Why didn’t Bush do something about this EO when he was President?
Greatly limited ROEs and disarmed on military bases.
Perhaps we should call our troops the the Disarmed Forces.
Their job involves weapons ALREADY, and we’re always told this is a NEW type of war in which there is no “front”, per se.
And so there they are —TARGETS.
And yet no way to defend us, indeed, no way even to defend THEMSELVES.
IT IS RIDICULOUS.
Do the feds still run that brothel they took over in the early 90's?
Mass shootings only occur in gun-free zones.
AMEN!
Arm soldiers!
They know exactly what to do.
Should instead be part of the active duty check-in when you get transfered in that you will attend all required concealed carry and long gun requirements for the state the base is on. You will then be required to purchase a sidearm with funding in a new allowance catagory just like housing allowance, clothing allowance, meal rations allowance. You will be required to carry at all times on the base, not required in your govt. housing, if applicable. But post an armed guard to accessways for govt housing to protect the unarmed members and their families.
If this isn’t common sense gun legislation, I don’t know what is.
Y’know, a lot of this problem is self-inflicted. We as gun owners have a real bad tendency to “hide our light under a bushel basket.” That is to say that most gun owners don’t carry and those that do tend to carry concealed. Which might be OK from a tactical perspective, but in the long run just undercuts our position. Very few gun owners Open Carry the Tools of Liberty. And it’s not helping us one little bit.
Ask yourself: would the kind of senseless butchery we’ve seen in CT and DC and CO and other places have occurred if even 10% of the population Open Carried?
No, it probably would not.
And we also have to ask whether we would even be hearing the tired bleatings of the gun grabbers if 10% of the population Open Carried?
No, we probably would not.
So while we complain about the gun grabbers and fight them politically, it continues to be something of a rearguard effort. We could largely eliminate violent crime and get marginalize the gun grabbers in one fell swoop if just say one out of 4 or one out of 5 gunowners would just openly and proudly carry the Tools of Liberty as they went about their day to day business.
We are sitting ducks right now. A band of clowns can overrun our military bases.
I didn’t know our men on military bases couldn’t have a handgun until the killing at Fort Hood. I was stunned to find that out. That many deaths at Fort Hood wouldn’t have happened if our guns had a handgum. These killings at the Naval base also be much less if our guys had a handgun.
That law needs to be struck down right now.
It seems like the Navy Yard shooter (I refuse to print its name) would have thought twice, and only have succeeded once, if he were met by a few armed GIs running to the sound of the gunfire, with weapons drawn.
Crazy.
Policies .. Who needs them unless they serve a leftist goal.
Years ago, even as we took up a new fight against terrorists of no particular persuasion, we lost our way, our nation’s leaders floundered and philandered too, the price we have paid since for their intrigues is inestimable, for families, for states and our nation.
Put some ice on it, Bubba. Time for you to get Jimmah Carter to build you a house.. With a view. Of Hillary and the hell she hath wrought as well.
As far as I’m concerned, American military personnel should be required to carry their firearm at all times.
Chicken, Alaska was invaded by ninjyas from 7 different LE Agencies. They literally outnumbered the ENTIRE TOWN.
And yet we cannot defend our own military bases in the capital city of our own country.
We enforce Iraqi borders, Yemeni borders, but leave our OWN totally undefended.
Is there any historical precedent?
1. We let our BP guy get killed (bean-bag rounds)
2. We let our Customs guy get killed
3. We let our “Embassy” guys get killed
4. We disarm our military
WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO BE IN THE MILITARY...?
Having spent several years as a military policeman on several military bases, I would like to clarify a couple of misconceptions here.
There is currently nothing preventing a commanding officer from arming troops with government firearms while they go about their duties on a military base except fear of “accidental discharges”. The law in place prohibits the possession of only privately owned firearms on bases.
Federal law and the laws of the states already allow any service member to carry an assigned firearm at any time during the course of their military duties.
There is a culture in the military of making policies for the lowest common denominator. Commanders choose not to arm troops on bases because inevitably some Joe will screw up and shoot his buddy at the motor pool.
I’m not saying it’s a good reason for not having, for example, all E-5s and above armed at least with pistols. It’s just the military rationale for not doing it.
Sure, we could change the EO or law or whatever and allow privately owned firearms in the barracks or on base housing, but this does not address the fact that service members should be armed while on base carrying out their duties. This must originate at the base commander level.
“Everyone wants to keep people safe – and no one denies Mr. Clinton’s good intentions.”
Damn the liberals and their “good intentions”. Has there EVER been a liberal “good intention” that hasn’t turned out bad? I can’t think of one. That is why it is a good bet to see what the liberals want and do the opposite.
Served from 1967 to 1969.
At Ft. Dix, Ft. Lewis and duty stations in Germany firearms were only carried while on guard duty (with ammo) and Field training exercises with blanks,qualification with live ammo, or checked out of the arms room for cleaning.
Privately owned firearms were kept locked in the arms room and only released to the owner with company commander’s approval for target shooting, hunting, change of duty station, or end of enlistment to take home.
There were 2 incidents at Ft. Lewis where soldiers on guard duty with live ammo 1). shot himself in the head either accidentally while playing with the pistol or committed suicide and 2). a round from an “unloaded” .45 was discharged inside the guard quarters passing through a bunk mattress and lodging in a trooper’s leg.
Not sure that everybody on post should be carrying firearms with live ammo when not in a combat zone is a good solution to on base shootings
When I was in Viet Nam, once we came back from a patrol (that could last 15 to 20 days) we would have to leave our weapons in our tents. We could not carry weapons on base.
While in the field, we could not have a round in the chamber (they did random checks and would punish any that they caught).
I always wondered why I could be trusted with a loaded gun in the field but not at the base (which by the way came under attack on a regular basis). Sometimes people in authority are just insane.