Defense Department authorizes arms for military recruiters

wnd.com ^ | 7/30/2015 | Bob Unruh

[rktman]

A new report says the U.S. military is authorizing service members who are at remote locations – such as a recruitment center – to be armed, even if they’re not in law enforcement.

In fact, a military spokesman said commanders already had the authority to “arm qualified troops at recruiting and other off-base sites.”

Whether that’s a clarification of existing authority or an expansion, the protocol certainly now is being emphasized that the U.S. military needs to be aware of “the continuing threat to DoD personnel in the U.S. homeland posed by Homegrown Violent Extremists.”

According to a report at The Hill, Defense Secretary Ash Carter has signed a new memo specifying that qualified troops can be armed, on orders from their commanders, at locations such as the off-base reserve center in Chattanooga, Tennessee, that was attacked by a lone gunman.

[rktman]

Well that's a no brainer. But we are dealing with d.c. so there is no shortage of no brains. So, all you patriots that have been standing guard in defense of the military, maybe you can stand down. Or not. Have to see if they actually issue the order/directive/memo and see if they are allowed more than a barney fife amount of ammo.

[Gamecock]

So now the rate limiting step will be whose weapon?

Recruiting stations don’t have an armory, are they going to put 9mm pistols in each recruiting station and how will they secure them?

They certainly aren’t going to allow personal weapons.

And are they going to allow recruiters to carry a weapon when they go off site?

I just don’t believe they are going to allow this to happen. This will be the end of the story until another recruiting station gets shot up.

[Old Sarge]

commanders already had the authority to “arm qualified troops at recruiting and other off-base sites.”

WHAT qualifications? All of us had be qualified on our weapons, so that SHOULD mean EVERY soldier.

[elpadre]

two bits says the general brow beat Carter into signing the memo.

It makes sense as the military personnel are well trained in the use of firearms and should be armed. And because of the publicized jihad against the members of the military they should all be issued a CCW as well.

[Vendome]

Stop using the term “Homeland”, agent Brody...

[rktman]

” the military personnel are well trained in the use of firearms”. Don’t be so sure. I’m bettin’ I’m not the only one on here that knows of people in service that should never be allowed near a firearm. I’m also pretty sure lots of us have seen them up close and placed ourselves in harms way due to close proximity. :>}

[jagusafr]

I did the research for this decision last week. It mainly came down to the “inherent right of self-defense” argument, which won the day over the objections of a number of Pentagon types, both in my JAG Corps and elsewhere, who kept saying they didn’t want “people going cowboy”. Can you frickin’ believe it? I had to convince (civilian, former AD) Air Force members that recruiters can be trusted with arms.

Idiocy.

[Gamecock]

**Can you frickin’ believe it?**

After 27 years in the Army, yes I can.

[Resolute Conservative]

The first time one is stolen or a service member forgets and carries one off property then it will end if not before.

[Gamecock]

Yup.

[elpadre]

been there done that (’52,’53) and my guys I would trust on the streets as much as I did in the field.

[itsahoot]

I’m bettin’ I’m not the only one on here that knows of people in service that should never be allowed near a firearm.

In 1958 I was stationed on a Nike Missile base in Illinois, had a good friend from Virginia big old mountain boy. He drew a prisoner transportation duty and went to supply and was issued a 45 pistol.

He was in the barack trying to get it loaded, went off shot through a wall hitting a guy in the next room.

I don't know how the Captain got him off without any charges but he did. Different army in those days.