Should we be arming selected NCOs and Officers that interact with the public?

2015-07-16T21:11:18-04:00

If the Federal Government allows vetted Commercial Airline Pilots to carry sidearms behind reinforced cabin doors in an effort to secure cockpits then the same thought process should apply to Recruiting Stations and Reserve Centers.

Obviously this would be limited in scope and I'm certainly not advocating for Recruiters to wear Kevlar but this is not the first instance of a soft site being targeted and it is simply common sense.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 16 at 2015 11:42 PM

2015-07-16T23:42:57-04:00

Unfortunately, with the current threats, which will continue and increase... military members at home are now targets. I believe more, if not all need to be armed. If everyone has a gun, at the ready, I am sure many (not all) would think twice.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jul 17 at 2015 3:19 AM

2015-07-17T03:19:42-04:00

I was always surprised that the military did not trust us with guns.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Jul 17 at 2015 9:42 AM

2015-07-17T09:42:14-04:00

From Tenn. to Times Square, military recruiting centers prove easy targets ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/07/17/from-tenn-to-times-square-military-recruiting-centers-prove-easy-targets/?hpid=z2

From Tenn. to Times Square, military recruiting centers prove easy targets

"Somebody brutally and brazenly attacked members of our armed services," Chattanooga Police Chief Fred Fletcher said.

Response by SSgt Charles Edwards made Jul 17 at 2015 9:56 AM

2015-07-17T09:56:16-04:00

Based on what happened in Chattanooga, it stands to reason that NCOs and officers should be allowed to carry as a means to defend themselves. Additionally, maybe it's time that all recruiting offices with large glass windows and doors be replaced with bullet resistant glass.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Jul 17 at 2015 10:23 AM

2015-07-17T10:23:24-04:00

A guide to recent attacks on military bases and installations ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/07/16/a-guide-to-recent-attacks-on-military-bases-and-installations/?hpid=z2

A guide to recent attacks on military bases and installations

More than 40 people have been killed by single-gunman attacks on military facilities since 2009.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 17 at 2015 11:36 AM

2015-07-17T11:36:51-04:00

CPL(P) Bret Farritor I think they should carry concealed handguns and possibly have a gun safe with rifles in the event of an active shooter situation.

Response by MSgt Manuel Diaz made Jul 17 at 2015 11:55 AM

2015-07-17T11:55:01-04:00

Terrorists have advocated they will target military personnel and Afghanistan Iraq veterans. Arm them all, or arm yourself, where legal or constitutionally guaranteed. Are they testing response and reaction time for future or secondary hits

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Jul 17 at 2015 11:59 AM

2015-07-17T11:59:54-04:00

From a legal stand point, armed soldiers deployed on American soil is not something that can happen.
This is an issue that tears me up. On the one hand, had the Recruiters been armed, the death toll from yesterday could have been mitigated by proven combat US Marines. Is it a certainty that the outcome would have been different? No, but it would have certainly changed the circumstances. On the other hand it is a slippery slope. First arm certain specific people. Then expand who those people are, then you have armed military deployed among the population. It is sad anytime a service member loses their life in defense of our great nation. It is sadder when that loss of life occurs on American Soil. It is compounded when that loss of life is not related to combat action. What I mean is that if a soldier dies in a helicopter crash on a training exercise, that is a sad tragedy, but at least that is an activity in which there is an inherent danger. When a Service Member is in what should be the safest posting in the military, that compounds the tragedy of the loss.
We as a society should not accept this. Recruiting Stations should be protected. Homeland Security, Private Security, US Marshals, or Local Law Enforcement should be used to insure that these types of attacks are difficult to accomplish.
On further thought, As United States Citizens, we have the right to keep and bear arms. Instead of arming these folks with military issued weapons, maybe they should just be allowed to carry a firearm based on the federal, state, and local regulations regarding the carry of a concealed firearm. If not concealed, then personal firearm carried in a uniform holster on the belt.

Response by PO2 John Riley made Jul 17 at 2015 5:50 PM

2015-07-17T17:50:45-04:00

Police are armed. In AZ it is legal for any resident to carry in plain view. There is no reason why most of our active duty personnel can't carry, if they have qualified for small arms. I was an electricians mate +50 years ago and when we acquired brig prisoners for labor aboard ship we wore SP armbands and loaded 45s.