How do we control access to the barracks?

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:38:01 -0500

Some of the new barracks at Fort Hood are impossible to control. The Army in my opinion should have thought about the design flaw which leads to any street walker or drug dealer access to our soldiers at the barracks. They are designed like motels with unrestricted access to anyone who walks up. What are your opinions? How can we fix it?

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 12:43 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:43:15 -0500

I miss the days where every soldier had to walk past the CQ desk to access the barracks. It better ensured the safety of our Soldiers. It also allowed us to protect junior Soldiers from making mistakes.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 12:43 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:43:24 -0500

Key Card entry on all doors.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 2:23 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 14:23:28 -0500

Back in good ol 4/2 CR when things got out of hand "cell block 400" was initiated.
-we had dug fighting positions around the barracks with 3 fire teams manning them 24/7
-an ECP was established at the entrance to the paring lot where I.D. cards were checked 24/7
- There was always 1 squad of roaming guards around the perimeter of the barracks
- There were 2 door sentry at each doorway to the stairwell/floors.
-there were 2 roaming guards on each floor
-all this in addition to CQ
-every time you passed a sentry or guard you had to present your ID card and sign a sheet stating which room you would be in, and why.

If you don't believe me, you might be able to find an old story on US ARMY W.T.F. moments.
There is never a dull moment in Vilseck.

The above is a bit drastic, but would definitely solve the problem.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 4:01 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:01:21 -0500

Ya'll are making this out like Soldiers only make bad decisions. SSG Dean, sounds like a prision but I also remember those days and the NCO asking 20 questions. Also I remember the visitors must be out by 2300 checks. How is it that I can a person of the opposite sex at my offpost apartment but I can't have one in the barracks? I also remember that 1SG outlawed parties in the Dayroom, good call, we will just take the party off post where there are no controls. Let me ask you a question, would you rather me play beer pong in the dayroom or at the bar 10 miles away. Oh, and guess what I'm not taking a cab because tomorrow I have to find a way to get my car. I keep hearing the Army needs to go back to the days of old and in some aspects I agree but in others I think we need to use the lessons learned approach and treat our Soldiers like the adults they can be. Instead we want to treat them like children and guess what, when you treat a grown ass man like a child he is going to say F it, I will act like you treat me.

SPC McCumber is onto something if you want to treat your Soldiers like children. Hell don't even allow them access to their civilian clothes. Take their car keys, you know just in case they may drink in the next few days. Have hourly formations 24/7 for accountability.

Why is it that I can go home and relax without having to worry about someone checking on me every two hours. It is to the point where if we do not know where our Soldiers are 24/7 and who they are with then we are bad leaders. Ya'll need to relax the leash ya'll are putting on these Soldiers. What till they deserve to be on a leash. The barracks are not an extension of work but a place where Soldiers live.

Have some of us been NCOs too long not to remember how living in the barracks were. I remember quite vividly and if my Soldiers are doing the right thing why do I need to be up in their Kool-Aid.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 5:53 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 17:53:23 -0500

Can you explain or sketch the layout? The barracks I've seen recently have one main entrance and some fire exits. The fire exits have no handles on the outside, so the only way in is they're propped open. Next, the fire doors on each stairwell have to be access with a card key like a room as well.

This creates the natural funnel/chokepoint for all traffic at the CQ desk.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 6:24 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 18:24:23 -0500

So prior to our deployment we had 6 people on CQ at the barracks and senior leaders doing random barracks checks between the hours of 1800 and 0600. Our soldiers were getting in more trouble than before this started and I feel like part of that is not so much that they were being "extra bad", but because the leadership was looking for trouble with a fine tooth comb so they didn't get blamed for what was going on in the barracks. This is not the right answer. We need to treat our single soldiers with as much respect and responsibility as we do our married soldiers. In my opinion, this is discrimination against single soldiers because they haven't decided to get married yet.

Soldiers will be soldiers whether they live in the barracks, in on post housing, or off post. The soldiers in the barracks are forced to live there and then treated like children. When you treat them like children, they will act as such.

If a married soldier who lives on post has a guest who drank too much spend the night, nothing is said. The army is providing that house as a benefit for the service member and dependents, not the guests. A soldier in the barracks doesn't want their guest to drink and drive, so they allow their guest to spend the night and that soldier is punished for essentially "doing the right thing".

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 7:54 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 19:54:47 -0500

SSG Dean,

Have one door for access (the others would be locked from the outside to not prevent a safety hazard) and have security camera's installed at each remaining doorway. Make it mandatory for each person to present an ID card to the CQ and maintain an access log of personnel entering the barracks (though, not necessarily leaving).

People will always find a way to sneak people in, but this would give better accountability and not require overly substantial resources, though overall expensive for security camera's, monitoring equipment and maintenance support could drive some people nuts, Soldiers could always be trained on those systems.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 8:27 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 20:27:29 -0500

<p>     I'm not the authority for what is or what should be. I'm asking others what they think and posting some of my own opinions. If I was King, then Soldiers would be legally able to drink upon enlistment and we would have clubs on the installation again that they could indulge in. If they can die for their country then they should be able to participate in it's liberty's, and by doing so on the installation we keep it out of the daily city news.</p><p><br></p><p>     Back on topic though, It is our job as NCO's to ensure good order and discipline in our organizations barracks. Do I feel they should be able to have overnight guests? Yes, but I feel they should be signed in after duty hours and signed out before first formation (again I don't make the rules). If something goes on at an organization's barracks, the COC will be the ones dealing with the damage control and hence, they are the policy makers.. </p><p><br></p><p>     Taking care of soldiers involves giving them what they need, not always what they want.  </p><p><br></p><p>     My main objective is to give them a safe place where they CAN drink, party, have fun, in a responsible manner.  I never busted up a party that was under control.  On the other hand I would break one up in an instant once they started throwing beer bottles from balcony's and shattered on sidewalks and in parking lots.  </p><p><br></p><p>     The last thing I want is to treat our Soldiers like children but the fact is that they do lack life experience, sometimes make questionable decisions (as we all do in the process of maturing). When they move off post because they get married, become an NCO, etc., then their on their own.  Until then it IS OUR JOB to look out for them.  </p><p><br></p><p>     That being said I would like to keep the riff-raff from having access to the barracks and ensure that underage individuals are denied access from them also. It's nearly impossible with some of  the new barracks layouts.  I've had to run off / call the MP's on prostitutes, drug dealers, etc..  Not to mention finding underage individuals in the barracks (by that I mean under 18yrs).  To me the layout should force traffic to pass the CQ whom is responsible for the barracks during his duty.  This in no way alleviates him/her from doing Security checks and walking the barracks though.</p><div class="clear"></div><div class="clear"></div><div class="comment_buttons"><div class="main-buttons"></div></div>

Response by CSM Stuart C. O'Black made Jan 31 at 2014 9:24 PM

CSM Stuart C. O'Black — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:24:29 -0500

Interesting topic, very long response.

A few points:

1) In our BDE we had two barracks. One only had four entrances minus the fire exits. The other had sixteen entrances. While we were gone the rear-d only used the one with four entrances. Since they did have issue discussed the locked all doors and posted guards, everyone was checked in and out. It worked well and they had very little issue. However, the Soldiers felt like they were in prison and due to the size of the building they had to walk a football field distance to exit when their car was 10 yards always.

2) Upon our return we occupied the second barracks and tried lockdown. They broke the door locks and it was very hard to control access. So when we walked through the barracks we realized what we were asking of our Soldiers. To walk two hundred yards to get to a vehicle or access 10 yards away. It was like your wife locking the garage door and mandating you only go through the front door. So after talking with the Soldiers we removed the restriction and opened all the doors. Minus a few small issues we have had the lowest incidents I have seen. We do have an NCO and three CQs two walk the area but this is to reduce theft and report issue. I truly believe if you build a professional attitude and environment they will behave that way.

3) We still have some theft issues but mostly in the parking lot so we are looking into purchasing cameras and will place them around. Hopefully a deterrent for many things.

4) Again we are not perfect even found a minor in the barracks, (hid in closet) have to turn down the music, etc... BUT nothing NCOs checking on Soldier cannot fix. Every time we find something wrong I take a step back and say is it an issue or incident - is it systemic or just a short term problem. When it is an incident and not a systemic issue why freak out when something happens in the Barracks? Every complex that big has issues!

***** Finally, believe me there is a lot happening in married housing- most don't see it because you don't get the Blotters. CSM don't yell housing is screwed up because the are mixed housing areas they can't control. But they do say the Barracks are screwed up because they can impact that. SOOOOO treat you Soldier with the respect they deserve but the guidance and oversight they need.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 10:10 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 22:10:48 -0500

devil's advocate.... why have barracks? our single soldiers generally just want the same treatment that a married soldier receives.

Response by SSG Oliver Mathews made Jan 31 at 2014 11:23 PM

SSG Oliver Mathews — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:23:53 -0500

If you are worried that any street walker or hooker can get to the barracks i would first wonder how these hookers and street walkers are getting on to post. Then i would hope that i trained my soldiers well enough to know and do the right thing. And at the end of it all. Understand that they are adults. The choices they make can only be influenced by their NCOs not made for them by us.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 11:37 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:37:33 -0500

SSG Michael D.

Consider putting up a physical or laser fence, motion triggered lights / audible warnings, warning signs stating this is a sensitive military installation / forbid trespassing / use of deadly force is authorized / and any surviving trespassers will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of law. Then develop a public reputation for shooting first and prosecuting later. :)

Warm Regards, Sandy

Response by CMDCM Gene Treants made Feb 2 at 2014 9:50 AM

CMDCM Gene Treants — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 09:50:59 -0500

In so many areas I keep hearing the "We are and ALL VOLUNTEER Force" ansewer. Yet nowhere in this thread has it come up. I understand the need for full lockdown in Recruit Training, but really, back in the States, in our motel like accomidations? The Military is now segrated into two legal classes adults, people old enought to drink legally, and those under the legal drinking age. Therein lies the real crux of the matter, not really anything else in the barracks really matters.

Solve this problem and you solve most of the other problems in the BEQ. Rules are easy to make and easier to ignore and Sailors/Soldiers/Airmen/Marines have found so many way to ignore rules it is worth writing a book just about that subject. However, drinking by underage members leads to the most problems. I do not now and never had the soloution to this one, our biggest problem.

We need the 17 to 20 year old recruit so raising the age oif enlistment is not the answer. The USA has told us the we cannot bend drinking rules in States and violate the rules of each state. We surly would not be doing our duty by not hammering our troops if they do have a beer while underagem even if they are being shot at, right?

So, Lets all just go back to DOD and ask for more money and eleminate the requirement to live in the BEQ. Military members could then live where they wanted and become a boost the the local economy and law enforcement!

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 2 at 2014 10:07 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 10:07:15 -0500

The CAC can be used as a key card to access most key card security systems now with a simple upgrade. The downside is if lost and "Joe" tries to hide it, the loss can become even more catastrophic.

Response by SSG Laureano Pabon made Feb 2 at 2014 10:52 AM

SSG Laureano Pabon — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 10:52:49 -0500

SSG D. Perhaps you already have your solution to this problem. Fact is I really don't know because no real end results are put to confirm that the problem was fixed.

However I would like to add something here that is not military, but a lesson learned in the civilian sector:

Before Windows XP came out to the public, it was going through its design stages.

To make this shorter, XP was in its Alpha stages.

When it was ready in its Alpha stages to be put to test.

Bill gates hired a group of hackers all paid, introduced XP to them and said "Hack into it". They did, Bill gates took all that information to his engineers and told them one thing "Fix it". They did. XP then came out as a Beta Version for people like me to work it . All additional troubles were all reported back and when that was fixed, it came out as a release version to the public.

What lessons where learned?

While the thread is seeking for solutions if it where me I would perhaps have put something like. Your going to enter a barracks with security posted here in X and X and X, you want to enter the barracks without getting known, How are you going to do it?

You would have been very surprise at how a military member can break into any area with out getting detected.

With that knowledge, you would have been able to FIX those problems.

One more thing, Security out here are or may be prone to hire members from the military perhaps allot faster then a civilian. Perhaps because military members are more discipline and perhaps because they are fully aware that security is a function that the military may be considered as being experts in. Either way I hope your barracks issue has been fixed and if not then I hope at least it has been improved.

Response by CPT Marcus Jeffries made Feb 2 at 2014 10:55 AM

CPT Marcus Jeffries — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 10:55:16 -0500

This is a great discussion. I have been in the military for over 12 years now and I have seen the evolution of billeting for single soldiers from the standard one building setup with company ops and CQ in the same building to the more apartment style living that some soldiers now experience. We are dealing with some of the same issues of theft and vandalism that many of you leaders in this discussion are experiencing. <div><br></div><div>While I agree that we should not limit freedom of the Soldiers. I also pose the question. Do you think that a lack of emphasis on values and pride are contributing to the disrespect shown by those that require more control?</div><div><br></div><div>Think back to initial entry training when you had to learn to be a soldier before you were given more freedom. We are taught the Army Values and we take pride in our unit so that we care for it and respect everything associated with our unit. Are we done with reenforcing those standards after we graduate our initial training? Yes, everyone is an adult but we are also "professional" Soldiers. </div>

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 2 at 2014 11:09 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 11:09:20 -0500

I say if street walkers and drug dealers are getting into the barracks of soldiers, I think we should worry more about the gate guards who let them on post without proper military credentials. Last time I checked, you have to have a military ID to get on any military installation. Regular civilians are not permitted to walk on or drive on without a Military sponsor or visitor's pass. Visitor's passes are not issued without reason for visit, proper ID, screening and a vehicle/body search. Also, visitor's passes are only for a certain amount of hours a day. When I was stationed at Fort Hood, visitor's weren't allowed on after 8 I believe.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 8 at 2014 1:12 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:12:15 -0400

Made that way so soldiers can sneak in some sloots SSG.

Response by SGT Craig Northacker made May 14 at 2014 11:38 AM

SGT Craig Northacker — Wed, 14 May 2014 11:38:24 -0400

I used to bring my dog to work when I was CQ. Nobody got past him-including the battalion duty officers. :)

Response by SPC Stephen Bobchin made Aug 25 at 2014 3:04 PM

SPC Stephen Bobchin — Mon, 25 Aug 2014 15:04:25 -0400

This isn't an issue with locking doors or posting CQ, this is a soldier issue (as most issues are). Your fix should be to encourage soldiers to take pride in where they live, make them happy to be there, and condition the group to stigmatize anyone who messes up a good thing for them.