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

This falls back to June 25, 1950! My Father (1st Marine Division) my Uncle was Army my other Uncle Air Force. Marines qualified at 500+yards, and the Army wasn’t far off. My Uncle in the Air Force said he never touched a weapon in basic or any other time. This he said was why his fellow Airmen were killed wholesale when the North Koreans overran our air fields! Dad said the bodies they recovered were shot in the back as they ran from the Reds. Mechanics, Cooks, Clerks etc. Never learned to defend their Air Fields.
In the Marines, whether we were a cook, clerk or mechanic. All Marines go to Infantry Training School and can function as an infantryman if needed. Even in the Navy Sailors qualify with weapons, many volunteer for Auxiliary Security Force.
Those who don’t learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

Whoa, why's it gotta be a communications airman? Ha.

As a Bomber Crew Chief I was qualified on both the M16 and the .38 . Got the ribbons and clusters, too. Big deal. Our job was/is to fight in the air. Fly, Fight, Win. YOU, were trained protect and guard us, so we could bring the fight to the enemy. Army and Marines

4 years as an avionics tech. Never fired a weapon after boot. I’m like you. All military active duty should be qualified on a rifle annually.

I generally agree with your opinion. Insider attacks were a major concern while I was deployed to Afghanistan in 12 and then again in 13. That being said, I think the AF should place more emphasis on defending ourselves (through use of firearms) and also make us qualify more often so that the AF members who did not grow up around firearms are generally more comfortable and competent with them. God only knows how many negligent discharges happened every week due to Airmen not being comfortable and competent with there weapons. I find it funny that some people claim costs as a reason for not qualifying more often ( we probably spent more money with the boondoggle of getting greeen boots that don't stain black only to switch uniforms again). Anyway, I agree with you. Aside from AFSOC and Security Forces, the Lions share of Air Force personnel are probably not very proficient with small arms and we could use a culture shift more in line with our sister services.

I think you’re spot on about basic weapons training. I’m a US Army Infantry veteran, so by comparison to an airman, my training was more comprehensive. Remember 2-1-2 for a misfire...Tap the underside of the magazine twice, pull the charging handle back and release once, hit the forward assist twice.

I’m a maintainer in the AF and have wondered why they will not qualify us on the M9, but will issue us a M4/M16 to carry around the flightline and put on the ground to work as we provide security to our own area. Use common sense, train with the most useful weapon

Please explain on where the time to train my traditional Air Guardsman is going to come from when there is not nearly enough time to train them in their actual job. We spend 80% of the time training for 10% of the job.

The answer to your question is simple. It's a lack of interest. From the top leadership position in the air force on down. If something is not important to the top, it is never important at the bottom.

I Commanded the 4th Combat Comm. Sq./Gp. During that time everyone in my unit had to qualify with the M-16 on a yearly basis and more frequently if we could get the ammunition. The same for my TACPs while I was in COMBAT CONTROL we all maintained proficiency with our weapons. It is up to the Command and the Sq. Commander ti put emphasis on maintaining that proficency.