How should we formally arm our troops?

Marine Corps won't spend money to arm us

Police officers are allowed and typically ordered to carry a weapon even while off duty, because they might come under attack by someone they have arrested. Why should it be any different for our troops. They should not need a CCP, they have to carry military ID with them any way. So a law should be passed allowing service members to carry a privately owned weapon or draw one if they want it. It is clear that our men and women in uniform are a target, they have been trained to use weapons, allow them to defend themselves just like police officers.

My suggestion would be to start with: ensuring they are up to date on their gun quals and allowing them to test using their private firearms. When in uniform; by issuing/controlling official sidearms like MPs. A member might be less "gun happy" if they have to account for the firing of that firearm through official means like law enforcement and MPs. When in civilian clothes on base; allow carrying of personal firearms (leaving the option to conceal or open carry up to the member).

We are already armed, now it's just a matter of how to carry, sidearms? M4s? Shotguns, less than lethal arms? Lots of questions. I'm all for having sidearms like the police.

If they receive proper training and carried concealed would be one way. Another way would also be to provide them with bullet proof vests, recruiting station windows/glass should be bullet proof, and have armed (open carry) security guard/officers.

Most of the USAF is not made up of combat troops so maybe arming recruiters would not be that smart. Probably makes sense to have some of our great Security Police stationed at these recruiting centers. Or maybe just let the Marines guard them?

This was also on FB where a "vet" mentioned that "If the military cannot trust a Soldier with a weapon, that Soldier needs to be gone". That is arrogant and foolhardy. I see the issue with arming recruiters as a beginning to a larger problem, and it landing on a VERY slippery slope of 2nd amendment rights vs. Command risk assessment vs. common sense. While my heart truly goes out to the families that have to live with this for the rest of their lives and the loss of five troops that had a long life to live, let's not get into a knee jerk reaction that this is going to be a commonplace theme. The Army has had incidents with Soldiers and weapons going against other Soldiers (blue on blue Ft. Bragg PT formation anyone?) that predate what's currently happening and the storm has been weathered and we survived just fine.
Before we go about arming recruiters, what about others? Where do we stop this? Does the troop with PTSD/TBI have just as much right to defend himself as a four star combatant commander? What would be the guidelines in this being both when enroute to work or home are "soft targets"? What is going to be the determining factors to allow these troops to have weapons? Are they going to be military weapons or personal weapons? Either one places issues for the command and the troops alike. Not all recruiting stations are near a post or an armory, so where are the military weapons going to be stored? Before someone says in a safe, who's going to stay with them as a guard? Who's going to sign them in and out? Recruiters work some HARD hours to get recruits as it is. You have to display there are weapons there through a placard and that's enough for some potato to try and steal them knowing no one's there after hours. Allow them to bring personal weapons in? Ok do the risk assessment on that. If you place them in the desk, is that the right answer? If so what's the sense of having them there in the first place? What caliber is allowed vs. being ridiculous? Would a 9mm be ok and a Barrett .50 cal not? How about having a recruiter standing overwatch on the shop? Sounds good, but then he could be the difference between mission success that month or failure. And that even sounds good until he gets detailed out to help with recruits (this WILL happen).
A Commander has to weigh what is vs. what can be and the impact on his/her unit. Allowing weapons in the workplace I don't think is the clear answer, although someone with a weapon IS a viable idea (a professional security agency?). And how many of these recruiters are vets who have PTSD/TBI untreated? Now you have someone with a weapon that "could" have a flashback and we have a blue on blue or a recruiter on a possible recruit. That's not fair to either one. Who's qualified to shoot and who isn't? Are we going to use the standard qual requirements as a litmus test? In combat I don't think anyone cares you qual'd expert or marksman.
I disagree with lamestream media and the NRA's attacks on this making it seem that this is going to happen again. Where are the metrics to back this up? I would stress vigilance over complacency. Attention to detail with a focus on reading people. The branches could install bulletproof glass cheaper than anything going or move and consolidate the recruiting stations to allow for greater manpower and maybe the use of weapons and technology to assist them. This HAS to be thought out FULLY and not off some political agenda or another knee jerk reaction to another unfortunate event. I don't want a repeat of this, but proper planning is the way to go, and taking off the uniforms really didn't solve anything....THE BUILDINGS ARE MARKED folks!! And in case they don't know, you can spot a troop or a vet a mile away with the way they walk. Nine in the front, Six to the rear with a 30 in step. That equals a troop along with the haircut to me.

If we're going to be formal about it, I would suggest polished black leather holsters -- possibly mounted on a belt akin to what the General Officers used to have for their pistols. That would seem to go best with both the Service and Dress uniforms (as formalwear).

On the other hand, there is something to be said for using a modified saber belt, and there is the question of whether it would be proper to wear both saber and pistol simultaneously.

Allow conceal carry on base for those military members who are trained. Train recruiters as a part of the duty.

What would happen if one of the recruiters had his own personal firearm in his bag and was able to put the bad guy down before he killed him?