Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Why are guns banned at our military recruitment centers?

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Lance Jacobs, Jul 16, 2015.

  1. Lance Jacobs

    Lance Jacobs South Willamette Valley Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,709
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    I just don't understand this. We knew that ISIS and other terrorist groups have repeatedly called upon Muslims to kill US servicemen in America. Yet, guns are totally banned at our military recruitment offices. Our servicemen are not allowed to be armed so that they can defend themselves.

    This has got to be the most insane gun free zone policy of them all, no?? Our servicemen are being specifically targeted for death, yet they are disarmed and not able to fight back, if they are attacked. Is that not actually setting them up for attack? Is it not even going so far as to encourage these offices to be attacked?

    It just seems so stupid to me.

    Take at a look at this photo showing the gun free zone notice at the entrance to the Marines Recruitment office in Chattanooga:

    gun-free-killing.jpg
     
  2. WasrNwarpaint

    WasrNwarpaint Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    1,046
    there has already been a shooting in a military gun free zone if I recall correctly
     
  3. solv3nt

    solv3nt Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,914
    Likes Received:
    1,298
    A 1992 directive from the DoD forbids soldiers from possessing firearms on base.
     
  4. Lance Jacobs

    Lance Jacobs South Willamette Valley Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,709
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    .

    But even if there had not been previous attacks, should not these threats by ISIS and others have been taken more seriously just on face value?

    What if the servicemen at the Chattanooga recruitment offices had been armed, and had been able to engage the terrorist? Perhaps they could have stopped him right then and there, instead of being helpless and not being able to do anything.

    ,
     
  5. Lance Jacobs

    Lance Jacobs South Willamette Valley Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,709
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    I checked, and there was an extremely similar Islamic terror attack back in 2009 on a US Army recruitment office in Little Rock that left one solider dead, and another wounded:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Little_Rock_recruiting_office_shooting

    .
     
  6. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,958
    I can understand not having EVERY Soldier issued a firearm and live rounds in civilian settings like strip mall recruiting offices or on Stateside bases in mess halls etc.. Let's face it, not all young servicemen and women act with maturity and common sense.

    Maybe all Officers, NCOs and other certain select service persons should however be allowed/required to carry as a precaution in these places though.

    Something should be done soon before more of these sitting duck shootings occur!
     
    blackadder likes this.
  7. Lance Jacobs

    Lance Jacobs South Willamette Valley Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,709
    Likes Received:
    2,589

    As far as the Marines go, the recruiter does have to be a NCO, with at least 2 years in his grade, and a minimum 4 years in the service. And he has to have high proficiency and conduct ratings.

    If our government cannot trust such men with handling guns safely, who can they trust??

    .
     
  8. bakersman345

    bakersman345 Camas wa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    676
    Likes Received:
    526
    Every service member killed by a terrorist is one less Republican vote. But seriously someone should be armed everywhere. Grocery store, military base, schools, day care, I mean really why can't people understand guns are good, and make people safer for the most part
     
    Loptr, Caveman Jim and 3MTA3 like this.
  9. jutbucks13

    jutbucks13 Beaverton Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    97
    I think it may be time for the United States Military to update their Carry Laws. These Marines had no chance to defend themselves. I did some snooping around and found that Article 134 in The UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) prohibits Service Members from Carrying Concealed. With todays climate is this the best policy? I'll agree that having someone carrying openly at a Recruitment Center may not be the image we as Americans want. But the other option is currently a Court Martial Offense..... Any thoughts?



    http://archive.marinecorpstimes.com...led-weapon-has-broad-meaning?sf29236618=['1']
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
  10. sdlsaginaw

    sdlsaginaw Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    100
    They need to close that "Gun Free But Not Bullet Free" loophole that lets things like this happen.... :rolleyes:
     
  11. jutbucks13

    jutbucks13 Beaverton Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    97
    Article 134 of the UCMJ is why! It is TIME for a change!
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
  12. 4Freedom

    4Freedom Boise, Idaho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,124
    Likes Received:
    817
    If they have a concealed weapons permit in the state they reside, they should have the right to conceal carry their weapon, regardless if they are in a Federal or Military base zone. Actually, I feel concealed weapons permits are unconstitutional in themselves, but since that is the rules for your average citizen, at least we can start there. I'm not a legal expert, but I do not believe according to our Constitution, that our 2nd Amendment does not apply in Federal zones or military zones. Considering, how many of our unarmed soldiers have been massacred on their bases, I think it is utterly disgraceful that we punish them and disarm them. These are the same people who risk their lives to protect our freedoms. Yet, we leave them as defenseless sheep on our own native soil? We could not trust our own soldiers to carry a gun with them, but we seemed to trust Mohammod Youssuf Abdulazeez with carrying weapons. He wasn't even on a list of people considered potentially dangerous or a terrorist threat. And, look, with our trust, what Mohammad Youssuf did to our soldiers? It's sad that we seem to give more rights to terrorists than our own men who risk their lives to defend our freedoms.

    I believe if our Marines are qualified to defend our country, they are qualified to be carrying a gun with them in recruiting centers. Also, I cannot agree that only officers should be allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. These men risk their lives to defend our country and its freedoms. If a 21 year old person has the right to defend himself off a military base, he should have the same right to do it on the base.

    And, here is another thought. What does this do to the morale of our troops or potential recruits for the military when they see our soldiers gunned down as helpless sheep right in a recruiting office?
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
    Dyjital likes this.
  13. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,958
    I agree CC permits are unconstitutional as well but as you know Servicemen give up a lot of their rights when they join. Get a DUI for instance and you get punished by local laws as well as losing rank or worse. Lots of double Jeopardy as well as a lot of BS no civilian has to put up with.

    They should however as I said make an exception on carrying based on Rank to weed out the youngest soldiers who are still emotionally developing, maybe getting their first taste of drink and getting into trouble and fights a lot as used to happen when I was in back in 82. Hell even the occasional Sgt. would get in a mess but very seldom compared to newbies!
     
    blackadder likes this.
  14. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,958
    BTW at 21 in my day you could have made Sgt. Most recruits were 17 or 18. Are all the lower ranks 21 and up these days??
    We had one guy who was mid to late 20 something in basic that we nicknamed "old man"!:D
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
  15. U201494

    U201494 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    492
    Put a lympdyck polesmoker in the Whitehouse and this is where we end up.
     
    Hayshaker and Oathkeeper1775 like this.
  16. Oathkeeper1775

    Oathkeeper1775 Coast Range Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1,370
    Not every service member is/was obedient to the military's restrictions on self defense...:rolleyes:.

    The military shouldn't be confused with any entity that remotely resembles an organization that respects individual liberties; in fact, the military has much more in common with collective entities such as socialism, fascism, nepotism, despotism, and communism.

    Arguably, that's why former service members appear to take their liberty more seriously than people who have not lived under such tight restrictions...we seem so....so...ostentatious in the face of encroachments onto our God given rights.:eek:

    My heart aches for the latest casualties and their families; at the hands of the alleged non-attributional shooter. Those Marines could have kicked his a $$ in a fair fight.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2015
  17. 4Freedom

    4Freedom Boise, Idaho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,124
    Likes Received:
    817
    Who says terrorists like to play fair? In fact, almost every terrorist act committed in this country was the result of us trusting these terrorists, who portrayed themselves as law-abiding citizens, turning our backs on them and then getting stabbed in the backs. The guy was well aware that these recruitment centers were Gun Free Zones and took advantage of the situation.
     
    Caveman Jim and Oathkeeper1775 like this.
  18. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,913
    Likes Received:
    19,583
    The (main) reason they have the weapons policy in the military that they do comes down to "simplifying to the lowest common denominator". Every CO is responsible for the (mis)conduct of the soldiers under their command, and are averse to jepordizimg their careers over the matter. If an incident were to happen and a CO is found not to have some sort of unit (or base/post) policy/regulation in place it's a career ending event for them.

    Second, although they espouse that the lives of their soldiers are paramount, in reality they are "inventory", and with any sort of inventory you're going to have losses.

    Third, the U.S. Military has never been adept, nor quick to counter asymmetrical warfare... and this event is exactly that, asymmetrical warfare.
     
    4Freedom and Oathkeeper1775 like this.
  19. 4Freedom

    4Freedom Boise, Idaho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,124
    Likes Received:
    817
    I agree that being in the military is not exactly like being a civilian. Nonetheless, the right to defend yourself is not a right that I think anybody, including our soldiers should lose by joining the military. If we are not going to pay extra money or put resources to hired armed guards to guard our soldiers, then we should allow our soldiers to have guns for the very purpose to defend themselves, if our government cannot protect them. If the battlefield becomes safer than the home base, perhaps its time to start treating our bases like battlefields too. That is what our bases have become. There has been more casualties now in our military bases on our own soil than there has been in hostile zones in other countries. Maybe, it has something to do with the fact our soldiers have loaded weapons in these areas and the hostiles don't feel as inclined to attack well-trained and heavily armed group of people?

    Whether or not you believe our soldiers should be able to carry loaded weapons, you seriously need to come to terms with the situation. Either we go out of our way to guard and protect our soldiers or we let these men, who may or may not be trustworthy to possess a gun, the right to defend themselves and the people around them. Considering how many 21 year olds without any training or even respect for firearms have CHLs, I really don't feel any more worried about them having a gun than a solider in the military, especially our marines.

    I know a few expressed some bad sentiments towards the military. I will say , as of now, I trust our current military more than the various law enforcement agencies in the country. I do not feel all that safe with some of the police officers who carry around guns who have proven themselves to not be so competent or trustworthy either. Although, in this case, if it wasn't for the bravery of a non-military police officer to stop the shooter, the shooting spree would have went on and many more innocent people's lives would have been lost. I guess I could say a small city Tennessee police officer would have a bit of an edge with his gun handling skills over those in other places.

    And, if a federal zone is off limit for our soldiers to carry, it should not be off limit for ordinary citizens to carry. Military bases and federal zone are still part of the USA and according to our Constitution, the 2nd Amendment, our rights to carry loaded weapons still apply there. Gun Free Zones, as I always said, are Shooting Spree ZOnes in reality. I understand the military has rules, but these rules are resulting in the deaths of innocent people and that must stop.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
  20. Barefoot African

    Barefoot African Saint Helens Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    117
    Every relative of every man lost in these gun free zones needs to press supreme court action against this unarmed and serving - nonsense.

    WT* is the second amendment for ? Every serving man has a born and stated right to defend and protect, against imminent violence, as do I. Where you are serving is not an excuse.

    We had the same dumb policy back in the day in South Africa, and no rights.

    Until they bombed the parking garage next door. Then we all said hell-no and carried all the time. As a conscript I guess I had an attitude.
     
    308, Oathkeeper1775 and 4Freedom like this.