Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

2020: Local Navy Pilots asking President Trump to carry concealed weapons on military base

https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local-navy-pilots-asking-president-trump-carry-concealed-weapons-military-base/B2HUG6JRGZCSZFU27EM4YVZ2HI/


“Our military personnel are soft targets,” their attorney, Justin Drach, said. “They need to be armed. If they want to carry a firearm for protection, they should be allowed to.”
«1

Replies

  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 5,945 Senior Member
    Immediate action/response appears somewhat delayed?

    If the policy change happens. It could open the door for much broader acceptance.
  • Big Al1Big Al1 Senior Member Posts: 7,615 Senior Member
    I don't see why not. Pilots are a highly trained and valuable assets, and they have to qualify regularly with firearms. I bet Ned could still qualify!! 
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,913 Senior Member
    Big Al1 said:
    I don't see why not. Pilots are a highly trained and valuable assets, and they have to qualify regularly with firearms. I bet Ned could still qualify!! 
    Ned is 'hell on wheels' with a pistol, and especially with a good revolver.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    Immediate action/response appears somewhat delayed?

    If the policy change happens. It could open the door for much broader acceptance.
    It seems like TWH is still "thinking it over". This request from the navy pilots came back in January. The Pentagon might have been twisting the President's arm against it. COVID-19/impeachment might have put it on the back burner. I would like to see all military personnel and DOD civilians in their duty places and in their quarters offered strong protection from would-be armed attacks.  I don't want to see armed protection only for the navy pilots while the army infantrymen or air force truck mechanics get plugged by the "pizza delivery man" or "the cable guy"  at their barracks/dorms. If Pres. Trump gives a green light on this, hopefully it might be a positive trend that spreads military-wide soon. MP's are already being allowed to keep personal arms on bases, at least on some bases. I hope Pres. Trump's GOP allies in Congress/Senate back up this movement or call to arm troops as well. This would be a very bold move for Trump in this election year. In spite of all this Pentagon naysaying about arming military personnel, the poor personnel vulnerable to attack on bases are the ones that are soft targets. Pentagon officials are safe from this. Meanwhile, our enemies abroad are full aware of how vulnerable our mostly-unarmed personnel are on bases. They can watch CNN and Fox News too. 
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 10,130 Senior Member
    Working for a 4 Star Combatant Command for the last 20 years, this has come up often.
    We used to be able to have guns in a locked vehicle, never inside the building.  Heck, it used to be my purchase card that paid for the Securities Teams range time.  I would bring a gun in my car and shoot with them, of course paying for my range time separately.
    After the Ft Hood incident firearms were prohibited on the property.
    While we all know, those that would harm innocents do not follow the laws, the way of thinking is that if they are forbidden, nobody will have them.  From what I understand, one of the SECDEFs since, has left it up to Base Commanders.  Our 4 Star has deligated it down to the Garrison Manager, who I know is an avid hunter and shooter. He has stood soundly on NO FIREARMS.  Nobody wants to be the one that allowed guns through the gate and have something happen on their watch.  Sadly, that is the way it is and I honestly do not see it changing in the near future
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,412 Senior Member
    forget it I had to delete again
    Shut up-----KAREN
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,943 Senior Member
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 21 #10
    Diver43 said:
    Working for a 4 Star Combatant Command for the last 20 years, this has come up often.
    We used to be able to have guns in a locked vehicle, never inside the building.  Heck, it used to be my purchase card that paid for the Securities Teams range time.  I would bring a gun in my car and shoot with them, of course paying for my range time separately.
    After the Ft Hood incident firearms were prohibited on the property.
    While we all know, those that would harm innocents do not follow the laws, the way of thinking is that if they are forbidden, nobody will have them.  From what I understand, one of the SECDEFs since, has left it up to Base Commanders.  Our 4 Star has deligated it down to the Garrison Manager, who I know is an avid hunter and shooter. He has stood soundly on NO FIREARMS.  Nobody wants to be the one that allowed guns through the gate and have something happen on their watch.  Sadly, that is the way it is and I honestly do not see it changing in the near future
    Sadly, many more personnel might have to be shot to death on bases by bad/crazy folks before Washington, DC really seriously considers laxing base gun restrictions in earnest. 

    Often, I hate to say, there is certain body count "that needs to be reached" before the govt. "does something" (or at least tries to do something) about it. Most of those commanders with no-gun policies probably pack personal firearms themselves as they please. An army general is not going to be shot by a random gunman on a post free from armed opposition. 

  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,182 Senior Member
    Strangely....this seems like a continuation of the thread you were not going to comment on further....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 21 #12
    Jayhawker said:
    Strangely....this seems like a continuation of the thread you were not going to comment on further....
    No, this was intended to be a new thread about a recent incident in the news. I'm only throwing in a comment of my own in regards to the comments of others here. Diver 43 made a "sadly" remark so I'm only sympathizing with him. Yes, I agree it is a SAD state of affairs that good people are getting shot and/or killed on our own American bases at home by armed evil persons or nut jobs and nothing (whatever) seems to be done about it by whomever. 
  • N454casullN454casull Member Posts: 479 Member
    bobbert said:
    Jayhawker said:
    Strangely....this seems like a continuation of the thread you were not going to comment on further....
    No, this was intended to be a new thread about a recent incident in the news. I'm only throwing in a comment of my own in regards to the comments of others here. Diver 43 made a "sadly" remark so I'm only sympathizing with him. Yes, I agree it is a SAD state of affairs that good people are getting shot and/or killed on our own American bases at home by armed evil persons or nut jobs and nothing (whatever) seems to be done about it by whomever. 
    Yea still not sure I want you to have a gun anytime...
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 22 #14
    Oh, well, I'm not sure if there's even gonna be a tomorrow.  But you don't know me personally, N454, why might you be sure about anything regarding me?

    If any member here has a good possible solution to protect American military people from bad/crazy people with weapons on installations, I'm all ears and I'm willing to listen to suggestions and ideas. Does anybody here have any good ideas to protect our troops on base from bad people with weapons? Should each and every vehicle going through the installation gate be thoroughly searched? Do we need TSO-airport/court-room-like security at bases? Can American taxpayers afford such extra security measures? 

    I'm a veteran and I receive my VA healthcare right at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. There are gate guards checking photo ID for every vehicle coming on post. I have an annual post pass as a visitor. Sometimes traffic is backed up 15-20 minutes just to check each ID. When I was in the army stationed at this same post 30 years ago, there were no gate guards here at all. It was an open post. People just drove on and off as they pleased. Then 9/11 followed by Homeland Security hit about 10 years later and all this simple innocence was forever lost. Terrorists do terrorist acts to cause major disruption, to throw a giant monkey wrench into our lifestyles. To imprison us in many ways. Extra security measures means extra time, money, energy and human resources consumed. 
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,913 Senior Member
    This, and the other thread, seem to be more about the lone rogue gunman than anything else. AND THERE'S NOT MUCH THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THE LONE CRAZY GUNMAN. Even if you have a lot of armed folk on military bases or other areas, the lone gunman can wreak havoc before a coordinated response can be mounted by armed personnel. And that's just a cold hard fact. Lone gunmen may be crazy, but most aren't stupid. They'll pick a time and place to do their dirty work that puts them in a target rich environment and give them time to kill before being killed or wounded and captured.
    Having everyone on a base armed at all times would end up making death by 'friendly fire' pretty much a given, too. And there were more than a few I served with that I wouldn't trust with a toy cap pistol. 
    Trying to put a one size fits all solution to this particular problem won't work, and doesn't work for most problems. On military bases, a Quick Reaction Force is one piece to the puzzle that will improve the situation. Other pieces of the puzzle can be worked out and tried and implemented or discarded. But arming everyone on a military base isn't one of those pieces that will work.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 22 #16
    tennmike said:
    This, and the other thread, seem to be more about the lone rogue gunman than anything else. AND THERE'S NOT MUCH THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THE LONE CRAZY GUNMAN. Even if you have a lot of armed folk on military bases or other areas, the lone gunman can wreak havoc before a coordinated response can be mounted by armed personnel. And that's just a cold hard fact. Lone gunmen may be crazy, but most aren't stupid. They'll pick a time and place to do their dirty work that puts them in a target rich environment and give them time to kill before being killed or wounded and captured.
    Having everyone on a base armed at all times would end up making death by 'friendly fire' pretty much a given, too. And there were more than a few I served with that I wouldn't trust with a toy cap pistol. 
    Trying to put a one size fits all solution to this particular problem won't work, and doesn't work for most problems. On military bases, a Quick Reaction Force is one piece to the puzzle that will improve the situation. Other pieces of the puzzle can be worked out and tried and implemented or discarded. But arming everyone on a military base isn't one of those pieces that will work.
    Tennmike, what do you think of Constitution Carry states? How safe, do you feel, are citizens in CC states from "lone crazy gunmen" as compared with non-CC states or states/cities whereby ordinary citizens are not at all allowed to carry in public at all? My state, Oklahoma, for example just became CC (permitless) last November. It seems like you feel people on installations are in inherently in more danger of getting shot or killed regardless of the degree people on installations are allowed to be armed. It sounds like they are dammed if they do or dammed if they don't. Are civilians more trustworthy than military personnel to be armed for personal security? Are military people's brains wired differently or is it just military indoctrination, total mind control, that makes them unstable? Does the stress of military service make people more volatile in their behaviors? 
    There are certainly a good number of civilians and a few LE officers who shouldn't be trusted with as little as a cap gun also. That's just the inherent danger of liberty and having gun rights. There's at least one bad apple who will abuse it but almost all the lone crazy gunmen we've seen reported on national news in recent history have gotten their arms from FFL dealers and passed FBI background checks. They did not get their firearms from gun show/private sales "loopholes". 

    Just about every soldier (including the lowliest of privates) is armed on a battlefield (in the traditional sense anyway). The way things are in this world these days, I would even say our bases are a continuing war zone. It's not really safe to say "it won't work" unless it's tried at least once. We'll never know for absolute unless it's given a shot. We can't just speculate. Perhaps, we should experiment by arming everybody on base and see what happens. If more people on bases end up dead because of this than have been killed by crazy lone gunmen then perhaps not. We have to once and for all determine which evil is the lesser one: arm everybody or arm nobody. You never know if broccoli tastes good or bad unless you first put it in your mouth. The military has been a test-bed for many social experiments for decades now. Perhaps they should give concealed carry a shot (no pun intended) at least once and see how it goes.  Another possibility is to have certain "key personnel" armed at all times as they did at one particular TX church. What if we were to just arm all the NCO's and officers if we can't trust those dumb young privates with weapons? 
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,182 Senior Member
    There have been many instances where the crazed lone gunman IS a member of the military...probably need to mull that over....

    Your statement about the number of military personnel who are armed is flawed...for every trigger puller out there, there are as many as 20 in a support role who may have had their last contact with a weapon in BCT....not necessarily the folks I want toting firearms around on a daily basis.

    A'll the stuff that makes civilian lone shooters nuts is present on base....Alcoholism, drug abuse, overwhelming personal problems, mental health issues...etc.

    The last time this issue was discussed on the board, I opined that arming certain (mostly senior)  NCOs in addition to having a QRF on duty at all times, in addition to getting rid of civilian contract security and having those duties accomplished by MPs would be a step in the right direction,,,
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 22 #18
    It sounds like buck sergeants (E-5) and corporals (E-4) shouldn't all be toting either. There should be maybe at least one armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) at the CQ desk at each barracks building and one such armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) for the BR desk. What about troop formations on base? Virtually nobody in my unit was armed during PT in the mornings, not even any officers. Perhaps, formations need at least one designated armed personnel to watch over them. 
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 3,798 Senior Member
    Until recently I had both my son and daughter on active duty.  Daughter recently left after 10 years (and WAY too many deployments to bad places), son is a lifer headed for his 20 soon.  

    This subject has been a running discussion in my house since they joined.  BOTH are extremely proficient with firearms and level headed adults.  Both assign no importance to the ability to carry concealed while at work in the base in the USA.  Even with things the way they are they figure the chances of becoming a victim of a disgruntled co-worker or friendly fire ND is far higher than the chance of them ever needing to protect themselves while on base.  Also, way too many young folks in the military have "issues" and the high suicide incidence is not by chance.  Both my kids have had to experience it first hand with the own troops WAY too many times.  

    So at the end, while I still strongly wish both my kids were able to carry their legal CCWs on base It is not my fight and they have no desire to make it their personal quest so I have to live with that.
    Old West Saying: God created men, but Col. Sam Colt made them equal.

    General George Patton:  “Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.”

  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 22 #20
    There was a young SPC4 in one of my units who attempted suicide in my barracks by wrist slashing. Was at Fort Ord, CA, early 1993 right before Clinton deactivated it. He was discovered on the floor of his room and taken out on a gurney by paramedics, he recovered and was then chaptered out. If not suicide by firearms they still come up with razor blades. Most of these military wrist-slashers don't die; they just arrange it so they will be discovered soon by a buddy or an NCO in the barracks and hopefully they will get the boot. 
  • bobbertbobbert Posts: 63 Member
    edited May 22 #21
    Jayhawker said:
    There have been many instances where the crazed lone gunman IS a member of the military...probably need to mull that over....

    Your statement about the number of military personnel who are armed is flawed...for every trigger puller out there, there are as many as 20 in a support role who may have had their last contact with a weapon in BCT....not necessarily the folks I want toting firearms around on a daily basis.

    A'll the stuff that makes civilian lone shooters nuts is present on base....Alcoholism, drug abuse, overwhelming personal problems, mental health issues...etc.

    The last time this issue was discussed on the board, I opined that arming certain (mostly senior)  NCOs in addition to having a QRF on duty at all times, in addition to getting rid of civilian contract security and having those duties accomplished by MPs would be a step in the right direction,,,
    It's odd: my drill sergeant in basic once said "no soldier is ever without a weapon downrange, your mask and your weapon are your two top survival tools in battle". There was a fellow, a PFC, in my unit who was a conscientious objector who refused to carry his assigned M16 weapon even in the field. He was looking for a chapter.
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 3,798 Senior Member
    bobbert said:
    There was a young SPC4 in one of my units who attempted suicide in my barracks by wrist slashing. Was at Fort Ord, CA, early 1993 right before Clinton deactivated it. He was discovered on the floor of his room and taken out on a gurney by paramedics, he recovered and was then chaptered out. If not suicide by firearms they still come up with razor blades. Most of these military wrist-slashers don't die; they just arrange it so they will be discovered soon by a buddy or an NCO in the barracks and hopefully they will get the boot. 
    Unfortunately the multiple incidents my kids have had to experience were definitive and involved handguns.  The last one my son basically drove up and heard the shot coming from the house, one of HIS guys...  

    I understand that someone who is determined to off themselves will find a means.  And TRUST me, there is nothing I want more than my kids well protected without having to depend on others.  Both are HIGHLY proficient with firearms.  But, THEY do not see the urgency or make it a priority so I defer to their opinion.
    Old West Saying: God created men, but Col. Sam Colt made them equal.

    General George Patton:  “Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.”

  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,182 Senior Member
    edited May 22 #23
    bobbert said:
    It sounds like buck sergeants (E-5) and corporals (E-4) shouldn't all be toting either. There should be maybe at least one armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) at the CQ desk at each barracks building and one such armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) for the BR desk. What about troop formations on base? Virtually nobody in my unit was armed during PT in the mornings, not even any officers. Perhaps, formations need at least one designated armed personnel to watch over them. 
    When I was in (69-74) the CQ always had access to a sidearm...as did the Duty Officer
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,350 Senior Member
    Violating my own 2nd Amendment rule  here but I originally saw this on Clubhouse. 

    I strongly disagree that military bases here are war zones.  There are very few instances of shootings on US military bases.  The most infamous one with the most casualties was the Ft. Hood case.  I believe if a lot of troops had been carrying handguns at the time/place of the attack, the casualties would have been way higher.  Since everyone was wearing the same clothes, how would anyone know who the aggressor?  Even trained soldiers tend to spray and pray when they suspect they're in danger from bad guys.  Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire from his unit of Army Rangers, who are highly trained with firearms. 


    If the only one who fired back at Ft. Hood was close enough to see the bad guy and shoot him, maybe the casualties would have been reduced.  But that's only the way it works in a perfect world.  One guy shoots, another guy hears it close by, feels he's getting shot at and is in danger, opens up and it's like dominoes. Pretty soon you've got a cluster-shoot.

    I'll go with Gun nut here.  His kids didn't/don't feel the need to be armed on post.  I never felt the need when I was in the Army.  The thought never occurred to me.  I agree that if a person intends to commit suicide, they'll find a way.  However, the chance of surviving a razor blade cut is greater than surviving a self-inflicted gunshot.  In the case given, the guy who cut himself got a second chance and time to think it over.  Like the guy who attempted to kill himself by jumping off a high bridge and later said, "I hadn't gone three feet when I realized I'd made a mistake."
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • GunNutGunNut Posts: 3,798 Senior Member
    I do believe there should be more firearms within the facilities (every building?) in all bases and at least a few trained folks with access to them at all times.  Ft. Hood should never happen again.
    Old West Saying: God created men, but Col. Sam Colt made them equal.

    General George Patton:  “Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.”

  • earlyagainearlyagain Posts: 5,945 Senior Member
    The recent attempt was thwarted. Sounded like sharp all over it security on the news.
  • LinefinderLinefinder Moderator Posts: 6,113 Senior Member
    IMO, the 800 lb gorilla in the room is the average age of the population on a military base vs the average age of the population at large. Taken as a whole the percentage of 18-20 YO's on a base is much higher than the population at large. And while I can't speak for anyone but myself, I do recall my late teens and early twenties as a timeframe I'm surprised I survived. Even if you've been a good boy all your life, that first taste of real freedom is heady, and can lead to some very bad decisions.

    Not knocking that age group, but reality is reality. I live in Colorado Springs (likely the only non-rural conservative city in the state) and on any given visit to Walmart or Safeway, I'm liable to see 3-4 people open carrying, and figure likely a dozen more are CC. Doesn't bother me at all. They're not 19 years old, fired up on a Friday night.

    There is a difference.

    Mike


    "Walking away seems to be a lost art form."
    N454casull
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,350 Senior Member
    GunNut said:
    I do believe there should be more firearms within the facilities (every building?) in all bases and at least a few trained folks with access to them at all times.  Ft. Hood should never happen again.

    It all happened so fast at Ft. Hood, I don't see how a firearm kept in another building could have been used.  Or another room, for that matter.  It was one of those terrorist attacks that are nearly impossible to prevent.  It's a reactive situation on the part of the good guys.  Just like every other terrorist attack here in the US.  

    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 10,130 Senior Member
    Jayhawker said:
    bobbert said:
    It sounds like buck sergeants (E-5) and corporals (E-4) shouldn't all be toting either. There should be maybe at least one armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) at the CQ desk at each barracks building and one such armed personnel (the NCO maybe?) for the BR desk. What about troop formations on base? Virtually nobody in my unit was armed during PT in the mornings, not even any officers. Perhaps, formations need at least one designated armed personnel to watch over them. 
    When I was in (69-74) the CQ always had access to a sidearm...as did the Duty Officer
    I was in 1977-1997 and the CQ nor runner ever had access to a firearm.  Once I got promoted a few times, as SDNCO I had access to the Arms Room, but guidelines stated that the SDNCO and the SDO (a field grade officer) together in an emergency could draw a M-16 or M-1911 and later M-9.  Never did utilize that authority.  
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 22,892 Senior Member
    I am allowed to carry on every military base. In fact, I bring all KINDS of weaponry onto every base I enter. 
    Apparently Federal can but civilian/military can’t. Or not without limitations. 

    :pouringfuelonthefire:

    😁
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 22,892 Senior Member
    I pulled up to a Gate Checkpoint once and the guard looked in my backseat at the stack of rifles.
    ”Sir, you have guns in your backseat!”
    ”Yep, that ain’t all of them.”
    Looks at creds.
    ”Thank you, Sir.”

    I love my job. 😎
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement