Should service members be able to conceal and carry while on duty?

2015-07-17T23:22:16-04:00

I would like to know the views of other service members of on duty conceal and carry.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 17 at 2015 11:24 PM

2015-07-17T23:24:47-04:00

Service not device. I apologize for my lack of proof reading.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 17 at 2015 11:54 PM

2015-07-17T23:54:56-04:00

I am retired military, but I am also retired law enforcement. Nowhere I go does the heat not go with me. The chances are fairly low that I will ever find myself in a 2005 Omaha West Roads' Mall or 2015 Charleston church shooting. The odds were astronomically high once, yet they are getting lower and lower every year. Add to that the "Lone Wolf" Islamic terrorist and nowhere is safe now. Anyway, once a cop, always a cop. My contract with the military really did not end when I retired. Neither did my obligation to protect and serve to public end when I retired, either.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Jul 18 at 2015 11:31 AM

2015-07-18T11:31:16-04:00

The military has never allowed everyone to carry for a reason. I think it would add an unwelcome aspect to good order and discipline..Nevermind drunk idiots in the barracks. hehe I WOULD, however, support allowing NCOs to carry if they wish and having designated personnel that are armed as part of their duties. It solves the problem without Sgt. Joe having to worry about shitbag PVT. Snuffy's glock when he's getting hemmed up.

Response by SSgt Eric Bainbridge made Jul 18 at 2015 1:06 PM

2015-07-18T13:06:17-04:00

I'm not sure active duty can carry concealed or open while in uniform amongst civilian population. Wouldn't this be a violation of Posse Comitatus?

Response by SSG Demetrius Davis made Jul 21 at 2015 12:47 PM

2015-07-21T12:47:36-04:00

For some reason I have found a great number of people think that if service members with a concealed carry permit were allowed to carry on post that the post will become the wild west with soldiers aimlessly popping off rounds in an active shooter situation. There are a great number of people who conceal carry now (off post of course), many of them soldiers, and I haven't heard of many, if any, CHL/CCW holders injuring a third innocent party in an active shooter situation, why would that change just because it is on post? My opinion is that all military personnel on and off post on or in federal property will always be a target just because the current law prohibits conceal carry in that particular place. To anyone planning a terrorist attack or a simple robbery, what better target than someone you know will not be armed. The current active shooter response SOPs are just that, responsive. Responded to an active shooter situation is already too late. Think about how fast you can empty a clip and reload a handgun. Now think how long it takes for someone in the active shooter situation to 1) call the MPs and report the location, then 2) the desk officer who took the call to report that to his/her supervisor [or whomever he/she reports the call to], then 3) relaying the location and briefing the MPs who are going to be the on scene respondents, then 4) driving to the scene. By the time it takes those 4 steps to be completed, how many rounds have been fired from the weapon(s) the shooter is using. During those 4 steps, how many people have been wounded or killed? All this happening while no one in the situation is armed. Same situation only now you have 5 or 6 CCW/CHL holders in the crowd who are armed. Granted there will still be a body count from the initial barrage of gunfire from the attacker but will it be as high if just 3 of the 5 or 6 armed individuals returned fire? Do we really believe that those carrying concealed handguns will return fire in recklessly manner?