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

If you are in the military, you should be trained and qualified in the current small arms inventory. If you deploy to a combat zone, our foe does not care if you are a clerk, cook, or infantry. All they know is that you are the enemy and they plan to kill you. Matter of fact training on the various AK variants would be advisable. I was in the Army Security Agency 1965-1968. I never was trained on an M16. Only on the M14. Lucky I never needed one in 'Nam.

USAF doesn't keep enough arms on hand at its bases to arm everyone stationed there. USAF SF usually don't number more than 400 personnel to cover three shifts a day, protect the base quarters, the flightline and very sensitive areas. Annual weapons training is conducted f I r tho a e career fields that be deemed as augments for security of the base. Career fields such as Combat Controllers, Pararescue and such, who will be in combat situations are prone to need small arms daily. Also thanks to the powers that be, their budget constraints won't allow USAF enough small arms/ammo, to arms all USAF personnel.

I would’ve loved training after having received an expert marksmanship ribbon! I wondered why I hadn’t been offered that! As a matter of fact, after the first time I was taken out to shoot, one guy and I had to go to a different range to shoot again. I asked why. The guy said because I shot like an expert and they needed to find out if that was correct!
After my score was checked the second time I asked, “how did I do?”
I was excited to appear an expert shooting an M-16. But thereafter I was never trained in anything about guns!

I served when SP was divided into Law Enforcement and Security. Security had responsibility for flight line and missiles.

Law Enforcement (white hats) had normal police functions plus Air Base Defince.

I had one base commander say we were his QRF team along with the SAT team.

Every Airman had M16 training during basic but only a few AFSC’s had annual qualification requirement.

LE on the other had had to qualify with M16 and .38 cal revolver. We also got shotgun familiarization and M79 / 203. Those headed to VN received M60 claymore, hand grenadine and demolition training. Most also got 1911 .45 cal.

The AF doctrine at my time 72-76 was since the 52’s were in Tiland only minimal stateside type security was necessarily. The TI Rangers and other combat units were detailed to protect all was good.

In county AB had SF and Army protection with SF LE inside the gate doing normal police functions and augmented any disturbances.

Everything changed after 911. SECURITY FORCES combined the two groups and equiped them for a front line combat role.

My understanding is all AF members receive proper weapons training and depending on assignment and location,, the equipment necessary.

Short answer, they should, without question. I started in my career in the Air Force as a Security Forces member, security police when I started, and was an instructor in CATM. I have seen many different ways to really screw up a qualification class / annual requirement session. The SMSGT is correct in that most AFSC's don't carry or handle weapons in their daily duties, it they who are the annual qualifiers I speak of, and honestly should be quarterly at the very least. I spent 6 years in the AF and then migrated to the Army as an MP, and many other things, and even in my many MOS's in the Army, I was always carrying a weapon of some sort, so the comparison is a bit off in a way, but accurate that the AF was not meant to be a ground defense force overall. In the Army if a base or FOB in a combat area is overrun, everyone will have a weapon in their hands. Our cooks were the primary support in such a case and were trained on crew served weapons, i.e. M-60's, M249's, and even Ma Deuce, the M2 Browning 50 caliber, so therein shows some differences in mission requirements. While in CATM I experienced the things SSG Christ has mentioned, and more. I think in the AF the annual personnel are just not interested in firearms training or firearms at all maybe, and when they have to return for their qualification time, it almost like you are starting at square one with them, every single time. I don't wish to sound harsh in that respect as I said some of them are simple not interested in this duty / requirement. So having seen tow sides of the house I do agree that all service members should be required to be more familiar and more proficient in weapons marksmanship, but that won't
change any time soon. Additional note; In the Army as well as what is saw in the AF, all members are instructors so to speak. You always train your teams members and they in turn train others as in the new guys, or maybe those who are weak in a certain task. This was true in the AF, I just saw it more in the Army on an overall basis.

Not everyone has the skills required to be a successful rifleman, but many have other skills valuable to maintaining a fighting force. There is no value judgement, just where do you fit in to the overall abilities of our forces. Now if you want to talk to me about the M16/M4 and the @$!*% shoulder burns I have from over 30 years of service after being born left handed, that is a whole 'nuther story! But each man and woman serves a purpose, and it can in fact be valuable without getting to carry a rifle.

The only armed forces organization where everyone is trained as a “ Rifleman” is the the “United States Marine Corps. They specialize in the “Rifleman”. Nobody can equal that. 246 years of training people to kill with a rifle and bayonet cannot be equaled ANYWHERE.

I was a cook and I had to qualify every base I went to and before I went to Korea. This was in the mid 80's. At Hill I even went through M60 training.
Did they stop requiring everyone to qualify since that time?

Can't say that I understand much of this post. Enlisted, my primary job was ACW Radar tech, except for one tour at 25th NORAD, I was always an SP augmentee. Had to qualify on M-16 in basic and at every station. As an officer, I had to qualify with the .38 before every PCS - and since I needed a rifle during my first overseas tour as an officer, I insisted on qualifying with the M-16 prior to my second overseas tour as well. So what's this about folks not qualifying?

AF veteran here. I thought I went through M-16 training in Basic and then again in Tech School and received a Marksmanship Ribbon, but I guess I could've hallucinated the experience.