How should we formally arm our troops?

I was just talking to my wife about this yesterday. imho, every active duty service member should be armed, with certain exceptions. Being armed in engineering spaces on Navy/CG ships, for instance would be an unfortunate encumbrance that inhibits duty performance. But every ground trooper, every airman, ever person on a shore installation, should be armed. Why do our troops have M5's or whatever the latest is, down range, but as soon as they get on the airplane - turn it in... Why aren't all officers and Senior Enlisted carrying loaded side arms?

The arguments of the past about people not knowing how to handle them, so there are accidents is bunk. Train like you fight!!! If our folks have to be armed with Mwhatevers and Sidearms down range, how can we justify them not being armed at home?

There are discussions in some states about concealed carry for some recruiters... Forget that. Concealed pistols just take time to get to and are not a visible deterrent. Fully strapped...

I was a 1st Sgt for a recruiting squadron. I estimate more than half my recruiters were on anti-depressants such as Paxil. Are you sure you want them carrying heat?

we can't arm recruiting stations, they're not "military" property, recruiters would be subject to local and state firm arms laws.

Alright, if we're going to do this, let's look at it logically.

First and foremost, we need to provide training. Pistol qualification at the basic level would be a 2 week event which would have to be added to the Basic/Bootcamp level (or MCT/MOS/AIT, etc). That's the only way to ensure "everyone" is trained.

Second we need to provide Annual Refresher training, much like we do for Rifle Qualification.

Third, we need to provide State/Local Training, as every state is a little different, and the rules regarding such are different. This would likely be a 1-2 day class upon arrival to the base, and a annual/semi-annual refresher (tied in with Annual Pistol Qualification).

Fourth, there is the matter of Age restrictions. In order to purchase a handgun, you must be over the age of 21. I do not know what individual States have enacted for possession, but let's assume there will be some deconfliction which must take place.

Fifth is storage. How do we store these weapons, and ammo. In bootcamp, we had "armory racks" but no ammo. We could likely provide lockboxes in the barracks, and issue them as well to troops who live offbase, however there are cost issues which would have to be accounted for. Even at $50 each (SWAG $ figure) that adds up fast for 1M troops.

Policies regarding alcohol consumption. Can a weapon be stored in a vehicle? Can a weapon be handed off to a spouse? These are all things that need to be accounted for.

HK MP5SDs so the noise doesn't disturb the shoppers.

See how upside down we have become? We are having to have a discussion (as a country) about arming the "armed" forces of the United States to protect themselves on U.S. soil. This is further evidence of how far we have drifted.
Recruiters are usually NCO's or Staff NCO's. They should be responsible enough to carry a side arm or I might question why, in a time of large draw downs, they are still in the armed forces. If we have NCO's/Staff NCO's that are not comfortable with firearms I would really question them being on the wall. I could see an exception for healthcare related positions where there might be a conflict perhaps a few others.

I think we start by arming all officers, staff NCOs, and CPOs.

We put weapons in the hands of anybody in any kind of uniform in foreign nations, but sadly can't arm our own brothers and sisters. Another example of political correctness killing our nation. Praying for the Marines' family and loved ones right now...

Arming the recruiters is solving only part of the problem. It's a necessary step, but it's only one step.

Armed recruiters would not have made much of a difference at Chattanooga, because the shooter engaged from standoff range outside the recruiting office, and very few of the victims would've had the ability to engage effectively.

Another problem: there are a LOT of NCOs and officers whom I would not trust with small arms in a tactical situation, because they haven't learned the skills needed to survive said situation--or even the skills required to safely bear arms. Combat troops have this drilled into them--but combat arms personnel make up only about 10% of the Marines and Army, and far less of the Navy and Air Force.

This problem will kill any arm-the-troops initiative because no commander in his right mind is going to risk the consequences of a (likely to happen) negligent discharge.

So, what needs to be done?

I believe we need a force protection training program to equip non-combat-arms personnel with the skills needed to safely handle firearms on a routine basis, the tactical skill to respond to an attack, the ability to act as an instructor and leader in local force protection initiatives, and risk assessment and mitigation skills to aid the commander in establishing and maintaining force protection measures.

This program would be joint (as this is a joint problem, and many of the most vulnerable facilities are joint ones; also, I want one standard for critical things like interfacing with local law enforcement). To be eligible to apply for the program, one must be an NCO or warrant/ commissioned officer (Army SP4s and USAF SrAs need not apply; in the E-4 ranks, only Army hard-stripe Corporals and USAF SSGs are eligible unless those branches change their manpower policies), with at least four years' time in service.

The evaluation process begins with the chain of command; consideration for the assessment phase will only be given to those who have favorable endorsement from their chain of command to the O-6 CO/OIC level. COs and OICs are expected to interview the candidate and the candidate's immediate seniors in the chain of command prior to granting favorable endorsement to the application.

The candidate will then participate in the assessment phase. This will consist of a physical fitness test and relevant portions of the USMC Combat Fitness Test (notably, the buddy drag/carry and movement under fire sections). All of this will be given at the end of a full day's work--the enemy isn't going to attack you when you're fresh and ready to go, after all! The assessment phase concludes with an interview by the selection board; this will be aimed at assessing the candidate's maturity and ability to instruct and advise.

Successful candidates will then undergo an eight-week program focused on the following areas:

1. Threat analysis, with risk analysis and mitigation strategies for garrison and field conditions.
2. First aid under fire.
3. Law governing the use of force
4. Weapons maintenance & safety
5. Tactical training, focused on immediate action drills, shoot/no-shoot criteria, and coordinating with law enforcement or other first responders.
6. Techniques of military instruction (Train the Trainer)

Qualification isn't one-and-done; elements will require at least annual re-certification--and the training for same will need to be done mostly on the certificant's own time. However, an individual who maintains the qualifications should be viewed with favor for promotion, retention, and assignment preference, as these are useful skills for any branch of service.

As a retired senior LEO this is MO. There shouldn't be a blanket statement that says arm all officers and NCOs. Some of them scared the shit out me when they were handling their assigned M9. There needs to be a designated certifier on who can carry. Each base has one person that signs a concealed carry card (someone in the PMO). There needs to be an established qualification table for concealed carriers and designated scorers. If they do not put in control measures there is going to be people hooking up their buddies, so they can carry, who shouldn't be carrying. If they do not establish controls, people carrying that shouldn't be carrying, are going to hurt people that shouldn't be getting hurt.