Good day all. If there is one group you would expect to be able to carry weapons, it would be soldiers. They are, after all, trained to use firearms of all sorts. However, there has been a ban on the ability of military personnel to carry weapons on base going back decades.
The original ban happened in 1992 under that useless idiot, President George H.W. Bush. However, it was Bill “Bubba Horndog” Clinton who issued the formal order, AR 190-14. In any case, this order was a flat out disaster and has cost the lives of a number of military personnel, such as the 2009 Fort Hood shooting by an Islamic Terrorist, Nidal Hasan.
There have been other incidents over the years, and many people have complained that if we can’t trust our own military with guns, then who can we trust? Now the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth has issued a new memo reversing this idiotic order. Here are the details from Fox News:
War Secretary Pete Hegseth signed a memo on Thursday ordering a major shift in base security policy, allowing service members to request permission to carry personal firearms for self-defense amid growing concerns about threats on U.S. installations.
In an announcement on social media, Hegseth said all American citizens have a God-given right under the Second Amendment to carry weapons for protection. However, he said that right has not been extended to uniformed service members, who are “trained at the highest and unwavering standards.”
First good on SecWar Hegseth. However, regarding the training? Yes. The military does train the troops to a standard. However, due to costs, they don’t get to as much live fire practice as they should, outside of a few Special Operations groups. There have been any number of instances where civilians have out shot soldiers. SecWar Hegseth needs to do something about that as well.
“These war fighters, entrusted with the safety of our nation, are no less entitled to exercise their God-given right to keep and bear arms than any other American,” Hegseth said. “Our war fighters defend the right of others to carry. They should be able to carry themselves.”
One reason soldiers should be able to carry is the escalating threats of terrorist attacks on military bases. Currently, only the on duty MP’s and base security troops are armed. The problem with this is simple. Terrorists will go where the MP’s aren’t and start shooting at people with no ability to fight back. While the video below is just a bit of fiction, during the real attack, there were people shooting at the Japanese planes with whatever they had at hand, including an M1911 .45 caliber pistol.
Citing recent tragedies at Fort Stewart, Holloman Air Force Base and Pensacola Naval Air Station, Hegseth said the incidents have “made clear” that “some threats are closer to home than we would like.”
“In these instances, minutes are a lifetime, and our service members have the courage and training to make those precious short minutes count,” he said. “Before today, it was virtually impossible … for War Department personnel to get permission to carry and store their own personal weapons aligned with the state laws where we operate our installations.”
Frankly, they should be aligned with Federal laws, or those of Texas, New Hampshire, etc. Basically if you aren’t a criminal, you can carry, and I don’t think convicted felons are allowed to serve at this time.
“Effectively, our bases across the country were gun-free zones,” Hegseth said. “Unless you’re training, or unless you are a military policeman, you couldn’t carry. You couldn’t bring your own firearm for your own personal protection onto post. Well, that’s no longer.”
Now I suspect that most soldiers who do decide to bring their own firearms onto the base, won’t be carrying them everywhere. Depending on what they do, they might have them in their cars or in their desks. Their uniforms do have lots of pockets so they could put something like a Ruger LCP, a Smith and Wesson Shield or a Sig Sauer P365 in one of their pockets. If some evil doer shows up, then the soldiers will be able to lay down fire until the MP’s show up.
The memo signed Thursday directs installation commanders to allow requests to carry a privately owned firearm, with the presumption that it is necessary for personal protection. If a request is denied, Hegseth said the reason for that denial will be put in writing and will explain, in detail, the basis for that direction.
I have a feeling that there might be a few installation commanders who have been infected with the WOKE virus who will not be able to help themselves and will deny the troops their right to keep and bear arms. I won’t be surprised if a few are first “Counseled” unofficially and if they can’t throw off the virus, removed from command.
“Again, the presumption is service members will be able to have their Second Amendment right on post,” he said. “Not all enemies are foreign, nor are they all outside our borders. Some are domestic. Confirming your God-given right to self-protection is what I’m signing into action today, and I’m proud to do so.”
Needless to say, the usual suspects are utterly opposed to this new policy. Here are a few details from Newsmax:
Gun control advocates and some military policy experts have raised concerns about the change.
Tanya Schardt, senior counsel at the Brady gun violence prevention organization, said military leadership has historically opposed loosening firearm restrictions on bases.
No, they were following the orders from the civilian leadership, in other words the president and the Secretary of Defense(lessness) I doubt that anyone actually asked their opinion nor have they provided it outside of channels.
She pointed to data showing that most active-duty service member suicides involve personally owned guns and warned the policy could increase risks.
“There will undoubtedly be an increase in gun suicide and other gun violence,” Schardt said.
Suicide is a problem and more must be done to help military personnel who are having issues. However, if someone is going to pull the plug, they will use whatever gets the job done. As to “Other gun violence,” are you talking about criminal activities carried out by criminals and terrorists? You know, people who flat out don’t obey the laws now?
“Our military installations are among the most guarded, protected properties in the world, and they’ve never been gun-free zones,” she said.
There are a number of troops who would argue that point you moron. Military bases are huge. Most of the base security is at the gates or patrolling the the perimeter. Some are patrolling inside the base of course. However, depending on the installation, you may not have more then a couple of hundred armed personnel on duty and they won’t be near the site of an attack.
Why? Because the attackers are generally not complete idiots. They are going to avoid the people with the M4 rifles and the M249B belt fed machineguns. They want to hit targets that can’t defend themselves. Besides, we know that your policy is the removal of all firearms in existence, even from the military.
I suspect that a year from now, once the policy is fully set up, we might see a few incidents where terrorists, criminals and other near do wells get lit up when they think that their uniformed targets are unarmed and therefore easy pickings. What I’m concerned about is the next Communist Democrat president undoing this new regulation.
Thatisall
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
