After yet another vicious, cowardly, murderous assault that has left five American service personnel dead on American soil, someone has finally insisted on an appropriate response. After the recent atrocity at the Marine recruiting office in Chattanooga, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson has ordered full time National Guardsmen in his state to be armed on duty. http://www.thv11.com/story/news/2015/07/17/gov-hutchinson-directs-states-full-time-guardsmen-to-be-armed/30319691/ .
Asa Hutchinson, we recall, was the man named to head the NRA School Shield program to put armed security in our nation’s schools in the wake of the horror at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. He is a man who understands the logical truth: the only way to stop mad dog mass killers is to do what we would do with any other mad dog.
“Big Army” may be reviewing something similar, though apparently more hesitantly: http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/17/army-chief-security-at-recruiting-posts-will-be-reviewed/21210711/?icid=maing-fluid|bon|dl2|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D1496193374 .
According to the Associated Press, “A day after a gunman shot and killed four Marines and wounded three other people in Chattanooga, Gen. Ray Odierno, chief of staff of the Army, told reporters that arming troops in those offices could cause more problems than it might solve. ‘I think we have to be careful about over-arming ourselves, and I’m not talking about where you end up attacking each other,’ Odierno said during a morning breakfast. Instead, he said, it’s more about “accidental discharges and everything else that goes along with having weapons that are loaded that causes injuries.”
“We’re always going to be somewhat vulnerable to a lone wolf, or whatever you want to call it, a surprise shooter, because we are out there with the population and that’s where we have to be,” added the Chief of Staff.
Kudos to Governor Hutchinson for decisively doing what is obviously the right thing. I sincerely hope it starts a trend.
In the meantime, that picture of the bullet-riddled window of the recruiting office in Chattanooga – replete with its “no guns” sign – stands as stark proof of the fact that “gun free zones” are simply hunting preserves for mass murderers.
Well there’s your problem right there!
DOUBLE door, single sign. We need stricter sign laws NOW !
Makes a lot of sense to me. Maybe too much sense to others.
Please consider signing the following petition http://wh.gov/iXnZR
The Liberal World Solution:
Make all of the Gun Free Zone signs larger & multi-lingual to make sure all future terrorists understand that they are NOT ALLOWED to bring guns there to shoot up the place!!!!!
It might be a good time to start printing up some Bomb Free Zone signs, too.
Only an incompetent imbecile like Gen. Odierno would consider the remote possibility of an accidental discharge to be more of a danger than the murders at Ft. Hood, The Washington Navy Yard, the Navy Operational Support Center and Marine Corps Reserve Center in Chattanooga. That probably means the Marines guarding the White House are not allowed to carry loaded weapons, either.
For those of you who haven’t seen this yet, here’s another peek at what The Liberal World wants your life to be like, because it’s more admirable to be a helpless coward than to prevent an innocent victim from being murdered:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/09/behold-the-beta-males-who-feel-good-about-watching-a-man-die/#.VanpivzlMbA.facebook
Military security policy has completely deteriorated since the days when the young Army officers Dwight Eisenhower and George Patton would drive up and down a road together carrying loaded pistols, hoping that local robbers would try to victimize them. Or Douglas MacArthur would tell a wanna-be armed robber to shove an offending pistol where the sun shone not. General Odierno is a perfect example of why an officer corps was really ever established separately from enlisted folk: to protect the general military leadership from blanket impeachment by the troops as a reaction to the misbegotten behavior of a minority of incompetent leaders. Asymmetric warfare has come to roost comfortably among us, thanks to our own general apathy. We need to speak and act.
With the purge that’s gone on in the military during the Obozo regime it’s no wonder that someone with the opinions of Gen. Odierno is what’s left at the top.
I must conceed that in todays world, one doesn’t rise to COSA without being aware of which way the winds blow over head. General Odierno is much what you would expect from the current general officer culture.
That said, contrary to popular belief, not every troop in every service is suited by training, temperment and/or ability to be armed amid the general population. Training can take care of most of that, but with the military budget strapped as it is, the infantry companies aren’t getting the training they need. Recruiters certainly aren’t. From that standpoint, the General has valid concerns.
Arming officers and at least NCOs is a legitimate need and should be done, but will require a cultural shift at command level in the DOD for it to happen. The Israelis manage it, so can we. After all, we did so prior to about 1970.
Addendum: I expect volunteer civilian instructors could be readily found to acquaint the troops with firearms use in a civilian arena. Although the Rules of Engagement recently in effect in the Middle East appear to be very close. The major issues would be the command culture, training time and ammunition.
The General should be relieved of his command. He either believes that the troops under him are to stupid to handle firearms safely, in which case he has failed to recruit competent soldiers. Or he believes that the troops under him don’t have the training to handle firearms safely, something he is responsible for. In either case he has failed his duty and should be relieved.
I can also tell you he just lost the respect of all those under him. Rightly so in my opinion.
Makes me wonder how many mosques in this country are gun-free zones…
The Govs of Texas and Florida did the same.
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/Texas-Governor-Orders-National-Guard-To-Carry-Guns-On-Base-316880921.html
I see over on Sipsey Street that Gov. Bobby Jindal issued Executive Orders to LA. N.G. along the same lines, arming on-duty N.G. in Louisiana. Good moves, IMO.
Although the media and Feds are downplaying the Islamic State connection to this tragic incident, undoubtedly more in-country USA attacks will soon happen. As those occur, the wimpy pacifist denial so rampant in our society about armed self-defense will rapidly change to deal with the new reality.
These are the same people who go to war and effectively kill the enemy. We never hear of any cases of ‘accidental discharge’. Are the a lot and we’re not being told? Does the training our troops get in firearms, muzzle discipline, safe handling all of the sudden disappear when they’re stateside?
Our troops don’t shoot each other while actively fighting a war right next to each other, yet they can’t control themselves while sitting next to each other in an office building? That’s what he’s saying. What a building crap, PC answer. Sell that crap somewhere else. I’m not buying it.
I hate spell check. Bull crap answer.
Consideration should be given to having all or some National Guard member keep their weapons and ammo at home. This would allow for a quicker response, especially in the event of a mass attack, where the police are not sufficient in number.
Am I the only one that thinks that ANY U.S. military personnel, man or woman, that does not have the basic skillset or training to safely carry a weapon for their own defense is ridiculous? Not training a soldier in small weaponry is unfathomable; I cannot comprehend this at all. I have been shaking my head in utter disbelief at this concept. Even the most insignificant pencil-pusher or paper clip counter should be taught weapons handling and safety to a competent level, or released from duty immediatel y. I always thought that was a requirement to be in the “armed forces”.
The Flag rank war fighters are gone; however, there are thousands of young warrior proteges working their way up the ranks.
I saw a new photo of the door with the bullet holes marked, The Gun Free Sign taken off but the sign with the recruiting station hours of operation was still up.
Send emails to your Senators and Representatives in Congress if we can create enough wind and heat on this military carry we can get changed. We are starting a new election cycle and this is a common sense issue. Marines unable to defend themselves is stupid to 85% of voters, so they know they will appear stupid if they oppose it.
Recruiters are usually at least on there second tour and NCO’s so they have decent experience. The issue comes in handgun training. If you do not use one as your primary weapon you are not usually trained with a sidearm. An infantryman is trained on rifles and cross trained other comon platoon weapons or crew served weapons and not handguns.
Personally I’m OK with them carrying their primary weapons if they have not been trained with sidearms.
House Armed Services Committee Chair Mac Thornberry R TX
“…we’re working on a provision on a bill we are putting the final touches on right now that would require the secretary to come up with the procedures to allow them to carry their weapons when they’re on installations, recruiting stations is a bit more complicated but I think we need to look at that.”
Praise God we still have men like Asa Hutchinson in positions where they can do the proper thing. What does that say about someone like Gen. Odierno? What could you possibly need to review, General?
We all know the answer to that question – his boss isn’t sure these are terrorist attacks! I’m afraid W.R. is right – this is what the current culture is giving us to lead our troops.
The terrible irony of the photo of the bullet-riddled doors with the gun free placard should be apparent to even the most strident gun grabbers! I don’t know how it could be any clearer. Exactly how many people are going to have to die before they get it?
This is all show and no bite by several state Governors. They have issued orders for the Generals of their respective states “to arm as they see necessary.” Expect to see little if any change.
More soldiers and Marines have been killed by Islamic Terrorist in this country then have been killed by ‘”accidental discharges”..this Gen, needs to be FIRED…He does not have the safety and livelihood of his troops as his top priority…Yet another PC leader…which this country has far to many of…imho
Just a surmise but I doubt the general performs his duties in recruiting stations. I think he is anti gun.in the same category as Mr. Obama. Surrounded by men with guns and secure in his own physical safety, he opposes SOLDIERS bearing arms holstered.
I recently head Dr. Grossman on a podcast explain the military asked Daddy Bush to disarm SOLDIERS on domestic bases because post Vietnam they were afraid for their own physical safety. Doctors use medicine and soldiers use guns.
Cowards demand and receive protection. It is beyond hypocrisy to demand a group.of citizen soldiers, not mercenaries, be defence less while you yourself claim that same right.
Spencer, you are so correct that more of these will occur. However, I’m not so sure the “wimpy pacifist denial” will rapidly change.
My late father, a decorated field artillery officer and survivor of the June 1944 Normandy Beach (France) landing and the subsequent brutal Battle of the Bulge, gave me this golden nugget of advice when I was commissioned as an Army Second Lieutenant, MI Branch, assigned to serve my initial four year tour of active duty as S-2 for a leg infantry battalion at Fort Lewis WA:
“Son, listen with care. Your sacred duty as a commissioned officer is to put the lives of the men under your command before your own.
“Accordingly, obey lawful orders, but ignore stupid regulations that will result in avoidable casualties.
“Orders are given by warriors with last names such as Bradley, Eisenhower, LeMay, Patton and Nimitz.
“Regulations are written by ticket-punching worriers at the Pentagon, self promoters whose only concern is to cover their own asses and to stay well clear of dangerous assignments in field environments.”
Consider for a moment what the response would have been if a Colonel subordinate to the late General George Patton had said to the General: “General, we cannot have soldiers walking around armed with loaded M1 Garand rifles and loaded M1911A1 pistols. Accidents could happen.”
That Colonel would have been launched out of the U.S. Army by a Roman Catapult if General Patton had not shot him in the foot to send a clear message.
Today’s Pentagon regulations end up all too often becoming deadgulations. America, it’s “guns up” time for our troops stateside and overseas.
Our fanatical jihadi foes are all around us. We must face that harsh reality.
Those civilian and military Pentagon milquetoasts who fear guns and troops bearing them in defense of self and nation need to find new employment, starting tomorrow … perhaps even tonight.
Gen. Odierno is not showing any originality at all, he’s simply trotting out the old, tired arguments that were used to delay the inevitable establishment of concealed carry in Illinois (50th in the Union, BTW). “There will be accidental discharges, blah, blah, blah.” If we can’t trust our active duty personnel (especially recruiters) to properly carry and use a handgun, we ought to just roll up our military and only take them out for ceremonial occasions. Tennessee is a shall-issue concealed carry state – the only place in that mall that was a gun-free zone was the recruiting office.
Gun Free zones are very dangerous as we’ve seen that countless times. Five more dead by a nut job bent on killing numerous people.
It’s a crazy administrative law that prohibits guns in “federal buildings” that needs to go away.
I also think doing away with prohibitng concealed carry holders and retired police officers under LEOSA known as HR218 from entering banks and post offices because solely their “federal buildings” once again were jeopardizing life with these gun free zones due to some crazy law signed by Bill Clinton.
I only spent 9 years in the Marine Corps so I may not be considered an expert on this subject, but I agree with the folks who say that not every member of the military should be automatically qualified for armed carry. I do believe that our military should be allowed to carry, particularly in “soft (gun free) zones”, but I also believe they should first, at the very least, pass the requirements for a concealed carry permit for the state in which they are deployed. Range training is good, but not good enough.
Roger, I agree. Having military members who will be armed while working State side (especially in public) should have concealed carry training. It would give them
the civilian rules of engagement. Plus it’s already a program that exists in all 50
states, therefore it could be implemented right away. Great idea.
Plus, as retired Air Force I see no reason why I’m not allowed to carry concealed on Base! Not only can I not carry, I can’t even have my fire arm unloaded and locked in my vehicle. This means that I’m also unarmed on my way to and from the base!
In WWII officers (well, staff officers, anyway) went armed everywhere. Including the Oval Office, for that matter.
Winston Churchill’s account of the Quebec Conference had an interesting bit. In this meeting in Canada, the President of the USA, the Prime Minister of Canada, the Prime Minister of Britain, the Imperial Chief of Staff, the General of the Army, and various other high-level dignitaries were being shown a chunk of “Pykrete”, a material being proposed for the construction of cargo carriers and floating landing strips in the Atlantic. When the inventor made the claim that it was bulletproof, General George Marshall unholstered his service .45 and fired a couple of rounds to see for himself…
Roger in NC – thanks for bringing a great point to these conversations. I, too, feel that if all were permitted to be armed without proper training, it would be just a matter of time until Gen. Odierno (and others) would be proven right as someone with the best intentions, would make a mistake. However, there must be a change in this policy. The combat veterans should be armed immediately, the rest trained in some basic combat (civilian) handgun courses – then armed. Why did I specify civilian? Because in recent years, there has been a huge influx of returning combat veterans who get into training civilians. Their intent is the best, but some of their tactics are military only and actually dangerous – for the civilian environment.
Consider what Jim in Illinois said above: “the ONLY place in that mall that was gun free – was the recruiting office.” While that’s fact, it defies any logic. Until this changes, we can expect more of the same – why? Because it is working for the bad guys!
I agree there should be training for the weapons and civilian area carry.
However, the military should not be subject to State CCW licensing issues and wait times. With transfers to new duty stations and units, sometimes without much lead time it is unreasonable to have a service member relocating to be unable to carry a weapon until he qualified for their new State”s CCW.
I was a married Marine Officer in GA scheduled to go to a 6 month school at Quantico, VA in August. I came to the base on a Monday in early May and the Corps had expanded a class that started 10 days later and I was in it. By 2PM I was checked out of the base with a moving truck coming Wednesday AM. Even if that move had been as originally scheduled I would have had more time but not enough to be able to have a CCW in a new State.
With everything involved with a new duty station and moving from one State to another we should not burden the military with State CCW requirements.
I’m sure most people on this blog are for a National Carry across the US and a good and rational first step would be for a national carry for military members.
Mas – OT, but FYI your “10 Commandments of Concealed Carry” have been linked to at The Firearms Blog: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/07/20/massad-ayoobs-10-commandments-of-concealed-carry/
I want to add something to my previous post. The arming of returning soldiers is not nearly as simple as I tried to make it. That arming should take place only if and when they have been properly counseled and trained, at the very least. I apologize for my rush for a solution.
Here in Pa., a group of legally armed men, consisting of mostly vets, has taken matters into their own hands. They are working in shifts at a recruiting office, open carrying their own handguns. They had some very heartfelt – and inspiring words for the reporters. Once again, yours truly is hampered by the device I’m using and cannot provide a link for you. I just saw it on WHTM/27. Check it out.
No! Don’t allow our military personnel to carry guns, as they will only have them taken away by criminals and terrorists who will then use those weapons against their owners and other innocent people. The Brady Bunch says that’s true, so it must be!
Instead, arm them with large color photos of a naked Hillary, Janet Reno, or Michelle Obama, which will not only repel evildoers (who hate those more vile than themselves), but makes them sick and if they are Islamic, will cause those terrorists to kill themselves as Allah doesn’t allow his fanatical male followers to lay eyes on nude women other than their wives. That’s why I always carry a copy of some girlie magazine with me, in case I’m confronted with a murderous Moslem who I can peacefully defend myself against without the use of violence. Just seeing a naked woman, especially an attractive young Caucasian one with big hooters, will make Islamic terrorists nauseous and too disoriented to shoot straight, giving one an opportunity to run for safety and find a cop at the nearest Dunkin Donuts or Krispy Kreme to report that incident to.
There is no reason that military personal could not receive the same training for handgun use that we civilians are required to get for a ccw permit. The ranges are available on all bases and MP personal know how to provide that training. Unfortunately, this wouldn’t be politically correct in this day and age. Ever since WW2, we have lead down this by those who desire to disarm this country. Japan did not want to invade this country because every one was armed and knew how to use that arm. We can’t say that today, can we? It is a shame that 1984 by Orwell or F 451 by Bradbury have been taken of the allowed reading list for our schools-we might learn something, do you think? By the way, when you get to the level of Joint Chiefs of Staff, you are a political animal.
There’s apparently a grassroots movement underway where armed civilians are picking up a weapon and standing a post at recruiting stations.
OK: http://www.ktul.com/story/29591020/man-standing-guard-outside-military-recruiting-office-in-yukon
OH: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/20/guarding_recruitment_centers.html
IN: http://www.21alive.com/news/local/Fort-Wayne-man-stands-guard-outside-of-Glendbrook-Mall-recruiting-office-317619221.html
GA: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/17/armed-citizens-line-up-to-guard-ga-recruiting-center-day-after-chattanooga/
VA: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/18/citizen-armed-with-ar-15-stands-guard-outside-virginia-recruiting-offices/
TN: http://www.dnj.com/story/news/2015/07/20/armed-civilians-stand-guard-boro-recruiting-offices/30428097/
I agree with Roger in NC and Don – PA. I don’t necessarily see every person in a recruiting office armed, but I can easily see some of them armed. The key I think is personal motivation, training and annual qualification. Some previous responses commented that they never hear of AD’s in the military or overseas, but I’ve heard of them. I’ve also heard of fratricides in combat and experienced a fratricide in training. It happens. However I think that if service members show an interest in being armed, and pass qualification requirements, I can see no reason why they should be denied.
I think that a personal interest in acquiring and maintaining skill in firearms use can be the best motivating factor for identifying those who would be the best to arm in military posts. I served 9+ years in the army, I knew a lot of people who were motivated to acquire (and did acquire) the skills needed to use firearms for personal defense. I also knew people (believe it or not) who I wouldn’t trust to handle a firearm loaded with blanks. Identifying those who are capable (the sheep dogs)and then giving them the ability to defend themselves and others, seems to be the most practical and safe way to proceed.
This begs some questions:
1)What would training would it require to bring these troops up to standard to be armed?
2) Why are they not at this standard already?
3) How many thousand revolutions per minute can Chesty Puller casket take?
Don:
Though I’m a little late in responding to your comment, I admit lacking any firm notion of how rapidly, or exactly what will cause, many of our citizens to change their “wimpy pacifistic denial.” But if U.S. history is any guide it reveals that when Americans are faced with dire emergencies they tend to make breathtaking social, economic and political changes. Some examples are the Civil War, FDR’s New Deal, the bombing of Pearl Harbor (and the end of U.S. isolationism), LBJ’s Great Society programs, 9/11, etc.
This is a very interesting, short, Video, where Black Clergymen speak about Democratic people control, via Gun Control, immediately after the Civil War, and how it applies Today, as BHO Disarms Veterans, and is now seeking to disarm Senior Social Security recipients, as soon as the grow physically unable to live without the aid of Health Care assistance.
Watch the Video, and hope the rest of America learns from the lessons Hitler taught the Jews during WWII?
https://www.youtube.com/embed/9RABZq5IoaQ?feature=player_embedded
Rich, you obviously sent your post before my “correction,” I couldn’t agree more.
Uncle Dave – above, I addressed the kind of training returning GI’s have. It is not all good for civilian environments. It would actually render them less effective – and potentially dangerous in a recruiting office, for example.
This morning on the Fox News channel I saw a citizen guarding a recruiting station. I think that is a wonderful thing for citizens to do, but consider the irony of armed civilians guarding unarmed members of our military!
Two thoughts come to mind; 1) The fact that we even have unarmed military members means that crime in this country has been so low for so long that it has become customary for service members not to carry weapons when they are stateside. That, and the fact that we never have wars in this country. Wars are something we travel to on the other side of the planet.
2) The Second Amendment has already saved us and preserved our freedoms up to this point in time. The government could or would roll right over us if we were unarmed. They could do whatever they want to us. Our guns have kept us free to this point, and hopefully they will preserve our freedoms in the future. The disarmed citizens (or subjects) of other countries are sheep and slaves. Some are treated well for now, but they are defenseless against tyranny.
Spencer – just for once, I wish America would not wait until it takes a “breathtaking change” to set things straight. When the writing on the wall is so very clear – as it is now – why wait? Deep down inside, I also feel America will rise to the occasion – it’s the foreplay that drives me nuts. The recent SCOTUS circus is a prime example of worrying about FEELINGS, for Pete’s sake!
In case this was below the radar in the USA. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33612092
In a country with the so-called Gold Standard of Gun-control, arming US service personnel with already rare exceptions is not going to happen. Britain has already demonstrated that they are willing to sacrifice soldiers and police to maintain their disarmed utopia. If you think I exaggerate consider this. When the F-111 was introduced to Europe by being assigned to RAF Upper Heyford, it came with an M-61 system mounted in half the bomb bay. We, members of the Munitions Maintenance Squadron, where tasked with its removal and subsequent storage at RAF Croughton. Why? Because, we were told, not allowed to fly with forward firing weapons over the UK by the Queen.
I just read that Gen. Odierno is on record as saying “….it’s too early to say whether or not they (recruiting offices) should have increased protection.” HUH?!?! General, I DIS-respectfully submit there is no question in anyone’s mind that they should have increased protection – the only question would be what KIND of protection.
At least the Marines and the Army have instructed recruiters not to have anything to do with the armed civilians outside recruitment offices:
From a Stars and Stripes article about the Army:
“Recruiters were ordered not to interact or acknowledge the armed civilians, who have been greeted by a mix of concern, indifference and gratitude by the public.
“‘If questioned by these alleged concerned citizens, be polite, professional and terminate the conversation immediately and report the incident to local law enforcement …,’ the command advised.”
Source: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/22/army-to-recruiters-treat-armed-citizens-as-security-threat.html
Two sources showing that the Marines are saying something very similar:
“”The following guidance applies when armed civilians (AC) are in the vicinity of Marine Corps offices: a. Immediately notify local law enforcement (LLE) of AC presence. Inform LLE that the Marine Corps did not request nor doe we support AC being in proximiity of our facilities. … c. Do not engage with AC unless absolutely necessary. If unavoidable, inform AC that we appreciate their intent but their presence is unnecessary and disruptive to recruiting operations.”
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=388993994629658&set=p.388993994629658&type=1&theater
http://nepr.net/news/2015/07/21/marines-asking-for-civilians-guarding-recruiting-centers-to-stand-down/
Dave, the liberal – I just finished a scan of my usual sources this A.M. and have yet to find ANY negative reactions – anywhere – only here from your sources, two of which were from New Hampshire and Wisconsin. I am not naïve enough to think there are issues from only those two states. But, I have found reports from at least five other states that have only positive things to say. Not to mention quotes from assorted military leaders who are advocates of what is going down. Equal time, brother.
Other news services have now picked up on it, too. Both the Army and Marine Corps national recruitment headquarters issued the statements I quoted, above. I’ve read that the Air Force’s recruitment HDQ has said something less than encouraging as well, but I’ve not been able to trace back the source on that. Haven’t heard anything from the Navy or the Coast Guard one way or the other.
But there’s now been an accidental discharge in front of a recruitment center.
http://wwlp.com/2015/07/23/armed-citizens-gun-accidentally-discharges-in-front-of-military-recruiting-center/
No, make that two accidental discharges, one by a recruiter who brought his personal weapon into the center against policy:
http://bearingarms.com/navy-recruiter-suffers-negligent-handgun-discharge-georgia/
(which also repeats the first story linked above).
Regarding those NEGLIGENT discharges, we can be our own worst enemies at times. Handing the antis some free ammo. Tsk, tsk…
Comments are closed.