Why can't military members carry personal weapons on bases?

[Stengun]

Howdy Reba,

Even Gov't employees get a break time.

Paul

 

[Reba]

Howdy Reba,

Even Gov't employees get a break time.

Paul

Good to know.

 

[SR9]

Howdy,



You must not have read the article because this applies the LEO and security personnel only.


Paul

Maybe it is you that needs to re-read the article posted. There is 2 phases to the program. As it states airman from SSGT up in fields from aircraft mechanics, to cooks, to administrative airman will be trained.

Arming the airmen: Dover AFB now allows open carry on base - News - Dover Post - Dover, DE

 

[kwc]

Maybe it is you that needs to re-read the article posted. There is 2 phases to the program. As it states airman from SSGT up in fields from aircraft mechanics, to cooks, to administrative airman will be trained.

Arming the airmen: Dover AFB now allows open carry on base - News - Dover Post - Dover, DE

A very limited number *might* be trained to augment security forces under the auspices of the "Unit Marshal Program." This is purely up to the unit commanders to implement, IF they believe it is necessary. They will open-carry military-issued weapons only.

The average troop will never be given the opportunity to carry on base at Dover AFB or any other installation under any of these three programs.

I'm starting to hear an echo.

 

[Reba]

Maybe it is you that needs to re-read the article posted. There is 2 phases to the program. As it states airman from SSGT up in fields from aircraft mechanics, to cooks, to administrative airman will be trained.

Arming the airmen: Dover AFB now allows open carry on base - News - Dover Post - Dover, DE

"the Security Forces Staff Arming Program, authorizes security personnel who do not normally carry weapons – such as Metzger and his staff – to be armed on duty."

"to be carried in personal vehicles while responding to an emergency"

"the second part of Eagle Shield . . . program trains selected airmen"

"When on duty, they’ll wear a distinctive insignia quickly let others – including responding security forces – know who they are and also will serve as a deterrent for anyone thinking about starting a shooting spree."

 

[SR9]

A very limited number *might* be trained to augment security forces under the auspices of the "Unit Marshal Program." This is purely up to the unit commanders to implement, IF they believe it is necessary. They will open-carry military-issued weapons only.

The average troop will never be given the opportunity to carry on base at Dover AFB or any other installation under any of these three programs.

I'm starting to hear an echo.

Well I'll ask around. I live close to Dover AFB.

 

[Blueshell]

In my 10 years in the Navy I've never figured out why our nation does not trust the members of its own military. I can only conclude that is the case since they impose ever more strict rules governing our conduct and our lifestyle. So why is it that those us charged with the defense of our nation, those of us in whom they place their so called trust to use weapons to defend others if we are attacked, that we can't carry personal weapons onto military bases? If Fort Hood proved anything it is that those who wish us harm can and will take advantage of the fact they know we are not allowed to carry the means of our own defense onto a base. I fail to see the rationale that allows us to wield weapons the rest of the population is not even allowed to own in defense of our country but on a base when it comes to our own defense or the defense of our fellow serviceman we are not to be trusted.

6 year combat vet here: There is no real reason. It's all politics and ********, no facts or data, just feelings.

 

[Wild Dog]

6 year combat vet here: There is no real reason. It's all politics and ********, no facts or data, just feelings.

I agree, military men and women should be able to carry on base. They have pretty good training, not as good as me but still pretty good.

 

[Rhino]

Well, not exactly.

Authorization may be granted by exception only, and even then must be done under the umbrella of a formal program available only to law enforcement officers and designated and trained security forces augmentees (via the "Unit Marshal Program") while carrying an issued service weapon.

The rest of us remain defenseless.

Well, not exactly.
.
There are actually three programs (or avenues of authorization), and none of them are new. They all existed already but no one was using them, most likely because it wasn't politically correct. The two Air Force programs are the Security Forces Staff Arming program and the Unit Marshal program, as you mentioned. The third avenue to allow carry on base is via the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act. All three of these avenues have been available and open to base commanders for years, but HQ Air Force sent out a notice to all base commanders back in January 'reminding' them of that after doing a high level review of all the active shooter incidents that have occurred at DoD sites. The 'reminder' was in essence a 'political approval' to implement programs that before that time would have been politically unacceptable.
.
Dover has implemented the Security Forces Staff Arming program, which arms only Security Forces personnel as has been discussed here. But they're also in the process of implementing the Unit Marshal program, which does in fact allow the arming of military members of any AFSC (specialty or job) at any location on the base. The Unit Marshal program was in fact created specifically to allow the arming of personnel where Security Forces protection was not easily or readily available, though I doubt they had domestic terrorism in mind when they originally created it. Members of the Unit Marshal program can only carry military issue weapons, and only while on duty. They'll almost certainly have to check the weapons out and back in every work day, depending on implementation regulations. Unit Marshals are defensive only. They do not respond to active shooter incidents outside their work area.
.
I've not yet seen any report of how any military installation may have decided to implement the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act, though it would only apply to Security Forces and off base law enforcement. However, the LEOSA does specifically authorize concealed carry, so it could be interesting to see how that may get implemented.
.

Besides, there's a Federal Law that states Jo one except federally authorized personnel can carry a firearm of on US Gov't property.

I carry on government property all the time. Ever been to a national park? Travelled in the western states? You carry on government property, and quite legally too. There is no law prohibiting that. I think you may be confusing government property with government installations. Or buildings. We had a lot of problems with that when drafting or lobbying for changes to our Ohio concealed carry laws. Lawmakers very often get confused on the differences too, and some very bad legislation, though often very well intended, gets proposed as a result.
.

Sad but true.

We agree on that. Especially sad they don't trust us when you see some of the people they're giving guns to these days.
.

A very limited number *might* be trained to augment security forces under the auspices of the "Unit Marshal Program." This is purely up to the unit commanders to implement, IF they believe it is necessary.

There's no *might* at Dover unless they've reversed course since that article was published in February. They're implementing the Unit Marshal Program, and supposedly others are watching to let Dover blaze the trail. That's not unusual at all really. It's quite common for a base to model its new procedures on another base that already has them.
.

They will open-carry military-issued weapons only.

You got that part right. Unless somebody gets creative with the LEOSA, which allows concealed carry.
.

The average troop will never be given the opportunity to carry on base at Dover AFB or any other installation under any of these three programs.

Well don't hold your breath, because the Unit Marshal Program is designed specifically for the 'average troop', and Dover's implementing it. I'm not saying I'd be totally shocked if some base did something really weird with it and used it in a way other than it was intended. Certainly wouldn't be the first time. But if you know the Air Force then you know they don't give newspaper interviews that aren't cleared through Base Public Affairs first. And you also know that PA isn't going to allow them to say they're arming airmen "from airplane mechanics to cooks to administrative specialists" if that isn't really their plan. So again, as long as they haven't completely reversed course since February.......
.

I'm starting to hear an echo.

Are you holding your breath?
.

6 year combat vet here: There is no real reason. It's all politics and ********, no facts or data, just feelings.

Which is pretty much what all such political decisions are.

 

[kwc]

@Rhino: I don't think there is any daylight between us on our understanding of this issue. The existence of the three distinct programs is pretty clear. How and where they are each implemented is evolving.

Once again (and hence my echo chamber comment), the "average troop" (meaning the vast majority of military members) will not be able to carry under any of the three programs. The Unit Marshal Program will incorporate a very limited number of participants in any one unit, hand-selected by the commanders. (I've read the guidance.) That leaves a *lot* of average military personnel unarmed. Some people are headline surfing and have concluded the Air Force has granted widespread approval for military members to carry firearms on an installation. Nothing could be further from the truth.

But if you know the Air Force then you know they don't give newspaper interviews that aren't cleared through Base Public Affairs first. And you also know that PA isn't going to allow them to say they're arming airmen "from airplane mechanics to cooks to administrative specialists" if that isn't really their plan.

Yep, I know the Air Force well... I'll hit the 27-year point of active duty service this summer and have worked with PA on many issues (currently at a MAJCOM) throughout that time.

 

[Rhino]

Okay. Got it. Your clarification on "average troop" is very much appreciated, and it helps me see where you're coming from. They will be arming airmen under the Unit Marshal Program that are not Security Forces, but the total number of those people will be very low, so relatively few will ever carry. Actually what I've seen here is tame compared to what I've seen elsewhere. I've had a heck of a time in some other places convincing people that, NO, the Air Force is NOT approving concealed carry for all licensees on base, and that is NOT what that newspaper article meant.
.
Wish I could have stayed longer. 20 years for me. Would have been more if I hadn't broken a kneecap. 25 for the wife.

 

[kwc]

Wish I could have stayed longer. 20 years for me. Would have been more if I hadn't broken a kneecap. 25 for the wife.

Thanks to you and your wife for serving! I'm capped at 30--not sure if I'll stay another full three years or not. I guess it all depends upon whether or not the next assignment will work out well for our family, if we get one.

 

[SR9]

Well I'll ask around. I live close to Dover AFB.

The guys I've talked to say they are seeing guys and gals being picked for this training.

 

[Rhino]

Thanks to you and your wife for serving!

Same to you. Good luck with the assignment.
.

The guys I've talked to say they are seeing guys and gals being picked for this training.

Excellent. I wonder how widespread it will get. And as much as I hate to say it, I wonder how long it will be before somebody screws up and potentially endangers the whole thing. Somebody screwing up always happens eventually, and unlike other programs, people motivated more by politics than functionality will be watching this program like a hawk.

 

[MiB602]

Politics needs to change

6 year combat vet here: There is no real reason. It's all politics and ********, no facts or data, just feelings.

The problem with politics is that for reasons which shall likely ever escape mans ability to explain it leaves logic and common sense at the door when debating most anything. However in theory more than in practice, politicians are public servants who again in theory are elected to serve the public trust. So sticking with theory and ignoring how things operate in practice politicians should take the concerns of their elected constituents and act accordingly. In truth I think most politicians don't pay much attention to the concerns of those who elected them. But the system however broken is the one we have to work with. Keeping that in mind I've stepped up my campaign of writing to my senators and congressmen about this issue. I'm under no illusions that my voice alone with make a dent in the moronic policies of ages past. But that's why I started things like this thread is to see if there are other like minded concerned individuals out there. History has shown that if enough people speak loud enough change does happen, not always for the better but it does (see prohibition of the 1920's and 30's). The founding fathers of this country while undoubtedly still men who had flaws had incredible foresight and wisdom and they crafted our Constitution and rights in such a way as to ensure the maximum protection they could for as long as possible. Today those freedoms and rights are under constant attack largely because the masses are too apathetic or distracted to care. I'm a 10 year vet of the U.S. Navy and while I don't have a front line combat job I am aware that if it ever really hit the fan that wouldn't matter. Moreover the two faced policy concerning the military today makes me sick. They expect us who serve to sacrifice our lives in the name of freedom if it came down to it but deny us the means of defending that freedom simply because we're on a military base? To me that's the equivalent of sending soldiers into combat naked without body armor. Many of our politicians have never served in the military and as such have no real grasp or our concerns, tactics, strategy or even the nature of the threats we face today. But there is an increasing number of them who have served and who might appreciate our concerns, if we tell them. So I humbly submit that while yes it might take time out of what is assuredly our already packed schedules we need to be more consistently voicing our concerns to the people who might have some hope of affecting changes.

And to those whom have served far longer than myself in whatever branch of the military might I say that I salute you and your long service and I thank you for your long standing dedication to our country.

 

[Reba]

Events like today's shooting don't help.

Two killed in shooting at Air Force base in Texas | Fox News

 

[Eidolon]

Odds are you're not going to get concealed carry of personal weapons on post. I would suggest arming all CQs and runners or SDNCOs and runners and all squad leaders and ASLs. They come to work and draw their issue side arm from the arms room and turn it in at the end of the day

 

[kwc]

Events like today's shooting don't help.

Two killed in shooting at Air Force base in Texas | Fox News

The weapons ban didn't seem to work very well.

But I agree, incidents like this certainly don't help!

Two weapons were found on the scene; both reportedly belonged to the assailant, a TSgt who was being escorted to the commander's office by the shirt.

 

[kwc]

The commander told the first sergeant to run, and "went out swinging" while the assailant shot toward the shirt and hit the commander three times in the arm before killing him.

One can't help but wonder how things would have been different if the shirt or commander had been allowed to be armed.

Commander ‘went out swinging’ in Lackland murder-suicide - San Antonio Express-News

 

[FAS1]

The commander told the first sergeant to run, and "went out swinging" while the assailant shot toward the shirt and hit the commander three times in the arm before killing him.

One can't help but wonder how things would have been different if the shirt or commander had been allowed to be armed.

Commander ‘went out swinging’ in Lackland murder-suicide - San Antonio Express-News

The Commander would probably be alive if he was armed IMHO.