"Military says no to arming servicemen at US bases"

2015-07-23T13:51:10-04:00

From: McClatchy DC
--
The Defense Department on Thursday came out squarely against giving weapons to every service member on a domestic military installation despite a growing clamor in Congress for such a step in the wake of the Tennessee shooting rampage.

Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman, said Defense Secretary Ash Carter is awaiting recommendations from the five military services on fortifying their recruiting centers and domestic bases following the July 15 assault that left six people dead – four Marines, a Navy corpsman and the shooter, Kuwait-born Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez – at a naval reserve center in Chattanooga.

“We do not support arming all military personnel for a variety of reasons,” Davis told reporters at the Pentagon. “(There are) safety concerns, the prohibitive cost for use-of-force and weapons training, qualification costs as well as compliance with multiple weapons-training laws.”

A bipartisan group of lawmakers, however, advanced legislation to remove at least some of the limits imposed on service members in the United States under Presidents George H.W. Bush, a Republican, and Bill Clinton, a Democrat, in the 1990s.

Sen. Jerry Moran, a Kansas Republican, introduced a bill Thursday that would repeal partial prohibitions on military personnel carrying firearms at domestic installations.

“Our men and women in uniform are banned from exercising this constitutional right when fulfilling their duties on American soil,” Moran said. “This infringement on the constitutional rights of our service members has caused American military installations and DOD sites to become increasingly vulnerable to those who wish to do harm.”

In addition to the Chattanooga tragedy, Moran cited four earlier attacks since 2009 when gunmen killed and wounded military personnel at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., the Pentagon in Virginia, a recruiting center in Little Rock, Ark., and at Fort Hood in Texas.

Moran’s measure would repeal a Defense Department directive issued Feb. 25, 1992, and an Army regulation issued in March 1993, both of which places limits on where and under what circumstances service members can carry loaded weapons while on base.

In the House, Republican Rep. Scott DesJarlais and Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, both of Tennessee, gathered 17 co-sponsors from both parties for a similar bill.

“We know our military facilities and recruitment centers are targets, and the five victims of last week’s attack in Chattanooga are sad evidence that more must be done to keep them safe,” Cohen said.

Two other Republican lawmakers, Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, an Iraq war veteran, and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California put forward a narrower bill that would authorize one armed service member to be placed at a military recruiting center, many of which are at shopping malls, high schools, universities and other public places to encourage greater access.

Some Americans were not waiting for Congress or the Pentagon to change their laws or practices.

Armed citizens, some alone and others in groups, were standing guard at recruiting centers in Texas, Alabama, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Army veteran Terry Jackson said he felt it was his duty to guard the recruiting center in Cleburn, Texas.

“It was unacceptable for our soldiers, sailors, our men and women of the military to go over and serve and go into combat, and then come back here to the homeland and be gunned down on their home duty stations,” Jackson told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

A former Special Operations officer, who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly about armed forces’ training, said many service members lack sufficient skills to carry loaded weapons.

“If you’re going to be involved at recruiting centers or protecting the public, you should be able to fire at least 84 percent of your rounds into a life-size target at 25 yards,” the officer told McClatchy.

He said most military personnel are not at that level of weapons proficiency.

Nevertheless, some military leaders disagreed with the current prohibitions in place.

At his Senate confirmation hearing to become Army chief of staff, Gen. Mark Milley said the Pentagon should weigh arming recruiters and other personnel.

“I think under certain conditions, both on military bases and in outstations, we should seriously consider it, and under certain conditions, I think it’s appropriate,” Milley told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.

Martin Schwartz, a former New York City police officer and retired criminal investigator for the U.S. Treasury Department, said the number of military police needs to be increased and more of them should be sent to recruiting centers.

Schwartz also said that the current regulation that prohibits some military police from carry loaded handguns while on duty should be repealed.

“This is an insane policy that places them and the public at risk,” Schwartz told McClatchy. “It takes too long in an emergency to rack a round into an empty chamber. That’s life-or-death time.”

Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Louisiana Republican who is running for president, expressed no sympathy for claims by Abdulazeez’s family that he suffered from depression in the months leading up to his assault.

“@BobbyJindal: Is any terrorist who kills innocent people in cold blood mentally healthy? No; stop w/excuses for Radical Islam,” Jindal tweeted.

At a news conference in Chattanooga, the FBI said at least one service member at the Navy reserve center there had fired several rounds at Abdulazeez, but it was not known whether those bullets hit him. Chattanooga police killed the shooter.

Edward W. Reinhold, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville office, said the four Marines and one sailor appeared to have been killed by Abdulazeez, not by friendly fire.

“All indications are – and we do not have the ballistic reports back – preliminarily, it looks like all victims were killed with the same weapon,” he said.

Reinhold said his agents had 400 leads in the case and cautioned against assuming that Abdulazeez, who had made several trips to Jordan in recent years, had been inspired by radical Muslims.

“At this point, we’re treating him as a homegrown violent extremist,” Reinhold said.

Reinhold and military officials said Abdulazeez’s rampage lasted three to five minutes after he crashed his car through a security gate, left the vehicle with an assault weapon and a handgun, began firing outside the reserve center and continued shooting once inside.

Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Paul Brier said some of his troops inside the center shielded others and tried to engage Abdulazeez. He said more people would have died had it not been for their bravery.

“Our Marines reacted the way you would expect, rapidly going room to room, getting people to safety,” Brier said. “After they had gotten to safety, some willingly ran back into the fight.”　

James Rosen: [login to see] , @jamesmartinrose

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article28359811.html#storylink=cpy

Military says no to arming servicemen at US bases

The Defense Department on Thursday came out squarely against giving weapons to every service member on a domestic military installation despite a growing clamor in Congress for such a step in the wake of the Tennessee shooting rampage.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Jul 23 at 2015 1:57 PM

2015-07-23T13:57:25-04:00

While I'm sure this will only add fuel to the fire, I feel that they bring up some good points as to why it isn't a good to arm service members at this time. Could things change if those things listed change? Sure but I think it would take a lot of time to get there.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 1:59 PM

2015-07-23T13:59:46-04:00

It is unlawful to not allow those of us with the proper training and experience to defend ourselves!

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 2:03 PM

2015-07-23T14:03:29-04:00

I am with leadership on this. Our Military does not need to be carrying more weapons on the installations. Our military facilities are secure and if need be security can be bolstered. SMs with proper weapons permits can carry off Post, if they so desire, but there is no need for it on military installations.

Response by SSgt Dale W. made Jul 23 at 2015 2:04 PM

2015-07-23T14:04:26-04:00

"Reinhold said his agents had 400 leads in the case and cautioned against assuming that Abdulazeez, who had made several trips to Jordan in recent years, had been inspired by radical Muslims."
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then by golly, it must be a ....giraffe. How friggin PC. We must take great care to not give offense to those that want to kill us. Otherwise, they might want to kill us more than they do now.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 2:04 PM

2015-07-23T14:04:44-04:00

If you can not trust us with guns here in the states. Why bother arming us at all?

And if you believe we shouldn't be armed at all, who is to defend the states at all when the time comes when our country is attacked!

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 2:11 PM

2015-07-23T14:11:32-04:00

I'll be honest, I don't expect the military to actually hand me a gun to carry around, however, for those who're qualified and have a concealed carry license, allow them to bring their weapons with them and carry them. Maybe have the servicemember account for their weapon on base, in a system or log at the main gate or wherever would be best. But something is better than nothing, considering these events.

Response by SGT David T. made Jul 23 at 2015 2:12 PM

2015-07-23T14:12:59-04:00

I don't think the military needs to arm anyone, only allow the service members to carry in accordance with the laws of the state that they live in while in uniform. Sure uniform regulations would need to be adjusted slightly but that is easy enough to do.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Jul 23 at 2015 2:28 PM

2015-07-23T14:28:51-04:00

I noticed they brought up the training and funding, so I'm wondering if our leaders are using this as a means to advocate for more DOD funding...

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 23 at 2015 2:33 PM

2015-07-23T14:33:46-04:00

Red Herring, no one was proposing to arm every service member on every base, everywhere. That would be ridiculous and next to impossible to do anyway.

There is a common sense approach to arm some of the NCO's/Staff NCO's in each unit to provide the possibility of security should they need it. You have a few people each day draw a weapon at the start of the day and secure it at the end of the day. Pretty simple to do, cost is nominal and it would give a possible shooter something to think about.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Jul 23 at 2015 2:40 PM

2015-07-23T14:40:06-04:00

Every single person on a base? No. Recruiters? Yes.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jul 23 at 2015 2:56 PM

2015-07-23T14:56:31-04:00

Next time shots are fired by our unarmed service members, I hope the media is ready for headlines like "Suspected gunman found with high powered rifle lodged up own butt, hog tied, and branded by Marine Corps recruiting staff."

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jul 23 at 2015 3:09 PM

2015-07-23T15:09:27-04:00

“We do not support arming all military personnel for a variety of reasons,” Anyone else find this comment troubling while at the same time very humorous? I think our troops in combat zones may be in some additional trouble?

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jul 23 at 2015 3:16 PM

2015-07-23T15:16:34-04:00

This is a comedy of errors surrounding iterative tragedies.
This is absurd. It is time to Arm the Armed Forces.
http://www.rallypoint.com/answers/arm-the-armed-forces

Arm the Armed Forces! | RallyPoint

The outcome of the discussion "Concealed carry for CAC holders?" by [~222148:SGT Bernard Boyer III]. Below follows my skeleton letter to congress, based on the edits RP members have suggested to the 10 points. Anyone and everyone is welcome to edit and personalize the letter for their own use in writing to their congressional representatives. We sent a mass email on 3 January, the swearing in of the new congress, now it's a free for all. You...

Response by SGT Mitch McKinley made Jul 23 at 2015 3:29 PM

2015-07-23T15:29:10-04:00

Ironic that the decision makers say that, as they sit behind the walls of the most heavily defended office building in the world being patrolled by PPA officers armed with MP-5s and snipers on the roof, while those they make the decisions for are walking around like ducks in a carnival shooting gallery.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2015 6:02 PM

2015-07-23T18:02:06-04:00

And now we know why several high ranking members of the military have been purged. They had to make room for the administrations' PC pacifists.

Response by SPC Kortney Kistler made Jul 23 at 2015 10:17 PM

2015-07-23T22:17:10-04:00

Some training should be necessary and it should be available to all personnel that wish to carry or those that are required to.

When I returned from Iraq in 04' I wanted to get my carry permit as Minnesota had voted in the shall carry law. I spoke with my local police chief as to what the procedure was. He explained to me that I needed to take a class and demonstrate that I had the ability to safely handle a firearm. I looked at him with surprise and said, "I've been carrying a loaded rifle for the last year and you want me to take a class on gun safety?"

Rules are Rules, I took the class and spent my time on the firing line a little shaky with the rest of the group barley familiar with the brand new Sigs, Glocks, and whatever other popular high dollar pistol they were talked into buying at Cabella's or Gander Mountain.

We were shooting at an 8.5x11 inch piece of plain white paper taped to a 3'x3' piece of cardboard. Half of the jokers there couldn't put 10 on the cardboard from 10 feet.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 24 at 2015 10:14 PM

2015-07-24T22:14:28-04:00

This is criminal. Who better than those who are best trained at dealing with firearms to have them?

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Mar 6 at 2018 8:38 AM

2018-03-06T08:38:16-05:00

Since this has been posted in 2015...things have changed. It is up to installation commanders to allow concealed carry on the base but not arm everyone at govt expense. SOme bases have done this some have not. I think if the individual has a full background check for an enhanced concealed carry, takes a use of force class provided by the base, qualifies with the weapon they will be carrying twice a year, it is a good idea. Give them a base permit in conjunction with their carry card issued by the state...that way if they are checked they are legal and if they can't provide it they get jacked for carrying.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Mar 6 at 2018 9:16 AM

2018-03-06T09:16:31-05:00

Good.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2018 11:01 AM

2018-03-06T11:01:26-05:00

Honestly, I don't trust most of the men and women I've served with with a weapon, lol.

Response by MSgt Stephen Council made Mar 6 at 2018 11:05 AM

2018-03-06T11:05:48-05:00

So, This is a very dated article. It is at least 2 1/2 years old. It really bears no meaning in today's discussions as the most recent topic is letting active duty military carry personal weapons on installations. To think that every stateside installation has sufficient stores of small arms to issue daily to all personnel is a bit of a stretch. Possibly some of the Army and Marine bases, but Navy and Air Force, not likely.

Response by Lt Col Charlie Brown made Mar 6 at 2018 2:41 PM

2018-03-06T14:41:58-05:00

I am still angry that our folks didn't have the ability to defend themselves.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Mar 6 at 2018 7:52 PM

2018-03-06T19:52:01-05:00

How hold is this? Ash Carter hasn’t been Secdef in over a year

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2018 8:32 PM

2018-03-06T20:32:36-05:00

Agree with the DoD ... as far as domestic military installations are concerned. Recruiting centers and any other off-installation facilities are another matter. It appears a decision on those is pending.