Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 11/09/2009 12:50:05 PM PST by J. Neil Schulman
Thank you for this post. I’m gonna make it an email. Let ‘em sue me.
I’m down with the “arm the public” thing. An armed society is a polite society.
kittykat77 wrote:
“What was the policy before the Clinton directive? Were all soldiers allowed to carry weapons at all (or some) times on US bases? What was the policy regarding personal (civilian) guns on US bases?”
I’m not 100% but I believe it was up to the base commander.
i was about to comment about drunk privates on payday... add women, guns and fast cars... yikes!
“The officer corps and the civilians in charge don’t give a f*ck if you are able to protect yourself, they just want you to obey.”
A great big F*ckin’ BRAVO SIERRA on that. I carry every day, I would rather EVERYBODY who works for me and for whose security I’m responsible were carrying a weapon AT ALL TIMES. I carry in church, at the courthouse, at high school football games - everywhere. It’s easier for me than for some, because I have the class of CHL that lets me do so, but everybody ought to know how to shoot and be prepared to do so.
Can I assume your military service, for which I thank you, was immediately post-Vietnam?
Colonel, USAFR
2 AF Small Arms Expert Marksman ribbons (M9 and M38)
1 Navy Expert Rifleman ribbon (M16)
The cost and number of man-hours of training and oversight required to satisfy the senior officers/civilians and allow every capable person to be armed at all times would make this program impractical.
My service was from 85-91 all enlisted, mostly at sea, and went from no weapons training to being in charge of the in-port and at-sea security alert weapons locker.
I was a horrible shot. Although since we were issued 12ga. shotguns with 00-buck to be used inside cramped steel compartments, I suspect in a real "security alert" we would have ended up with many ricochet related injuries.
Then arm every man woman & child under the same logic.
I say we isolate the Islamocists. We did something like this in WWII with the Japanese because we did not know if they were going to do something or not. If they don't like the isolation (until the war is over in 25 years), let them leave the country. Otherwise, you are inviting the trouble from every kook ball that gets mad at the traffic. One guy here in AZ just drove up to the photo radar car and shot the attendant through the window. He was mad at photo radar. So, is this better?
exactly...
So while Clinton was vastly EXPANDING the federal agents who could carry a firearm (poultry inspectors were authorized to carry a firearm when on the job), he was LIMITING the soldier’s ability to defend themselves.
I wish you’d had better officers. No excuse for not properly training people when they need it. Happy Vet’s Day.
Colonel, USAFR
If you live off-base/post, you can keep them at your residence as long as they are legally obtained.
Taking away more guns from the personnel on post/base will not make it safer.
This POS terrorist transported his weapons in his car onto post.
I've visited my son at his army post and they only thing you have to have to get on post is a post issued vehicle sticker and an ID. If you are a visitor, you have to show your car registration, insurance verification and driver's license then you get a one day pass.
THE VEHICLE IS NOT CHECKED FOR ILLEGAL ITEMS. So it was very easy to get a weapon on post as long as he had the proper passes.
“A Clinton Administration revision to Department of Defense Directive 5210.56 — Army Regulation 190-14, dated 12 March 1993 — permits the Secretary of the Army to authorize military personnel to carry firearms “on a case by case basis” for personal protection within the continental United States, but forbids military personnel to carry their own personal firearms and both requires “a credible and specific threat” before firearms be issued for military personnel to protect themselves. It further directs that firearms “not be issued indiscriminately for that purpose.”
“
Clinton Body Count....see comedian’s post.
Frankly I don't care whose fault it was. Fix it. Fix it now.
Dutchboy88 wrote:
“’He wouldn’t have opened fire in the first place if he knew armed soldiers in the room would immediately shoot back.’
Then arm every man woman & child under the same logic.
I say we isolate the Islamocists. We did something like this in WWII with the Japanese because we did not know if they were going to do something or not. If they don’t like the isolation (until the war is over in 25 years), let them leave the country. Otherwise, you are inviting the trouble from every kook ball that gets mad at the traffic. One guy here in AZ just drove up to the photo radar car and shot the attendant through the window. He was mad at photo radar. So, is this better?”
Even the Supreme Court found that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s detention of American citizens of Japanese descent was unconstitutional. That you would recommend that makes me think you’re as much of a fascist as FDR.
The American solution is to let a free people defend themselves — and that certainly applies to the American army.
As for your traffic-light incident, for each of these there are ten times as many cases where a defensive gun use saved a life or stopped a crime. You must be reading only the Brady campaigns lying anti-gun propaganda.
Billthedrill wrote:
“While I agree whole-heartedly with the idea of allowing anyone who is capable to bear arms, the ban didn’t originate with Clinton. It was like that all during my active duty service from 1970-1980 and on every base I can recall during the next 15 years spent working for the Navy in one capacity or other. It isn’t new. Frankly I don’t care whose fault it was. Fix it. Fix it now.”
Before Clinton it varied by service and by post. I think you’d find Army and Marine bases had different policies than Naval and Air Force bases
But I agree with your bottom line. Whether it’s DoD policy or command SNAFU, it needs to be stopped.
I'm with you 66% on that one. A bit more if you're including safety-conscious "children" like my 13-year-old cousin who bagged his first deer, with the gun he owns and shoots almost daily, at the age of nine.
But certainly, every adult of sound mind.
“Then arm every man woman & child under the same logic.”
Then ALLOW THE INDIVIDUAL CHOICE OF armS TO every man woman & EMANCIPATED child under the same logic OF NATURAL LAW.
There, fixed. If people don’t choose to arm themselves for their own defense when they aren’t constrained, then they are no smarter than tree huggers who go into bear country with nothing more to shoot than a camera. SELF defense is not delegatable. But those who optionally-disarmed the victims created the environment where a single shooter could be highly effective. The criminal is at fault, but his effectiveness in mayhem is enhanced or inhibited by the official environment.
It is a logical fallacy to argue from the specific to the general (a photoradar inspired murderer is not a reason to change Arizona’s liberal self defense and weapon’s regulations). Millions of kook-balls get mad at traffic everyday with the only damage being to their own blood pressure but that is hardly news.
In general, allowing people to make their own choices regarding their own self reliance and safety is a character building experience, and a military base should be one of the better, safer learning laboratories for creating adults. Something the military might be expected to consistently encourage.
The over reaction by ‘isolation’ of innocent Japanese you cite is a dreadful black mark on our history and was never proven socially or militarily useful, and has been officially repudiated. But that doesn’t negate the argument in the general case that virulent and pathological subcultures such as some gangs, militant Islamism, or inter-generational communists on Medicare might benefit a free society by getting a free cattle-car ride before being treated for lead deficiency.
If this is that pot-smoking hazy America of Woodstock, then we don't want any. Hold hands and sing KumByYa with the Dums.
No US Military organization allows "free people" to defend themselves. They are trained to follow orders or people die (sounds like "A Few Good Men"). But, I've been an officer in the Army and it is not about the kind of self-determination that you describe. There are times when we are to come together and allow constitutional leadership to direct. There are times when they become too large, too powerful. The US Constituion is somewhere in the middle. And that is not facist.
To blame George W. Bush for gun control as the proximate cause of Islamic terror massacres is ludicrous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.