Imagine A World With No Guns
…Where we all can be victims
When Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan started shooting up the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Pfc. Marquest Smith dove under a desk. A.P. reports that “he lay low for several minutes, waiting for the shooter to run out of ammunition and wishing he, too, had a gun.”
Neither Smith nor the other victims of Hasan’s assault had guns because soldiers on military bases within the United States generally are not supposed to carry them. Last week’s shootings, which killed 13 people and wounded more than 30, demonstrated once again the folly of “gun-free zones,” which attract and assist people bent on mass murder instead of deterring them.
That these poor wonderful people were ordered to be defenseless just infuriates me to no end.
Military Thingies, Morality, Nanny State, Politics | Mr. Bingley | 
November 11, 2009 8:55 am
Subscribe
It’s ALWAYS been that way.
Geesh. Well I hope they change that lickety-split. The world has changed, and it’s time to get rid of the “I’d Like To Teach The World To Sing” mentality.
It’s not really quite true. You can have firearms in your vehicle, and in the hunting areas.
I remember at El Toro during the first Gulf War they started doing random searches of cars and generally beefing up security. The MP’s found firearms in about 2/3 of the cars that they searched. They just ignored the issue but sent out an email saying “come on, guys, be more discreet.”
What we really need is to demolish the concealed carry licensing program and allow everyone to carry whenever and however they like. Any area that wants to exclude guns needs to provide a 100% screen like at the court house to make sure others are safe.
Although I abhor any attempt to impose restrictions of our second amendment rights, there are practical circumstances where it may not be appropriate to have a weapon. But any such decision should be guided by common sense. I think we should imply, insist upon and expect personal responsibility. Make it the norm that conduct which runs contrary to our societal moires is faced with the guidance of accountability. Punitive law for bad behavior is appropriate but only if is enforced. To many spineless politicians and their supporters, when faced with the failure of their efforts to protect because they won’t expend the uncomfortable effort to enforce, instead rely upon ever more restrictive laws that end up usurping our rights.
I think maybe you forgot your indoc at El Toro, Skyler. Or maybe they’d changed it when you, young pup that you are, got there, but there were VERY explicit regs about PERSONAL firearms and base. They could only be in your vehicle IF you were heading somewhere they were needed at that moment (like a range, etc.) and they’d better be all bagged up. They couldn’t be “stored” in your vehicle, trunk or otherwise ~ if you actually LIVED on base ~ barracks or housing ~ they had to be turned over to the armory, stored there and checked out “as needed”.
How do I know I remember correctly? The universal, “Fuck that/you and the horse you rode in on!” coming out of all the indocs (major dad included).
Enforcement is something else entirely.
Yeah, I remember, but I also remember it being ignored. I don’t know anyone that carried, though.
When I checked in I was living in the BOQ (rat trap that it was) and I dutifully put my rifles in the armory. They looked at me like I was a nut.
Oh, except Maj. DeArmen. He always carried.
Newark airport was full of reservists with M-14s just after 9/11. What happenhed?
I can’t get past the image of an unarmed military. Anywhere. That’s just scary.
Memo to Army: Get your s*** together before someone else gets an idea.
Also I think being in californai had something to do with it. Quantico had hunters crawling all over the place. Fort Hood probably does too.
Growing up in the Air Force, my dad always kept a firearm in our home. Me too when I got my first .22 at age 11 or so. I don’t know what their policy is or was, but I know that my dad wouldn’t have violated policy, so I assume they could keep firearms in quarters.
I don’t know what the policy is at all Army installations, but I know that at Forts Huachuca and Polk, at least when I was there, you could keep personal firearms in your family quarters. However, if you lived in the barracks, you had to store them in the armory.
I’m of two minds about the firearms policy. I’d like to think that the trained military folks would best police themselves, however I’ve known A LOT of “fuck authority” types who were ONLY in the military to get the weapons and tactical training. I was discussing this on another site and someone came up with the idea of volunteer security that would patrol anonymously and be licensed to carry on the installation. Deputized by the Provost, I imagine. The problem with any of this, I believe, isn’t one of political correctness, but is a legal one. The MPs, SPs, civilian police, are duly authorized law enforcement while the average Soldier, Sailor, Marine or Airman is not. I guess a class could change that. I don’t know. It’s a thought. I sure as hell know that I would have volunteered for such a thing had I been asked when I was serving.
All those anti-authority types carry their weapons in Iraq with no problems.
I trend toward your point, Skylar. I think the discipline and fear of retribution keeps those folks in line.
I remember back when I was a Marine, my M-16 was locked up all safe & sound in the armory, until the time when I routinely had to clean it. I never knew the reason why, I can only assume, which I’m not going to do. Any facts out there?
There are regulations that govern the storage/control of sensitive items, Dale. When not in use, they have to be secured. Weapons in an armory. NVGs and NBC/CBR materials either in a locked room or in the armory as well.
It’s generally an accountability issue.
“It’s generally an accountability issue.”
Accountability is one reason. It’s not the only reason.
Back when I was in Germany, as a young lieutenant, we would deploy into the field with weapons, tools, equipment, COMSEC items, and everything else. This was in the 1980’s, when terrorist attacks were common, and the Soviet Army was off not very far away.
And we didn’t carry ammunition. Well, I did, in the strictly unauthorized .45 ACP I packed while in the field. I hoped it would be enough.
“Accountability” was hardly the reason for such a security failure, although it made for a hand excuse. They didn’t want armed soldiers. This attitude showed up in Kuwait, where it was clear that the troops had no serious training in safe weapons handling, and we kept on getting friendly fire incidents at the clearing barrels. One young lad was shot in the stomach by his friend.
A few months ago, while I was getting a new vehicle tag at Fort Lewis, I read their indoc papers. If you were assigned to Fort Lewis, regardless if you lived on or off post, you were required to *register* your *personal* weapons.
“Accountability”? Only in a small way.