't usually place our airbases and airfields where there is any likelihood of enemy interference.
Example: when I was in Iraq in 2003, the majority of our airmen were stationed in, took off from, and landed, in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia; there were airfields (that we took control of), which our airmen would land in, on occasion (supply, maintenance, fuel, but usually not extended grounding). Those are considered joint forces based, meaning that the Army (or Marines) were in control of and secured the base. When enemy engagements happened, the airmen would either get in the air, or hunker down. It was our job to protect them (and every other asset on basecamp).
The airmen that my unit was protecting, at various times, had weapons specialists, on board, as well as mechanics and pilots, as flight crew. The weapons specialist that I was privy to talk with, new about nearly every weapon system, had an M4, and a pistol, but much preferred his 50 Caliber machine gun (side door mounted). The weapons specialists seemed to take as much pride in knowing as many weapons systems as possible (much like us ground forces). He beat me, every time, when disassembling and reassembling the 50 Cal. He came very close to my time on the M4. His ability to break down, clean, and reassemble the 9mm, was better than even my platoon sergeant.
There are (few and far between) some airmen that can and do train with ground based weapons systems. However, if they have to use them, it is a VERY bad day.
It's much more important that they know how to get their aircraft in the air, and keep it there.

You have to remember, the original placement of air bases was far from the front lines. If the enemy comes knocking on the front door of an air base, then you have a serious problem.

For the most part the only Air Force members that see a combat zone are air crews. Even the people who maintain and arm the combat aircraft are usually stationed a long way from enemy soldiers. In my own case I spent 8 years in the regular AF and never touched a government weapon except in basic training. My first permanent station was in NY where I worked in the military pay office - a base level job. After that I was assigned to SAC HQ where nobody but police had any use for weapons. There were some officer details that required they strap on a pistol for courier duty but enlisted people don't do that. My last permanent station was in Washington DC. Again there were no weapons for any AF people there.

Most AF personnel never have the need to use or carry a weapon. If deploying into a combat zone, definitely just in time training for proficiency.

During the Vietnam War, many non-security policemen were pulled from other AFSCs to augment SF. They were trained in the use of .38s, M-16s, M-60s and 60 to 84mm mortars (usually for illumination). Base defense was their main objective. But it didn't end in Vietnam/SEA. Units like Tactical Air Control (mobile radar units) had to be able to defend themselves. Why? Small SF detachments. So along with my AFSC (AGE) , I was selected to be trained on the M-60 (of which I already was qualified on) and the M-79 40mm grenade launcher. But like everything else there were goofball who wanted to play Rambo with two or more weapons. Therefore when my time was up in TAC AIR, no one else was trained to replace me.

I can't reply for the new af but when I was in I q'd as expert out of basic and afterwards also this was with an m-16, the only reason I did not q with the m-9 was that our range was not good enough!

My take is that putting a weapon in the hands of individuals who don’t fire a weapon routinely is a recipe for disaster. Keeping them qualified would be costly. However, I think quick reaction teams of those who could be spared in urgent situations could be trained and kept qualified. These teams could respond in an emergency.

I agree it is outrageous and is exactly why i trained myself to as many weapons I could get ahold of. My grandson is now a SSgt in the USAF and I trained him on the civilian equivalentcivilian persons of the m-4 and the beretta 92 and a SIG P-320. My philosophy is ya gotta look out for yourself cause no one is gonna do it for you.