Personal Weapons Won’t Ensure Base Safety
We hear a lot of talk about shooters targeting gun-free zones. The concept of a gun-free zone in the United States is absurd, although, I don’t know if they are specifically “targeting” these places. The carnage is escalated, sadly, due to the absence of someone prepared to confront an active shooter. Is it the same on military facilities? It isn’t really a gun free zone. Is the idea of a fully armed military installation reasonable? This is a knee jerk response and isn’t a legitimate plan to stop armed intruders. According to Fox:
Lawmakers, as well as survivors of the 2009 shooting, claim he could have been stopped sooner if others on base had their weapons by their side.
“When our soldiers are unarmed, they will find themselves in a situation like yesterday and in 2009,” Sgt. Howard Ray, a survivor of the 2009 mass shooting in which 13 people were killed, told Fox News.
One source who was at the scene when the Fort Hood lockdown was ordered Wednesday also raised concerns about current DOD policy.
“When will they allow those who have concealed weapon permits to carry them on post?” the individual told Fox News. “We don’t have a way to protect ourselves. … We are all hostages on post.”
Military installations largely do not allow soldiers to be armed or carry personal firearms while on post, except for law enforcement and security personnel.
The Army issued regulations in 1993 specifically restricting who carries what on an Army base, but soldiers were not all sporting holsters and wild-westing it up prior to that, for sure. A select group of soldiers, chosen by the Army, was armed. Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Fox and Friends that as an officer he carried a side arm on Fort Knox in 1970. Maybe that is the solution. Maybe higher ranking enlisted should be trained to be the ones carrying on base.
The Army is not going to permit ANY soldier to carry personal firearms on base. I had to be issued CLOTHESLINE when I lived on Cherry Point as a Marine’s wife. Of all the things they regulate, they certainly are not going to relinquish control of weapons on base! There is that whole issue of uniformity.
It doesn’t matter if you earned your welding certificate in the civilian world, it’s worthless to the military. They train you anew. Why would a concealed carry permit carry any weight with them? The weapon, and the permitting, would have to come from the military, and those who are trying to make this a simple fix know that. With nearly a million and a half active duty personnel where would the budget come from to issue, maintain, track all of these side arms?
What about the Navy, where the only arms training recruits get is using a simulator? Few sailors even touch a real weapon during their training. Air Force installations? The Coast Guard?
As a parent of 3 military children, of course I want my kids to be able to protect themselves at all times, but I must trust that this team, this FAMILY, has in place protocol that protects the group, not a bunch of individuals protecting themselves. The services do need to rethink the limits they have placed on the group to do that protecting.
More personnel should be carrying a MILITARY ISSUED weapon on base. More personnel should have quick access to weapons in the case of a terrorist attack or threat. More personnel should be ready to assert deadly force on a moment’s notice. In the event of an attack, protocol needs to be in place where hundreds of trained responders should be ready and able to put down one person with a gun, or a dozen. But, every soldier, sailor, airman and marine with a concealed carry permit traipsing about with their weapon of choice? No. Next thing you know the females will be demanding to wear their hair in twisties.
Category: Military issues
Senior Enlisted watchstanders, and the Daily / Command Duty Officers for each tenant command on base, should by qualified in small arms and carry a sidearm when on duty.
JMHO, YMMV.
Understand what you are saying, but do not particularly agree. While we all know that we give up certain rights by being military, basic Constitutional issues should not be among them, at least not completely.
Members of the military retain the right to worship as they choose, for instance, with only some limitation. We still have the right to voice our opinions even when restricted as to time and place.
We are moving ever closer to national registration of all weapons. Many states already recognize concealed carry licenses from other states, much as they do drivers licenses.
Even the military recognizes drivers licenses from states other than where one is assigned. Why should a Constitutional right be more difficult to afford to members of the military than are driving privileges?
good point, owb, about the driver’s license.
Most of the places I was stationed had the OOD/SNCOOD armed. That was only for after hours though. The area guard had armed sentries on after hours posts also. The Guard Commander and Sgt of the guard, as well as those posted at the Armory were armed 24/7. The guard force also had a quick reactionary force who could bring several armed Marines to a site within 5-10 minutes.
PMO Marines, of course were armed. The chances are that if someone pulled a Ft Hood style shooting at the PX, Medical or Barracks none of that would have mattered. There still would have been casualties.
I’m not sure if there would ever be a safeguard that could be put in place to totally prevent shootings. Additional armed posts and the arming of officers and Sr NCOs won’t stop someone who is determined from commiting violence.
Anyone who goes on a shooting spree on a military base is pretty much suicidal anyway. There is virtually no way they will be able to get off base once they commit the act and word gets out.
‘Additional armed posts and the arming of officers and Sr NCOs won’t stop someone who is determined from commiting violence.’
Exactly. In the 1960s and 1970s, no one carried weapons on the bases where I was stationed. They were at the base shooting ranges, or in the training areas.
I don’t know what is at the base of this trend in violence, but it is not new. We are just more aware of it than we used to be, thanks to the media, who have their heads in the sand and do very flawed reporting of this kind of thing.
Charles Whitman stifled his anger for years and then went on a killing spree at the University of Texas. Heirens went on a murder free-for-all in Chicago. Richard Speck trapped eight student nurses in their apartment and killed all but one of them. Jack the Ripper chose his victims at random, but they were all prostitutes. Pol Pot ordered the deaths of 1.9 million Cambodians.
Explain all of that. Then you’ll know how to stop it.
The autopsy of Charles Whitman revealed a large brain tumor.
I was just arguing something similar to friends on FB. That maybe we give all the barracks a small arms locker of pistols, shotguns, the scary black rifle. Enough to stand up an ASF. It is tied to your CAC card for access. So if you have not completed the required training, then you don’t get access. Maybe even make it dual card access to prevent a lone nut from accessing the locker and going off like that guy in ’95 at Ft. Bragg. You loose access the minute you loose a security clearance, go to NJP or Courts Martial or head to a medical facility for longer than 24 hours. Training is invalid and has to be repeated and the the CO grants the privilege back.
It would potentially aid in security, because you have the trained folks in the barracks act as ASF for their home. The minute an active shooter goes down the base goes on lock down, the residents lock down their barracks and they report to higher authority that barracks X is secure. The same could be done at some of the other facilities around the base. A small arms locker enough to outfit two fire teams of shotguns and pistols and scary black rifles. Active shooter and the first 10 folks form the fire team, secure the building and move everyone to a shelter in place location that is secure. The fire team reports to higher authority that building Y is secure on the security net. So that when the main ASF and security forces are sweeping they already know what has been swept and secured.
Charles – I hate to sound like a naysayer, but Army posts already have something similar to what you mention: the MP Station.
I spent 6 fun-filled years at Ft. Hood and it is a rather large place. I can’t imagine that it would be any safer with a few thousand gun-toting soldiers on the loose. I’m going to catch hell for this statement, but I don’t feel that the maturity level is always there, especially after hours in the barracks. In both cases at Hood, Hassan and the Soldier from yesterday legally owned their weapons, and could have earned a Concealed Handgun permit given different circumstances. They might not have killed or wounded as many folks had they been surrounded by a room full of other “permitted” Soldiers, but folks Soldiers would have still been shot, perhaps by friendly fire as well. Short of a total Post lockdown where every vehicle is thoroughly searched before entry (time consuming) I don’t know what the realistic fix can be, but I’m not sure if arming hundreds or thousands of Soldiers will make things any safer. Face it folsk – our military is a reflection of our society. What happens outside of the gates eventually finds its way inside the gates (gangs, drugs, weapons, etc).
NBC, I haven’t been to many Army posts; but if they are set up like most of the Navy, Marine and Air Force posts that I have deployed to or stationed at. They have a central security post and roving patrols of either MOS MPs or uniformed civilian security forces from CID/NCIS/etc that ride around in a car. Not a single base that I have been to in my 13 years in the Navy and my 20 years as a military brat had multiple security posts like some of the larger cities do. Also, I am not suggesting with my idea that these folks go look for trouble. Rather the thought is, the security alert siren/alarm/horn/whistle goes down. The base is in lock down and each building uses their personnel to secure their spaces. You live there or work there. You know which doors lock and which look locked but dont, which windows, that the stairwell here leads to the open field and which one leads to the parking lot. That these folks sweep their building and their building alone and lock down the doors. No one in and no one out without the word of the day. So on and so forth, treat the security mind for even in CONUS as there is everyone outside the fence is trying to kill you or they hate you. There is plenty of evidence over the last decade at least if not longer that we in the military are gung ho about security overseas, but put a foot back in the US and the simple things of verification of access lists or even the privilege of doing a security drill is kabuki security theater. You are totally right the maturity level isn’t there and after hours in the barracks it isn’t there for sure. So again, looking at my idea you just can’t stroll up and draw if the NCO that has CQ or Barracks Duty can’t trust you if the alert for lock down happens then you don’t get issued. There has to be a way to facilitate the troops to… Read more »
I’m sorry, but if the maturity level isnt there, IT NEEDS TO BE. These are military bases and not day care facilities. Maybe bringing the senior NCOs back into the barracks is actually a good idea and not the pain in the Ass it was portrayed as being.
A major part of the problem is Joes these days are treated like children, thus they act as such. Yet these same immature individuals will be trusted with your life in a much higher stress environment than garrison. There will always be “that guy”, but if you treat everybody like that guy, then they will act that way.
Oh and I would argue that to make even a plan of SNCOs, duty watches, all Officers carry a sidearms means more time at the range for all and means more spending on basic marksmanship training in the military.
When did Army posts become bases? Is that gender neutral or something? And what’s the problem with having armed personnel at key facilities likely to be targeted by a terririst or deranged person? I don’t see thia as an all or nothing proposition. It’s the Army. The Army has trained people, proficient with the use of their eyeballs, their sixth sense, and their weapons. It’s unlikely that a gate post will detect a would-be shooter. Internal security is what is needed–yesterday.
Contact your Senators and Representatives, urge them to support legislation allowing service members with CCPs to carry on post.
My solution (and I realize much of it will never happen):
1. All commissioned officers WILL openly carry a loaded, issued service sidearm at all times in CONUS when in uniform and/or on duty, unless specific circumstances permit (ie flying on official business, in which case they will check their sidearm and put it back on upon arrival). Additionally all NCOs on staff duty/CQ or other service equivalents WILL openly carry a loaded, issued service sidearm.
3. Enlisted members and warrant officers MAY carry a concealed personally owned weapon on any military installation, whether in uniform or not, provided that they hold a valid concealed carry permit from any US state. Enlisted members and warrant officers MAY openly carry a personally owned weapon on a military installation while in civilian clothes, provided that such carry is in accordance with the laws of the state in which the installation is located. Enlisted members and warrant officers will not openly carry a personally owned weapon while in uniform. (I understand why some people want to base the right to carry on post on rank, but a CCP means at least as much to me as what’s on your chest–who do you trust more with a firearm, a private who joined at 25, happens to be a gun enthusiast, and had a CCP before joining the military, or SSG Shaniqua from the S-1 shop who hasn’t touched a firearm since BCT?)
4. Any service member who holds a concealed carry permit in any US state or territory will have his or her permit honored by all other US states or territories.
And it looks like I skipped #2. I think #2 was originally the staff duty thing, but I decided to roll that into #1. Well, you guys get the point.
Yes. Yes. Yes. I would rather be protected by a Mil guy with a pistol any day rather than a cop. No offense to any cop. I am a former FED LEO … Mil guys know how to shoot and move! And this is the FACT we are talking about!
MIL/VETS Safety Act … NOW!
I would dispute that. Maybe a combat arms or SOF unit has a lot more marksmen, but remember there is a lot more tail than tooth. I just spent nine months in Kosovo with professional Soldiers that had trouble handling usually unloaded M9s. Support Soldiers’ weapons training usually only involves annual qualification. Rarely reflexive fire or movement tables.
I said qualified.
The only personnel required under my plan to carry on post would be officers and, occasionally, NCOs. Require a week of handgun training/active shooter response as part of the officer training pipeline in all services, two days of the same as a prerequisite for promotion to an NCO rank, along with biannual refresher training for personnel holding those ranks and required annual qualification. Officers who fail to qualify and/or complete the training are separated from the service, NCOs who do the same are given the choice of separation or reduction to the highest non-NCO rank in their respective service (and can be restored to their previous rank upon attaining the standard).
As for soldiers carrying private weapons, unless they are carrying openly–which in my proposal is allowed only in civilian clothes, and only then according to the laws of the state on which the installation is located–they would need to be concealed carry permit holders, which by definition means they are almost certainly law-abiding citizens and most likely have some sort of experience and training (most CCP holders invest the time to improve their skills, even if the state that issued their CCP does not require it).
You would be worried if you knew how little training your local LEO goes through, yet they are able to carry anywhere and everywhere, because of the false perception that the badge gives them magical powers over what everyone else has.
First, great article.
Second, like police officers who have the Officers Safety Act that permits them carry most place in the 50, we qualified servicemembers should have a Military/Vets Safety Act that permits certain qualified Mil and Vets to carry similar and equal to LEO’s active and retired.
One of several reasons that I never lived on post again after my first two years at Fort Hood in the early 90s. I refuse to live somewhere in these United States where rules deprive me of the Constitutional right to protect myself and my family. I was stationed at Fort Hood during the Luby’s Cafeteria shooting not far from the main gate. Felt pretty helpless eating lunch near Luby’s that day in BDUs with only a fixed blade knife on my person. Never again. As I type this, I’m sitting in a McDonald’s Playland with my sidearm and concealed carry permit as I watch over my kids. The “help is only minutes away” or “Big Brother will protect me” argument doesn’t wash with me when seconds count. A bad guy is already changing magazines by the time anyone finishes calling 911.
Exactly right. Why should anyone’s right to defend themselves and their loved ones end at the gate?
Military leaders of the past would be horrified at the thought that our soldiers are completely defenseless on base and told to ‘shelter in place’ like kids hiding in the closet, hoping to not be found.
Damn skippy!
I just completed the classroom portion of a citizens firearms safety course held here by our local Shreiff’s office. They told us that the average number of people killed or injured in a mass shooting that is stopped by the police is just under 14. The average number killed or injured when an armed bystander reacts to the shooter is less than 3. I don’t go anywhere unarmed unless forced by law to disarm myself.
Which is something the progressives don’t grasp. I have stared at some with a bugged eye look after talking DUI and car accidents with how much more can you clampdown on either before you realize that these things will happen. They look at you like your the devil incarnation for saying that people will die and some will die before they are old and gray.
I carry every day- to work, my days off, everywhere. Except 2 days a month, when I go to drill.
But when I go to drill is when I end up driving through to most questionable areas I do the entire month, in the wee hours of the mornibg on a weekend- prime time for crime.
Supposedly, according to DOD logic and the logic displayed in this article when I put on the uniform I become less capable and responsible……
I totally agreed with you up until the part where you implied I questioned your capabilities.
Personal weapons won’t ensure base safety? Really? What evidence do you have to back hat up? In my day, we were given axe handles to guard ammo dumps. I know I was a total badass and didn’t require anything more to invade the Soviet Union, much less guard ammunition, but it still would have been nice to have a fighting chance had any bad guys decided they wanted the ammo more than I did.
We were all proponents of our guys having their weapons inside FOBs and HQ buildings in the war zones, due to green on blue attacks and our guys not being able to defend themselves; right? Tell me; do our warriors suddenly become incompetent morons that can’t be trusted with anything bigger than a spud gun, once they reach CONUS? Since many of you propose that only senior enlisted and officers should be armed in CONUS; should they, also, be the only ones that go outside the wire in the warzones, too?
What you are all telling me is that our warriors are only competent when in a war zone; is that about right? Dear God in Heaven! Thank all that is holy that the Platoon Sergeant and the Platoon Leader are armed!!! I know I would have slept better at night knowing they were armed and I was dependent on them to keep me safe in CONUS, because I wouldn’t know how to do it, except in a war zone.
What the fuck is that kind of thinking???
Bingo, OT! Makes no sense to want unarmed warriors, unless you subscribe to that old theory that warriors should not be seen by the more polite/elite in society.
Personal weapons are not about base or post security – they are about personal security. Until we are in a situation which warrants the lethal use of force, no one would know definitively whether any of us is armed or not.
The libtards have directly contributed to the increase in crime with many of their policies but mostly with their efforts to disarm law abiding citizens and demonizing those who believe that the 2nd Amendment protects the other Amendments. The criminals will never give up their weapons and do not care about the Bill of Rights.
as I said, before… you realize there are other branches, right? AND you proved my point– they gave you an AX?! It’s time they came up with an actual plan- as opposed to THAT.
No- they gave him an ax HANDLE. Couldn’t trust just anyone with an edged weapon…
No your premise is BS. If we can’t trust someone with a rifle or pistol they shouldn’t in the military. PERIOD. Then since we are letting these people join the military should provide them with decent training. I’ve been drinking all night and have access to more weapons than I did while off duty as an 11B in the barracks; do you really think I’m going to go shoot anything up? HELL NO I’m not.
During the day why not allow easy access to weapons for soldiers, and off duty hours have them secure it the weapons. CQ and Staff Duty would then still have weapons, and do you really want MPs to be the only ones armed? LMAO The only people to have NDs on a COP I was on that resulted in actually injuries were MPs clearing their M9s.
Boo; we didn’t have attacks on base here in CONUS, either, at least not like today. Also, we were allowed to check out our privately owned weapons from our unit armorer any time we wanted. The point is; if being armed inside the wire is a good response for green on blue attacks Afghanistan, then those same troops come back here and it’s suddenly not? Where’s the logic? That’s why I asked you to provide evidence to back up your claim.
Now that brings back memories. Big storm hits post during Basic Training and knocks out the power post-wide, including the bank. There my buddy and I are, walking around the bank in the driving rain/wind with friggin’ ax handles and wearing roadguard vests. We had a long talk about how stupid it was to think that somebody coming to rob the bank wouldn’t have a firearm and how stupid it was for us to be there with only a piece of wood and our General Orders. Idiotic is what it was and is to think that Soldiers should be unarmed. Armed volunteers (exception draftees) has been the definition of the word Soldier from a couple hundred years ago in this country last time I checked.
I retired in 2013. I carried illegally anyway for many years. There was a cadre of us that carried and knew the others that did. During a briefing on an active shooter exercise to be held in 2013, the issue of the “perp” using blanks came up. The guy running the exercise expressly said “no”. When asked why, he admitted that they knew people carried against regulation and that the guy would probably be shot quickly by someone like me. It’s easy to carry in BDU’s. Just do it. Fuck ’em.
Wow. Giant fail, dude. Act like a professional.
Nothing like a dead professional. Or one who watches his friends be murdered.
Nothing like a dead professional. Or perhaps watching your buddies be killed while you hide under your desk.
Shelter in place? Hell no it’s harder to hit a moving target, especially one shooting back! Kudos to you.
I am really surprised that people are advocating breaking regulation and/or law. We’re professionals. When someone gives us an order we don’t like, we’re supposed to salute the flag and move out smartly.
So should we encourage the mass murder of our brothers? CINC breaks the law regularly, does that mean it’s ok for him and not us? Should results be ignored, and methods be all that is important while people die?
Professionals plan, take precautions, train, and then execute. What’s so unprofessional about being armed?
You are a jackass.
Leave now or be a late night snack!
Google and IP check in isle # 1 please!
Eat away. The NYC says it all.
The NYC says it all. Blasio Boy
1. Does the 1993 regulation work? Are violent crimes significantly lower on military posts than in the general population? 2. During my service (1970 to 1976) all posts required post-resident soldiers to register privately-owned weapons and store them in the arms rooms so 1993 seems like nothing new. I lived off post for most of that time so I avoided that issue. 3. Service people have good weapons training. During my time, I never saw a soldier who could not quickly field strip an M16. I was asked to demonstrate last weekend for a friend who just bought an AR15; it was muscle memory. The soldiers I know point their weapons in a safe direction and keep their finger off the trigger until they are ready to fire. I am trained and work as a Range Safety Officer for one of the clubs I belong to – you might be surprised by some of the behaviors I have seen. 4. Shit happens. Nothing will prevent tragedy. 5. A military post is a guaranteed weapon-free zone. See 1993 and para 2 above. 6. I may be the only one but I think that any military person pulling any sort of security duty should be armed and have live ammo. When I was an E-2, I pulled guard duty with a weapon but no ammo. That struck me as titanically stupid. Sure as hell, if someone came at me with a firearm, I would be forced to give up my weapon — a nice shiny fully-automatic M16. And, no doubt, I would be up on a statement of charges for losing it. That is just screwed up. 7. Concealed carry works for the civilian world but there is no need in the military world. Make the weapon part of the uniform and you are done. Yes there would have to be new rules: weapon and equipment acquisition, training, storage, and qualification. None of this is bad for a military force. I think that our military is expected to be competent with firearms. You guys in uniform are not civilians. I am old,… Read more »
I still commend the writer, as we see here there many important points of view. Based on the response most comments are thoughtful and solid in their own right.
BLUF: Gun ownership is a right, a right that we have fought to preserve and one that we should carry on as we project protection and defense in our daily lives … On base or off.
Carry on!
It has been since 1988 that I was AD and stationed at a CONUS base.
When I was mobilized and deployed to Balad Air Base Iraq, we always had to have our M4’s and a fully loaded 30 round magazine with us at all times. No, the magazine was NOT INSERTED in our M4’s. The onle exception to this policy was if we were in PT’s going to or from the gym. Yes we had clearing barrels all over the place, yes we had our weapons checked to make sure our safeties was engaged before we were allowed entrance into the DFAC, PX, ect, ect.
We kept our weapons with us in our CHU’s with a full base load. Not in any armory. I never heard of anyone having an accidental discharge or so forth with our weapons when we were there, nor did I ever hear of some rogue service member going postal over there.
So, what am I missing here?
MCPO: you forgot again….”Over”
More serious: I RV travel a lot and often stay at military campgrounds. I’ve never been asked if I have a weapon but I don’t carry because I will not lie to a sentry. I have a NC CCW permit. If I say I had one, per other vet RV folks, you are escorted by MP’s to an arms room and you have to be there everyday (sometimes twice/day) for inventory. Ain’t worth the hassle.
s
Now the gun shop is being brought into this mess by the braindead mindset of reporters:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/fort-hood-shooting/fort-hood-shooter-bought-weapon-same-gun-shop-tied-2009-n70971?gt1=43001
The reasoning behind this escapes me, other than there JUST HAS TO BE a connection and it’s the gun shop’s fault that the two weapons were purchased at the same place by two different people.
I have yet to see such imbecilic crap come from anything other than the yellow journalism that exists in tabloids.
Comrades in Arms: I’ve said this before (on other web sites, as well as this one), these situations would not be a problem if every military installation ordered all military personnel to keep their fully loaded issued personal weapon with them at all times and in all places, whether on duty and in uniform, or off duty and in mufti. That is standard operating procedure in the Israel Defense Force. If any soldier, sailor, marine, or airman can not be trusted with a loaded weapon, then they shouldn’t be permitted to serve in the ranks of our military services. By the way, “2/17 AIR CAV”, congratulations for pointing out that the United States Army has “posts”, and not “bases”, except for some isolated installations located in foreign combat zones. It is the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force that have bases here in the United States, not the Army. When I was at Fort Hood, Texas (about a gazillion years ago!), my wife and I lived on post in Walker Village (is it still there – – – or long gone?), and I had my (unregistered? – – – I can’t remember) firearms and ammunition in our assigned quarters, as was permitted for married personnel, and there was never any problem. Before I got married, when living in the barracks, I kept my personal Colt “Aero Commander” Model 1911 .45 semi-automatic pistol either stored in my wall locker during the day, or under my pillow when I slept. Life was dangerous on Fort Hood (and at all other installations worldwide) because of rampant illegal drug use, low troop morale, and numerous episodes of anti-White racial violence (news of which the Army always tried to conceal). When I was in Saigon at the Phu Lam Signal Battalion, 1st Signal Brigade, in our barracks, we kept our M-16 rifles, protective gear, and load bearing web gear, with full ammunition pouches and a bandoleer, in our wall lockers next to our bunks. At the 178th Maintenance Company at Dong Ha, and also at the 501st Signal Battalion (Airmobile), 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile), we… Read more »
BINGO, Mr. Malernee! Lopez WAS prescribed Ambien, and I’ve heard plenty of accounts of people having hallucinations, exhibiting psychotic behavior, etc. while on it. Maybe an investigation into what cocktail of drugs he was prescribed is in order? IN NO WAY am I trying to stick up for the perpetrator, but I think that investigations into what Soldiers, Sailors, and Airmen get prescribed for psychiatric help out to happen.
Mr. Mallernee: re “and also at the 501st Signal Battalion (Airmobile), 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile)”
When/Where was this? Was LTC Lennart “Swede” Nelson the BN CO?
SJ, Et Alii:
I was a Field Radio Relay and Carrier Equipment Repairman in the Electronics Maintenance Section of Headquarters and Support Company, 501st Signal Battalion (Airmobile), 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile), at Camp Eagle (between Hue and Phu Bai), Republic of Viet Nam, from July 1970 until December 1971.
I don’t remember who the Battalion Commander was, but my Company Commander was Captain William Wehunt, and the NCOIC of the Electronics Maintenance Section was Sergeant First Class Antonio Lopez.
I had arrived in the Republic of Viet Nam on 12 December 1969, at Cam Ranh Bay, and I departed the Republic of Viet Nam from Da Nang on 21 February 1972.
I dislike digressing from a thread, Mr. Mallernee, but I don’t live too far away from Gulfport, MS (We flew from there to embark on our tour to A-stan), and I wouldn’t mind “road-tripping” over there once I have enough time off to come and say “HI!” and once I get clearance and a dispatch from Household 6 to do so, whaddya think, Sir?
PROUD INFIDEL, Et Alii:
All visitors are always welcome, not only for me, but for all of the residents here!
I’ll even buy the meal tickets for your chow in our Mess Hall.
You’ll have to call or e-mail me ahead of time, so I can alert the guy guarding the Main Gate.
If your name is not on his list, you don’t get in.
I’ll probably meet you at the Main Gate, or at the Front Entrance.
Your vehicle, yourself, and any passengers, will all have to be registered by Security when you enter the Main Gate.
Here is the URL for the Armed Forces Retirement Home in Gulfport, Mississippi:
https://www.afrh.gov/afrh/gulf/gulfcampus.htm
I’ll be looking forward to your visit!
Thank you.
John Robert Mallernee
Armed Forces Retirement Home
1800 Beach Drive, Unit 311
Gulfport, Mississippi 39507
My wife was given ambien when she was in labour with our first child; she’s a bear to wake up without drugs, but this stuff made her downright MEAN. I don’t doubt that the drug could have played a significant roll or been one of the causes of this incident.
re: bases vs. post. There are other branches. I know it’s hard to imagine… but, you know, it’s a fact!
No biggy. Base or post, your points are well made. Not that any of us are required to completely agree (which I rather doubt you would expect, given the widely divergent opinions around here), but reading a well crafted piece is always a joy.
Every Armed Service does things different, like telling what time it is, for instance:
Civilians say “It’s 3:00 PM.”
In the US Army, it’s 1500
In the US Navy, the bell rings X number of times after some Sailor polishes it, paints part of the boat, polishes the Captain’s knob (HIS OFFICE DOOR’S DOORKNOB, GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER, mine needs the extra space!!)and polishes his Chief’s shoes (YEAH, I’ll most likely get my ass kicked for that, but I couldn’t resist!)
In the Air Farce, an O5 asks an E4 “Hey Bob, what time is it?” and the E4 replies “Yeah, Mike, Mickey’s big hand is on the twelve, and his little hand is on the THREE!”
In the USMC, they say”*OOG!* *AAARRGHH!* *GRUNT!* *OORAAHH!* *KILL!* *KILL!* *KILL!* *GRUNT!*
*Ducking into a low crawl VERY QUICKLY*
ROFLOL ! ! !
Sorry, I think those with CCW should be allowed to carry on post. Perhaps restrict to NCOs, but it’s obvious the status quo is a fail.
The welding point is also incorrect, civilian training that applies to a military skill can earn one a ‘bye’ from AIT, at least in the in the Army. It’s called Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP), and also offers qualified soldiers entry at with a higher rank.
Basing CCW off rank is a weak ass argument. Every person, regardless of rank, has the right to defend themselves and every other person around.
Blanket disarmament on military installations is troubling. The argument that service members can’t be trusted on post with personally owned firearms flies in the face of the very same members being armed 24/7 while deployed. Perhaps the Army should think of arming staff duty officers & NCOs at the brigade level and higher, but that won’t stop someone bent on mayhem.
I realize that I am going to catch some grief for this, but after the Washington Navy Yard shooting, the media interviewed a Captain (I believe) who was on the floor where the shooting took place. His office contained a fireproof, bullet proof safe yet as the shooter roamed on his floor, he was forced to cower in the corner, waiting for help.
I always thought “why wasn’t he allowed to keep a weapon in that safe?”
Secondly, one of the sixteen people injured in the attack at Fort Hood yesterday was injured scaling a fence attempting to run away from the shooter.
I am not foolish enough to think that an unarmed person should take on an armed person with unknown weapons and capabilities, but it bothered me a great deal that a US soldier who is part of a long, respected and revered branch of the military had to run away from the sound of the guns instead of running to them.
There are many reasons to join the US Military. Education, opportunities, a sense of purpose, etc are just some of those reasons.
But it seems to me that one of the prevailing reasons is not only the love of country, but the higher purpose of protecting those who cannot protect themselves. Whether it be here or abroad, we are the “good guys” who are willing to put their lives between innocents and evil.
We have much to look at, consider and change if we do not allow men and women in the military who are willing to die to protect others to protect themselves here at home and while on a base.
At another web site, I just now learned that thirty-four (34) year old Specialist (E-4) Ivan Lopez was a police officer for eight (08) years in Puerto Rico, and had recently been bullied by fellow soldiers, with the final straw being when his fellow soldiers played a joke on him, throwing human feces into his face.
He had previously been stationed at Fort Bliss, Texas, and had a wife and child.
His mother and grandfather had recently died, and he had a difficult time obtaining his commander’s permission to go to his mother’s funeral.
I previously commented about him having previous issues/warning signs that were ignored or neglected by his CoC. As I see it, the plot thickens.
Mental problems.
Heaven forbid the defenders of the constitution actually be treated like adults and enjoy basic freedoms of it.
Point is the enlisted man is looked down upon so much the people in charge would rather them die than to miss an opportunity to micromanage and limit their very security on base.
Just like the civilian kings in the United States with their personal armed security in areas where others aren’t afforded the same opportunity the lords in the US military are afforded the exact same amenities.
It’s ridiculous.
The Marine Corps, micromanage?! Surely not? You mean junior enlisted are treated like kindergardeners? I don’t believe you for a second! /sarc
“We’ll trust you to go down range and fight a war, but we’re surely not going to trust you to wipe your ass without we tell you how!”
Just for saying that, FatCircles, safety stand down 0800 tomorrow.