4
4
0
A year after four Marines and a sailor were killed in a lone wolf-style terror attack on a Thursday morning in Tennessee, the Defense Department is still grappling with how best to protect troops at outlying facilities.
The issue has preoccupied top Pentagon officials since the July 2015 attack by an American-born Muslim at a recruiting station and reserve center in Chattanooga. But so far, there have been no changes to Defense Department policies.
Military commanders have adopted a patchwork of approaches to the controversial question of whether troops — especially recruiters — should carry more guns to protect against terrorist-style shootings at their workplace. Each service have also taken varied steps to harden what some call “soft targets,” by giving recruiters ballistic barriers they can hide behind or tools to jam doors.
The Army and the Marine Corps have signaled a deep reluctance to arm recruiters, citing the need to ensure that recruiting stations are welcoming places to greet the public without intimidating security measures.
At the same time, the Air Force and the Navy are pushing ahead with policies to put more guns in the hands of more troops as added security measure against the threat of “active shooters,” who collectively have killed at least 40 troops in several attacks since 2009.
The year-long debate has left some frustrated. One Marine recruiter said he feels that the “higher ups are more concerned about being politically correct than taking care of its Marines.” They waited months for better security measures at his recruiting station, he said, only to receive a device called a “Davie Bar” that can jam doors.
They quickly discovered a major problem with the design, though: Their office door swings both ways, leaving the device effectively useless.
“As a recruiter on the street, I look over my shoulder now,” he said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, “and this is the best our command has done for us. It’s just wrong.”
On the one-year anniversary of the attack, there will be events held in Chattanooga to honor the five men killed in the shootings: Gunnery Sgt. Thomas Sullivan, Staff Sgt. David Wyatt, Sgt. Carson Holmquist, Lance Cpl. Squire K. Wells and Navy Logistics Specialist 2nd Class Randall Smith.
Here’s a look at what has changed — and what hasn’t — one year later.
The issue has preoccupied top Pentagon officials since the July 2015 attack by an American-born Muslim at a recruiting station and reserve center in Chattanooga. But so far, there have been no changes to Defense Department policies.
Military commanders have adopted a patchwork of approaches to the controversial question of whether troops — especially recruiters — should carry more guns to protect against terrorist-style shootings at their workplace. Each service have also taken varied steps to harden what some call “soft targets,” by giving recruiters ballistic barriers they can hide behind or tools to jam doors.
The Army and the Marine Corps have signaled a deep reluctance to arm recruiters, citing the need to ensure that recruiting stations are welcoming places to greet the public without intimidating security measures.
At the same time, the Air Force and the Navy are pushing ahead with policies to put more guns in the hands of more troops as added security measure against the threat of “active shooters,” who collectively have killed at least 40 troops in several attacks since 2009.
The year-long debate has left some frustrated. One Marine recruiter said he feels that the “higher ups are more concerned about being politically correct than taking care of its Marines.” They waited months for better security measures at his recruiting station, he said, only to receive a device called a “Davie Bar” that can jam doors.
They quickly discovered a major problem with the design, though: Their office door swings both ways, leaving the device effectively useless.
“As a recruiter on the street, I look over my shoulder now,” he said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, “and this is the best our command has done for us. It’s just wrong.”
On the one-year anniversary of the attack, there will be events held in Chattanooga to honor the five men killed in the shootings: Gunnery Sgt. Thomas Sullivan, Staff Sgt. David Wyatt, Sgt. Carson Holmquist, Lance Cpl. Squire K. Wells and Navy Logistics Specialist 2nd Class Randall Smith.
Here’s a look at what has changed — and what hasn’t — one year later.
87034870
Posted from armytimes.comPosted in these groups: 
79R: Recruiter
79R: Recruiter
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
3
3
0
DoD trusts us with defending the Constitution but not ourselves. I agree with the writer that a recruiting station needs to be a welcoming environment but not at the expense of a recruiters safety.
(3)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
The S3 in my stand alone armory now carries a Bertta M9 9mm with extra ammo. I feel safe when an AGR is walking around packing! This is in Gun control California
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
In the past few years we have seen radical Muslims assaulting recruiting stations and over the past year we have seen ambushes of police officers in Dallas and today in Baton Rouge SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL.
DoD has notoriously slow when it comes to protecting the force against emerging threats. Contrast that speed with the effort to execute social engineering changes where policy and procedure are fast-tracked.
Hopefully the next administration will be more focused on treating all citizens of this nation with dignity and respect. I hope that citizens and police forces will work together to improve safety and community relations.
It seems the dogs of war have been unleashed in this nation while generally law-abiding citizens are increasingly at risk because those assigned to protect them are under fire.
I hope that DHS will share with local and regional police forces the intel they have on potential ambushes and trouble makers. I also hope preemptive strikes will stop many future ambush attempts. I expect that some of these radical anti-police groups have been infiltrated. Hopefully the violent groups will implode with as little loss of innocent life as possible.
DoD has notoriously slow when it comes to protecting the force against emerging threats. Contrast that speed with the effort to execute social engineering changes where policy and procedure are fast-tracked.
Hopefully the next administration will be more focused on treating all citizens of this nation with dignity and respect. I hope that citizens and police forces will work together to improve safety and community relations.
It seems the dogs of war have been unleashed in this nation while generally law-abiding citizens are increasingly at risk because those assigned to protect them are under fire.
I hope that DHS will share with local and regional police forces the intel they have on potential ambushes and trouble makers. I also hope preemptive strikes will stop many future ambush attempts. I expect that some of these radical anti-police groups have been infiltrated. Hopefully the violent groups will implode with as little loss of innocent life as possible.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google