Ok someone explain this to me.

[bersaguy]

I would like to hear the views of people regarding the fact that for some reason our elected officials felt that our well trained top of the line in the world military personnel should not be armed while on a base inside the country? I will give my opinion but I would like some others. I think for the most part they are actually afraid of our military personnel. You figure almost everyone in the Department of Homeland Security is armed at all times.( not law enforcement except in emergencies) The Secret Service, a branch of our Government is armed at all times. But are for protection of officials and not law enforcement.) It has now come to light that even people in the EPA. ( not law enforcement) is even armed along with people in Social Security ( not law enforcement) are armed. Why are our fighting men and women in our military not allowed to be armed when they are the most well trained and qualified in the handling of firearms and not armed and in an emergency such as Ft Hood and the Naval base our troops are not armed?........... :popcorn: :popcorn:
  :popcorn:

[c.a.willard]

I have mixed feelings about this one.  I would like to say all service members are responsible enough, but this sadly is not the case.   There are times where it is necessary to be loud and aggressive with a subordinate, i would prefer not to have to worry about them being armed at the time.  

 

You have the military tag under your screen name so i'm sure you realize that the majority of the military are not as proficient in firearms as some would like to believe.

 

I would be completely in agreement on allowing those with a carry permit to carry on the installation when in a non duty status (just like about every other place in the US) I'm just not completely sold on carrying while at work. 

 

I can't believe I am about to even suggest this, but i wonder if allowing the service member to carry their POW at work in a green status with a loaded mag in a pouch would be doable.  Not that this discussion matters much because we all know it ain't likely to ever happen

 

 

Edited to add: after a little critical thinking exorcize and a little self head slap i can not find an articulate reasonable argument against allowing permit holders to carry even in uniform.  I am not removing my previous comment because it may still have value to the discussion.  I'm still not sure how comfortable i am with it, but my personal comfort level means squat in the grand scheme of things. 

Edited September 17, 2013 by c.a.willard

[TrickyNicky]

Well I can't explain everything but FYI the armed agent of the EPA and Social Security office ARE law enforcement. They have a set of very specific laws they enforce, but are still law enforcement. Much
The same as an ATF or DEA agent or even US Marshalls. They don't enforce ALL the laws but are LE just the same.

YMMV, but that's just the way it is. Also worth noting that not every employee of DHS is armed none the less armed at all times, same with secret service.

[bersaguy]

Well I can't explain everything but FYI the armed agent of the EPA and Social Security office ARE law enforcement. They have a set of very specific laws they enforce, but are still law enforcement. Much
The same as an ATF or DEA agent or even US Marshalls. They don't enforce ALL the laws but are LE just the same.

YMMV, but that's just the way it is. Also worth noting that not every employee of DHS is armed none the less armed at all times, same with secret service.

 

Well all I have read all of the agencies I mentioned have armed personnel at all times. Just saying these people are armed yet our military is not? What is wrong with that picture?

[LagerHead]

It is very, very easy to explain why they won't allow military personnel to carry on base. You are not even close to trustworthy unless you are an officer. Enlisted personnel can't be trusted which is why they have things like "mandatory fun" on long weekends. There are no exceptions to this rule. If you can't be trusted to not get so blitzed that you steal a tank and ram it through a child care center on a weekend, how can you possibly be trusted to carry a loaded gun during the week? 

[Guest Riciticky]

I carried a 45 on C-130's for years but it was concealed. Don't know what the rules are now, but back then, it was called an anti hijacking device. The air force made us unload and check in every time we landed somewhere. Then check it out again when we got ready to take off again. What a hassle.

[TrickyNicky]

They do have armed personnel at all times, just like our military. Not everyone is armed at all times though, again, just like our military.

What I think your getting at, and please correct me if I'm wrong is the recent tragedy in the DC Naval base/shipyard (not sure).
If that's right it is surely a tragedy but as CA Willard has pointed out, you don't need everyone armed all the time. It's not practical for at least the reasons he pointed out and likely many more if you take time to really analyze the pros and cons.

Having said that, I do think its silly that there are not more armed servicemen on base.