DoD Releases Plan to Allow Personnel to Carry Firearms on Base

[KJQ6945]

More people other than a handful of MPs need to be armed on a military base.
The civillian world pictures a military base as a hard target. Trained, armed soldiers everywhere. The reality has been proven a couple times with active shooter situations.

I got out in '87, and a lot has changed since. I'm guessing the drinking has toned down with a nationwide 21 drinking age. Guns and booze don't mix, and that is my biggest hesitation. Life in the barracks, especially after returning from the field, can be like a frat house on steroids. BBI basically reminded me how wild it can get. If you haven't lived it, it might me tough to understand.

I lived off post for most of permanent party. I stored a lot of weapons for my buddies that hunted, as it was a whole lot easier to get them from me than the armorer. Most of us had a pistol or two, but I don't remember anybody carrying. Times have changed, and the regs need to also.

What would be acceptable change? Should soldiers be allowed to keep personal weapons in a room they share with someone else?

 

[freekforge]

As much as would love to see this work out i really don't think it will. I think this will end up like the whole sleeve rolling thing. I was at atterbury for a couple weeks when they announced that soldiers could roll up their sleeves I was told to do what everyone else was even though im not Army. Everyone was in the common area in the barracks giving their input on the very best sleeve rolling technique, all was good in the hood. But by day 3 our hopes and dreams had been crushed and now most people i talk to hate it. I can see the concealed carry thing going down the same hill.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Respectfully I must say someone wasn't truthful with you. First i am a Lead Firearms instructor within DOJ and use to work with the US Marshals Service. The only Fed LE's be they FBI, Marshals even BOP etc that can carry armed on a commercial flight are ones that attended a special course at FLETC. Each LEO is issued a special 6 digit number that is tracked and controlled through TSA.

There were a few LEO's (mostly FED) that were allowed to fly armed after LEOSA however TSA and Homeland Security tightened that up with agency letterhead and the special number tracked through their course attendance.

I always wondered about that. It wouldn't surprise me if it was embellished/made up but I figured posting here would help determine that

 

[drillsgt]

My point was/is just because someone is in the Military doesn't equate to training or ability. Similar to LTCH. Just because several folks have them doesn't mean all of them are prepared either.

You're right being in the military doesn't equate to many having any extra training or ability but you don't need to be Delta to defend yourself either, people with no training do it successfully quite often. Even the lowliest support personnel at least go through basic training with a lot of firearms instruction and they will get more if they get a state issued permit or whatever the Post would mandate. You must really think poorly of IN's numerous LTCH holders then.

 

[drillsgt]

My fault for assuming the relevant similarity was self evident. While increasing my personal risk, it reduces institutional risk. Not that soldiers are prisoners (although, as I recall, there were some marked similarities), or that they would disarm each other. Is the military's goal reducing personal risk for an individual soldier, or is it reducing institutional risk via losing less troops overall?

To paraphrase:

1) The risk of ND/AD is not zero. I've already laid out the relevant facts for this, and the fact military members have accidentally shot themselves right here in this county this year. There is no requirement for malfeasance or evil intent. ADs can be reduced through proper training (that DoD will never implement widely) but will never be eliminated. It's neither anti-gun nor anti-soldier to recognize this and include it in decision making.

2) Gun owners shoot themselves more often that they shoot bad guys, by a pretty large margin. In the civilian world, that's the price of freedom. It's not simply about the ratio of bad guys shot to ADs, there's significantly more at stake. In the military, freedom is secondary to mission and the individual is secondary to the unit. Unless that's changed as well.

3) Soldiers are humans and citizens, but they are also assets. See #2.

Not sure why you are so fixated on AD's and think there is going to be a rash of shootings and death and destruction across Posts/Bases nationwide, it's silly. Those that would take advantage of it are probably already pro-gun folks who carry off duty anyway, it's not like they're going to order all the S-shop clerks to start carrying on post. If you're so concerned about AD's/ND's you should probably start with your own profession and work out from there.

 

[drillsgt]

Maybe I misread something but I'm not seeing where anyone was against it outright just several of us (me included) only stated several issues we have observed. Just because they are Military does not means they are proficient as they should be, no different than many that have LTCH are not as proficient as they should be and even some LEO's are not as proficient as they should be either.

Just

Just because someone is Military or an NCO means they are all that with a firearm. I have seen it several times over o. Several Military ranges I ran.

This can be applied to many individuals across all different organizations, I've seen many individuals who are in combat arms that were not all that, but i've also seen the same thing with local/county/federal LE as well, being in one group or the other doesn't infer any special or inherent ability. I've even seen members of SF that with a pistol in their hand were a soup sandwich and didn't even know how to grip it properly. So let's agree that anyone that's not you is just a total disaster waiting to be unleashed upon society, at what level of training would you be comfortable in letting MIL carry? Say one thunder ranch class, ten classes etc., what would make you sleep well at night?

 

[drillsgt]

I always wondered about that. It wouldn't surprise me if it was embellished/made up but I figured posting here would help determine that

It does sound a little out there but what time period was this? Not too long ago in 2008 when I was in a CID unit all we had to do was take an online class so we knew the proper procedure when we got to the airport.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

It does sound a little out there but what time period was this? Not too long ago in 2008 when I was in a CID unit all we had to do was take an online class so we knew the proper procedure when we got to the airport.

Yeah, but even with that you needed a valid reason to fly armed, ie prisoner escort, correct? That's how it is for civilian LEO, and certainly doesn't allow you to fly armed for general purposes, let alone make you an air marshal for the day.

 

[in625shooter]

This can be applied to many individuals across all different organizations, I've seen many individuals who are in combat arms that were not all that, but i've also seen the same thing with local/county/federal LE as well, being in one group or the other doesn't infer any special or inherent ability. I've even seen members of SF that with a pistol in their hand were a soup sandwich and didn't even know how to grip it properly. So let's agree that anyone that's not you is just a total disaster waiting to be unleashed upon society, at what level of training would you be comfortable in letting MIL carry? Say one thunder ranch class, ten classes etc., what would make you sleep well at night?

Respectfully, That's pretty much what I said. As far as Military I believe the number is 10% of combat arms that actually will pull the trigger. And never said anyone can't or hasn't defended their self. You are the one throwing Delta around not me. And on your other post about my opinion of LTCH holders all I stated was fact and that is many are not as prepared as they think they are which is t a stretch. Go to any IDPA or IPSC match and watch. Several self proclaimed "Sheep dogs" dont fair to well.

And I also stand by my point that even military basic most troops have only a basic course in marksmanship. Better than nothing but I saw it then and I see it daily now in LE as an instructor. Only about 10-20% of folks take an I retesting and invest their own time in shooting. Whether training for work or even recreational type. That does not mean anyone is against military or anyone having means to protect themselves just it wo t guarantee all bad will just stop happening.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Not sure why you are so fixated on AD's and think there is going to be a rash of shootings and death and destruction across Posts/Bases nationwide, it's silly. Those that would take advantage of it are probably already pro-gun folks who carry off duty anyway, it's not like they're going to order all the S-shop clerks to start carrying on post. If you're so concerned about AD's/ND's you should probably start with your own profession and work out from there.

Again, would you care to take a guess how many military members have injured themselves with NDs in my county alone this year?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Respectfully, That's pretty much what I said. As far as Military I believe the number is 10% of combat arms that actually will pull the trigger.

I believe that figure comes from LTC Grossman and, while much of his work is solid, does not stand up under scrutiny. Different topic, but that percentage is quite low.

 

[Woobie]

We're failing oldpink's purity test by asking questions and pointing out potential issues. I suspect most folks here are on the same page, or close. Even Woobie mentioned he sees potential issues in the barracks.

But, let's play along for a minute.

How many troops lost to terrorists, or violence of any type that could be prevented by being armed while in garrison? Then, how many have been killed by ADs in training or in the field?

Article from 2009: Accidental deaths plaguing US troops in Iraq - The Boston Globe



126 accidental discharges reported in an 8 month period during OEF: https://www.dvidshub.net/news/12275/negligent-discharges-they-affect-service-members



Going back to 2004: 'Disturbing trend' seen in negligent discharges of weapons in Afghanistan - News - Stripes



Negligent Discharges Kill 90 U.S. Soldiers in Iraq - The Truth About Guns



Navy Recruiter Suffers Negligent Handgun Discharge In Georgia - Bearing Arms - Chattanooga, Georgia, Navy, Negligent Discharge, Tennessee (If you count the Navy as military...)



So, perhaps we're not the only ones with the concern. If looking at the facts fails the purity test, so be it.

It is worth pointing out that most of those statistics come from before or during the era when the culture was making a change toward where it is now. And I can only speak on Army training. For all I know the USMC is still telling their guys to rest their chins on the muzzle.

There is also a concern (and for the life of me I can't figure out why it hasn't caught on more with the terrorists) that there will be copycat terrorism based on past attacks by Hassan and others. So while past numbers are low, we also have to look at changing trends and times.

Please don't take this as attacking the character instead of the argument, but Gen Odierno has overseen a lot of the wussification, online training culture change in the Army. Not a fan, and I don't take a lot of stock in some of the things he says. And it's just like him to try to solve the problem in a PowerPoint or taking something away, rather than find a solid solution.

Finally, I'm betting a not-insignificant number of those ND's are murders. Guys don't take kindly to you getting their buddies killed. It's not nearly as much time in the Brig if no one thinks it's actual murder.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

It is worth pointing out that most of those statistics come from before or during the era when the culture was making a change toward where it is now. And I can only speak on Army training. For all I know the USMC is still telling their guys to rest their chins on the muzzle.

There is also a concern (and for the life of me I can't figure out why it hasn't caught on more with the terrorists) that there will be copycat terrorism based on past attacks by Hassan and others. So while past numbers are low, we also have to look at changing trends and times.

Please don't take this as attacking the character instead of the argument, but Gen Odierno has overseen a lot of the wussification, online training culture change in the Army. Not a fan, and I don't take a lot of stock in some of the things he says. And it's just like him to try to solve the problem in a PowerPoint or taking something away, rather than find a solid solution.

Finally, I'm betting a not-insignificant number of those ND's are murders. Guys don't take kindly to you getting their buddies killed. It's not nearly as much time in the Brig if no one thinks it's actual murder.

I don't know the guy, but I know brass is often more concerned with being brass than anything else. In short, I'll figure you're right on that one..

Murder vs ND...I dunno. Maybe some of them, but as in investigator I can tell you that it's not quite as simple as "oops, I didn't mean to." Some likely are, but counterpoint how many NDs that were never reported or blamed on something else? I'm not sure I'd count murder disguised as an ND as a pro in this debate, regardless.

The stats are, for the most part, older. That doesn't mean there aren't new stats, it just means that's when the media was interested. I didn't see anything, other than the Navy guy who ND'd into his leg and that was only newsworthy because it was after the attacks on recruiters. I believe you that training is better, but surely no one is claiming that NDs are completely eliminated. More gun handling will result in more NDs. You've got, what, a bit over a million active duty troops in all branches? It doesn't take much of a percentage to start stacking up numbers. (And, yes, I know, not everyone will carry and not everyone is eligible to, but you see the point)

The majority of the military member NDs that I've responded to have also involved alcohol. Perhaps things have radically changed, but I suppose that might be part of what you meant with "issues in the barracks" earlier in the thread? They have been, thankfully, non-fatal. Generally hand injuries.

So, yes, I think NDs are an important part of the discussion when we look at risk vs reward. Recruiters are at more risk (soft target and also exposed to random crime, and I don't recall many robberies or the like on military installations), and should hopefully be less risky than Pvt. Snuffy, making that a much easier call in my mind.

 

[in625shooter]

I believe that figure comes from LTC Grossman and, while much of his work is solid, does not stand up under scrutiny. Different topic, but that percentage is quite low.

True but if you look at even LEO's that don't drop the hammer (or striker) even when they are legally allowed due to either they are apprehensive of being scrutinized or maybe professional restraint. The amount should be much much higher.

Evan Marshal shared a study on stopping power.net that this was mentioned in a study about Cop Attackers and weapons. Sort of related


News from The Force Science Research Center

 

[Woobie]

Here's how I would handle this:

No POW's in the field. Only around offices, company areas, main post or off post.
No POW's unholstered. UCMJ action for violation.
POW's can be stored at home for those living in on base housing or off post.
For those living in barracks, Weapons get locked up. No weapons in any room. CQ can sign you out your weapon when you leave, but you sign it in before you go to your room. You maintain your mags and ammo.
Since CQ doesn't have access to the vault, anyone wanting to have a weapon to carry can chip in to buy an approved safe.

That last one is a week one, and I think it needs more thought to help accountability and reduce accusations of theft.

I think the concerns and experiences shared in this thread are valuable and mostly accurate. What we currently have in place is Draconian, and also been revealed in a number of incidents to actually be detrimental to ForcePro. I think it could be helpful, as well as beneficial to individual service member liberty to swing this pendulum back the other way a bit.

 

[oldpink]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This
Damn rep system still not working.

 

[actaeon277]

Well, you can't put any sign in your window whether it be Trump or hello kitty so it's not really a good comparison. You are free to support Trump all you want just not in uniform but this applies to non-military jobs as well. As far as health and welfare inspections go they are seldom random and we had to have 'probable cause' to conduct one and we would get JAG sign off as well. We didn't just decide to go search on a whim. What's the issue with General Court's Martial, that's pretty much akin to a civilian court proceeding?

UCMJ ? United States Code of Military Justice
888. ARTICLE 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS « UCMJ ? United States Code of Military Justice
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

889. ARTICLE 89 DISRESPECT TOWARD SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER « UCMJ ? United States Code of Military Justice
Any person subject to this chapter who behaves with disrespect toward his superior commissioned officer shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


These are just some areas where the first amendment is "abridged".
Yes, criticizing command in a civilian can get you fired.
This is not "firing".


And search warrants were never used when they searched barracks or ships. Pretty sure that could be an abridgement of the 4th.

 

[actaeon277]

my cousin was active with the army. He checked in to a civilian flight and was made an air marshal for the flight, complete with a handgun. No one died. He was not given training before the flight, just told to step up if needed. No one needs additional training.

I wasn't in the service, but have heard you'd get knocked down/out if you muzzle swept someone...

I don't know about sweeping (muzzle sweeping, I know about broom sweeping), but I was told force was authorized when if someone reached for the RPCP (Reactor Plant Control Panel).
I witnessed at least two trainees get thrown over a chain (strung across a doorway) when they reached for the RPCP without explaining what they were doing FIRST.

 

[actaeon277]

I believe that figure comes from LTC Grossman and, while much of his work is solid, does not stand up under scrutiny. Different topic, but that percentage is quite low.

Men Against Fire: How Many Soldiers Actually Fired Their Weapons at the Enemy During the Vietnam War | HistoryNet

This article talks about the subject.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This
Damn rep system still not working.

Why don't you think soldiers should be allowed to carry in the barracks? I assume you agree with that provision, as you're ready to rep the plan. Given your previous comments, it would seem the options are low opinion of soldiers who live in barracks or anti-second amendment.