When I was doing WARSKIL LE duties in 79-82, I was issued a .38 AND ammo, whether I was on patrol or pulling Gate Guard duty. Got my Expert Ribbon with the M16, but never carried that.

I'm not sure why the brass feel it's necessary to ban individuals personal guns from the base. Makes no sense to me.

"All personnel" no. NCOs and Officers, yes.

LTC David B. - I understand your point, and agree mostly. Here is where I would possibly disagree. I work on post, so I have to drive from my off post residence to my on post office. During that travel time, to and from work, I am without my personal protection. No, I do not think there is a threat around every corner, but I am unprotected (to a degree) during my travel times. Currently, you can only transport unloaded firearms on post to your residence or the range (sportsman center). So I would be breaking the law (or at least intent) by transporting an unloaded firearm to and from work (keeping it in my vehicle locked up and unloaded while on post). I do feel that everyone should get training if they plan to carry open or concealed, if only so that they have a better understanding of the legal ramifications of their actions, and what they can (should) and cannot (should not) do when carrying. I am a licensed and certified firearms instructor (state and federal), and support this, only if there is a validated level of training people need in order to carry on post.

The problem is that most people believe that Soldiers (military personnel) are highly trained and proficient in regards to firearms. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of military personnel qualify once or twice a year and do not touch firearms at any other time. There is a mindset that comes with responsible gun ownership and more importantly with those who chose to carry open or concealed. Without that mindset, they are an accident (negligence) waiting to happen.

Generally speaking, those who go through the training, obtain their concealed weapons permit/concealed handgun license, and regularly carry, are to a degree safer with firearms than those who receive no training or are simply in the military. People need to understand that simply carrying a firearm means nothing without fully understanding how to successfully and effectively employ it, and understand that they are liable for every round that exits their handgun.

I digress now, and say simply this. I am trained and certified to carry in multiple states, I have received training from some of the best in the business, and I am confident in my ability to safely carry a firearm on my at all times. I have been on multiple installations that have had active shooter incidents, with at least two fatalities. I would rather I have a tool used for self defense and defense of others than depend on the MPs making it to my building in time to stop someone. 1358 fps is much faster than 911. Just my opinion.

Concur.

I agree SSG Joel as far as CCW permits being worthless if alcohol is involved. It is truly ridiculous that you should loose your ability to defend yourself when you're out with friends at a bar or at an alcohol-serving restaurant with your family. But why not both. SD and CQ should be armed in my opinion. But soldiers should be afforded the same rights to self protection that we defend don't you agree?

Well  to SSG Joel and Micheal. If you go to the alcohol serving restaurant and it has the 51 percent sign you take it to the car or change restaurants. but if out on the town and I know that I am going to be drinking 1) I leave it at home, 2) I don't go to a bar that I know that might be questionable. If I wouldn't take my wife to or trust her there with out me I don't go to that kinda establishment. However I do like the idea of the CQ AND the staff duty and runners being armed. Reason I say runners is that both said personel leave the area to conduct securtiy and checks of the barracks. So that leaves the runner there by themselves if that situation pops up they also have the weapon as well.

Lieutenant Philpot, would you mind telling us about the situation you alluded to?

I gotta hear this one too, Chief. Please elaborate, LT.

I carry concealed most places allowed by law (in the great state of Indiana, that is virtually everywhere) but open carry never sits well with me.
I always feel like I am signing up to be the first one shot by the bad guy.

I can Open Carry here in Idaho and could in Montana when I lived there. However, I like the element of surprise and CCW. This fat old lady can conceal my weapon and no one ever knows :-D

I'm not so sure about this considering the lack of quality pistol training Soldiers generally receive. If concealed carry ever became a possibility, the Army would have to revamp the training to incorporate shoot/don't shoot scenarios in addition to a better training program. As for SFC Hoke's comment; aren't those officer usually trained by NCOs? If a Soldiers can prove he/she can handle a firearm properly, then we should let them have a CCP.

Maybe I'm mistaken MAJ Woods, but shouldnt all soldiers carrying lethal weapons be trained in PID? Also more pistol training definitely couldnt hurt. The M9 causes more injuries than any other weapon were issued. And it typically is issued to higher ranking soldiers who should know by now how to safely handle it.