Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Jerram wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:


Then just ban the wearing of the uniform off post.

And the fact that that idea is given more consideration in the halls of power than allowing military members to carry their personally owned and permitted hand guns to work is seriously fethed up.

But the thing is, this "ban" is already in place. And I know from talking to marines and former marines, that the USMC has a much stricter policy on the wear of uniforms off base than the army does. The problem, at least as of when I was in the army, was that you almost never saw those regs enforced.

 djones520 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
ROE are going to vary too much by environment to matter... and given the amount (and levels) of alcohol and drug consumption in the Armed Forces, having everyone walking around with a '16 and ten magazines is trouble just waiting to happen.

So clearly you have no idea what your talking about...

I'm not even going to touch on the incredibly insulting comment about substance abuse, but even here in Afghanistan we aren't walking around loaded for bear. I have a full combat load because my mission does take me off FOB. Those who remain on FOB though only carry one magazine with their weapon. Hell I only carry a single magazine while on FOB. With my M-9, not M-4.

I can't begin to tell you the number of people in my unit who pissed hot for pot, coke and amphetamines when I was in the service. Alcohol was a given. You assumed, any night of the week, that there was alcohol freely available in the barracks. As the saying goes, "If you weren't an alcoholic or a drug-addict when you went into the military, you sure will be by the time you get out."

And if you're going to get your panties in a twist over a bit of hyperbole, that's fine, but even a single thirty-round magazine in an area potentially filled with civilians (like a strip-mall at a Recruiter's station) who might also be armed and, hey, who knows, have a chip on their shoulder about the military invading their "sovereign state" or some such BS, is a nightmare just waiting to happen.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Jerram wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:


Then just ban the wearing of the uniform off post.

And the fact that that idea is given more consideration in the halls of power than allowing military members to carry their personally owned and permitted hand guns to work is seriously fethed up.

But the thing is, this "ban" is already in place. And I know from talking to marines and former marines, that the USMC has a much stricter policy on the wear of uniforms off base than the army does. The problem, at least as of when I was in the army, was that you almost never saw those regs enforced.

Yes the USMC has a stricter policy on wear of uniforms out and about town as compared to any of the other services, but no that doesn't mean such a "ban" is in place. Heck as if you need the uniform to identify a marine anyways....

Not all Marines are Bigguy McLargehuge.

 Psienesis wrote:
Not all Marines are Bigguy McLargehuge.

No, but there is a reason we call them "Jarheads"


Seriously, every marine that I've known or hung out with, all had the same "high and tight". Every. Single. One.

Seriously have to issue the weapon to someone who has not deployed just to remove "OMG A VET WITH PTSD JUST WENT NUTS!" incident

So, CNN is reporting that the shooter probably wasn't associated with ISIL, at least by his own words.

Chattanooga shooter Mohammad Abdulazeez told a friend that ISIS was "doing wrong" and "it was a stupid group and it was completely against Islam," the friend told CNN on Monday.

The article is way too long to paste here.

Which is funny, since it doesn't match his actions. I'ma call BS on that assertion.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Which is funny, since it doesn't match his actions. I'ma call BS on that assertion.

Shh... it was a cover, so his friends didn't suspect

Marines aren't allowed to Wear Cammies or Dress Blue Alphas, those are the 2 big no nos. Other then that you can wear Dress Blue Bravo's and Chucks/deltas whenever the hell you wanted. Of course if you did and you didn't have a specific reason I.E. Event, Speech, formal dinner/affair then we would label you as a Motard. And trust me those rules were STRICTLY enforced. I personally chewed a group of Bootenants a new butthole when I saw them off base in Cammies at a Dunkin Donuts out of their cars joking around. (I was a Salty Cpl at the time).

Also whenever we did any kind of troop movements that didn't involve military transports we usually were ordered to do it in civilian attire....granted as stated earlier its kinda hard to miss a group of Marines pretending to be civilians.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Which is funny, since it doesn't match his actions. I'ma call BS on that assertion.

By all means, make up any story you like?

Think I take whatever the LEO investigation turns up before I take what his friend and CNN says. Still early in the investigation

 Jihadin wrote:
Still early in the investigation

Absolutely. CNN isn't the greatest reporting at the best of times, anyway.

He also seems to have been a big stoner, which is a little weird since in my anecdotal experience marijuana usually mellows people out.

 djones520 wrote:
Arming Recruiters, while an incredibly impractical measure, since they won't have access to an armory, they would only be armed with an M-9, and would have the minimal amount of ammunition necessary for an active shooter incident.

Less ammo than is ideal still beats none at all. Having taken a quick drive around, most of the recruiting in this area is done in buildings whose defensive characteristics i would generously call 'minimum'. Big glass walls on one side and little in the way of interior walls, substantial furniture, or even a back door. If they come through the front, there's nowhere to go.

Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

What you get for leaving your crap unsecure.

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

What you get for leaving your crap unsecure.

Nope, it was very much secured inside EKMS, what we had done was run a PFT that wasn't for score and decided to go as fast as we wanted...which meant SLOW AS ......

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

What you get for leaving your crap unsecure.

Nope, it was very much secured inside EKMS, what we had done was run a PFT that wasn't for score and decided to go as fast as we wanted...which meant SLOW AS ......

So your key card was left unsecured..........plot thickens

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

What you get for leaving your crap unsecure.

Nope, it was very much secured inside EKMS, what we had done was run a PFT that wasn't for score and decided to go as fast as we wanted...which meant SLOW AS ......

So your key card was left unsecured..........plot thickens

I have no idea how your EKMS worked but we didn't have key cards, EKMS was a manned post, usually by a SSgt or his alternate a Sgt. silly army Key cards are for the AIr force and their hotel room/barracks.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Guess you never seen what a pissed off NCO can do with a Skillcraft pen eh

My personal favorite was the ammo cans lying randomly around offices and company offices. You know the ones that got turned into PT equipment, loose storage and the sort. I distinctly remember coming into work one day after my squad had annoyed our Sgt the day before to find hand shovels and a map on 2 dozen locations where he had buried an ammo can with a piece of gear we needed the next day for an inspection....D*** move

What you get for leaving your crap unsecure.

Nope, it was very much secured inside EKMS, what we had done was run a PFT that wasn't for score and decided to go as fast as we wanted...which meant SLOW AS ......

So your key card was left unsecured..........plot thickens

I have no idea how your EKMS worked but we didn't have key cards, EKMS was a manned post, usually by a SSgt or his alternate a Sgt. silly army Key cards are for the AIr force and their hotel room/barracks.

Tells me you left your gear unsecure. Guard or not. One always secure their gear. 110% accountability. Your squad took it for granted that since a guard was posted it was "secure". A NCO Guard at that. End. Of. Story.

 Jihadin wrote:
Ft Hood and I think the other was El Paso

Fort Hood shows the need for timely armed intervention when someone is attacking unarmed personnel. El Paso seems strange to mention as it was not a terrorist attack, it was someone with a mental health issue and a grudge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
So, CNN is reporting that the shooter probably wasn't associated with ISIL, at least by his own words.

Chattanooga shooter Mohammad Abdulazeez told a friend that ISIS was "doing wrong" and "it was a stupid group and it was completely against Islam," the friend told CNN on Monday.

The article is way too long to paste here.

He may not have been connected to ISIS, but there are religious extremist undertones to the attack.

Authorities are investigating a text message from Abdulazeez to a friend before the attack, law enforcement sources said. The message included an Islamic verse that says, "Whoever shows enmity to a friend of mine, then I have declared war against him."

On arming soldiers off base...Look at the outcry (legitimized by a sitting govenor) over the Jade Helm exercises.

An executive order from Obama ordering off-base soldiers to be armed (or even seeing armed uniformed soldiers) would make the uproar about Jade Helm seem minor.

 skyth wrote:
On arming soldiers off base...Look at the outcry (legitimized by a sitting govenor) over the Jade Helm exercises.

An executive order from Obama ordering off-base soldiers to be armed (or even seeing armed uniformed soldiers) would make the uproar about Jade Helm seem minor.

If you can't conceal a personal weapon while wearing ACUs or similar, you are an idiot or incompetent. I can conceal my pistol in shorts and a t-shirt.

And screw the Executive Order straw man. How about the various legislative efforts out there to allow soldiers to conceal carry if they desire and have the requisite permits? Frankly I have not seen too many calls to have every troop carrying his/her M4 around all the time off or on post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The following shows (approximate in some cases) numbers of concealed carry permits by state:

http://www.legallyarmed.com/ccw_statistics.htm

They do link to some sources and state some others without links. I have zero idea how accurate it is.

This PDF has similar numbers and shows sources for their numbers at the end:

http://www.crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Concealed-Carry-Permit-Holders-Across-the-United-States.pdf

Now, the reason I bring this up is to show that there are a bunch of folks with permits out there. How can anyone think these people are any better or worse at handling a concealed weapon than a soldier or DoD civilian with the same permit would be? Did I increase your level of fear of being shot out of hand by pointing out there are concealed guns all over the place?

Now, I'm going to assume some (probably small) proportion of those numbers are active duty members or DoD civilians (I know several in both categories that have their permits). Assuming those already with permits were those most interested in obtaining one, I suspect if these folks were allowed to carry at work the numbers wouldn't rise too much, though being allowed to carry would indeed influence some folks to then seek out and obtain a permit and a weapon. If you believe active duty and DoD civilians are representative of the overall population, the %s given in that PDF would probably be representative of the %s who would end up with a permit, maybe active duty would have slightly higher %s, but I would bet not by much. Not everyone with a permit carries all the time (or at all).

Regardless, allowing soldiers to be armed off-base wi create a huge outcry from the type of people worried about the Jade Heln exercises.

Granted, if it was a Republican president there likely wouldn't be any outcry.

Arming soldiers in general or having armed guards at military facilities? Think we're blurring the line here

 skyth wrote:
Regardless, allowing soldiers to be armed off-base wi create a huge outcry from the type of people worried about the Jade Heln exercises.

Granted, if it was a Republican president there likely wouldn't be any outcry.

When they are in civilian clothes, they CAN be armed off post as is (assuming they have their permit).

Do the tinfoil hat wearing types get upset at this as is?


And do you really think the folks scared of Jade Helm give a rat's ass if the sitting POTUS has an R or a D? If they are the ones you are worried about complaining, I submit that tiny fraction of our population doesn't care R or D.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
Arming soldiers in general or having armed guards at military facilities? Think we're blurring the line here

I actually saw a proposal to put bullet proof glass and hire security guards for recruiting stations. What a waste of tax dollars that would end up being.

I don't think anyone is arguing against armed guards at a military post. The gate team at Ft. Lewis, now JBLM, was always armed when I was there, and we always went armed when pulling guard rotation at our ASP (Ordnance unit) and when transporting to/from.

But at an off-post site, such as a recruiting office in a strip mall (which is why structural security is so poor, it's a rented store-front, not designed IAW military standards or tactical planning) is, as I've said, an accident waiting to happen. Whether its some moron going for a squealie around the parking lot that seems to be aiming for the station, some conspiracy-theory idiot off his/her meds (look at the poor vet in Florida that got shot for guarding some sea-turtles!) or just your regular, run-of-the-mill kook, the number of potentially-terrible events involving civilian casualties far outstrips the number of actual attacks happening on sites like this.

Upthread, someone mentioned the Ft. Hood shooting. They are apparently forgetting that armed people *did* respond to Hasan. He shot most of them. He was, specifically, targeting military personnel, after all. Eventually, a police officer shot and paralyzed him, ending the threat, but that was not the first armed response to the incident. It was not a lack of armed response that allowed that, simply that Hasan was a better shot, or that he already had his weapon out and active, or was simply one lucky SOB.

 Psienesis wrote:


Upthread, someone mentioned the Ft. Hood shooting. They are apparently forgetting that armed people *did* respond to Hasan. He shot most of them. He was, specifically, targeting military personnel, after all. Eventually, a police officer shot and paralyzed him, ending the threat, but that was not the first armed response to the incident. It was not a lack of armed response that allowed that, simply that Hasan was a better shot, or that he already had his weapon out and active, or was simply one lucky SOB.

Not an entirely accurate way to describe it.

The first cop to confront him, he got off the first shots and he hit her, though she did return fire (officer Munley). The next (officer Todd) tried to get him to surrender, ended up exchanging fire with Hasan and took Hasan down. Munley was the ONLY one of the victims shot (13 killed 32 wounded) who was armed. So he did not shoot 'most' of the armed responders, and only TWO armed responders confronted him. NONE of the military were armed (except of course Hasan himself...) What is worth noting is that at least three of those killed were killed trying to charge Hasan and stop him. Maybe if one of them had been armed Hasan kills less folks. Maybe not. What we DO know is it took a guy shooting Hasan to stop Hasan.

You might be right, I posted that from memory, and knew that several people confronted/attacked Hasan, but don't recall the specifics of who was armed with what and when (though he did shoot a guy with a table? Chair? Something.) Shot Munley, of course. Shot at Todd, and hit him... twice? One might have been a deflection shrapnel wound.

... so, yeah, actually, armed with whatever, Hasan did shoot every armed person to engage him.