Please sign this White House petition!

[tj1371x]

As many of you have heard, Fort Hood had another active shooter situation that has unfortunately taken the lives and good health of service members and their families this week. Many service members like myself carry a concealed handgun when out in town to protect ourselves, our loved ones, other citizens, and to prevent tragedies like this from happening. Unfortunately, because of current legislature, we are not allowed to carry these firearms on base (not even in our vehicles). Because of this, response to active shooter scenarios on base rely SOLELY on the base military police force (MP's), which in the case of this weeks shooting took over 20 minutes after the first shots were fired. This is simply unacceptable.

Please take the few minutes it takes to sign this petition in the link below, and help prevent any potential loss of life or good health on our military bases in the future, and also help spread the word!

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...arry-soldiers-military-installations/FDk9cNpH


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FishingPilot]

IMHO, quite honestly this is another knee jerk reaction which will result in bad laws yet again. If you have ever spent any time on a base outside of the Navy, where ground troops and Marines train to kill every day, you would know this is a bad idea. These are high stress areas where there are fights all over the place every day, drinking in the barracks, someone slept with someone else's girlfriend, wife and so on. Allowing them to carry on base is just adding fuel to a fire. I have nothing against the Navy, but after spending time on some Navy bases I feel that they are a lot less stressful. Again, just my humble opinion.

 

[tj1371x]

I was a marine '04-'08 and lived in the barracks. Some of us kept weapons in our vehicles instead of checking them into the armory as per the regs (vehicles were not subject to inspection during "health and comfort" checks). I don't see why service members shouldn't be allowed to keep firearms on their person. Surely they are LESS likely than the average person of the same age to pull a gun during a confrontation as they have had more training in NOT pulling the trigger during confrontations (think returning fire only when you have positive ID of an armed threat engaging you), and often have training on de-escalation. I'd trust a young marine/soldier with a weapon more than I would a frat boy legally carrying elsewhere...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Water-Man]

IMHO, quite honestly this is another knee jerk reaction which will result in bad laws yet again. If you have ever spent any time on a base outside of the Navy, where ground troops and Marines train to kill every day, you would know this is a bad idea. These are high stress areas where there are fights all over the place every day, drinking in the barracks, someone slept with someone else's girlfriend, wife and so on. Allowing them to carry on base is just adding fuel to a fire. I have nothing against the Navy, but after spending time on some Navy bases I feel that they are a lot less stressful. Again, just my humble opinion.

Your post doesn't make sense.

 

[Water-Man]

I was a marine '04-'08 and lived in the barracks. Some of us kept weapons in our vehicles instead of checking them into the armory as per the regs (vehicles were not subject to inspection during "health and comfort" checks). I don't see why service members shouldn't be allowed to keep firearms on their person. Surely they are LESS likely than the average person of the same age to pull a gun during a confrontation as they have had more training in NOT pulling the trigger during confrontations (think returning fire only when you have positive ID of an armed threat engaging you), and often have training on de-escalation. I'd trust a young marine/soldier with a weapon more than I would a frat boy legally carrying elsewhere...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They're more likely because, for the most part, they're a bunch of teenagers full of testosterone. Don't count on my vote. I've been there, done that and on bases that provide more training than most.

 

[vt_shooter]

I think the upside of allowing troops to carry on bases outweighs the downside. The downside is the inevitability that there will be some small number of heated confrontations between troops that leads to shootings; the upside is allowing troops to carry on base pretty much eliminates the probability of a massacre like what Nidal Malik Hasan did. Or perhaps certain troops could be selected to carry on base. But making the troops be as vulnerable as un-armed civilians in a shopping mall doesn't seem like the right answer.

 

[tj1371x]

I think the upside of allowing troops to carry on bases outweighs the downside. The downside is the inevitability that there will be some small number of heated confrontations between troops that leads to shootings; the upside is allowing troops to carry on base pretty much eliminates the probability of a massacre like what Nidal Malik Hasan did. Or perhaps certain troops could be selected to carry on base. But making the troops be as vulnerable as un-armed civilians in a shopping mall doesn't seem like the right answer.

Exactly. Anyone of age to purchase and carry a handgun would subject to the same laws and regulations of citizens who carry off base, only they'd be doing it on base. When you compare the maturity factor of the youngest of troops eligible to carry (21 for most places), they are generally more mature than 21 year old college kids I've seen, and have better training to boot (generally speaking, and in my observations).

Like you said, the pros outweigh any potential cons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shouldazagged]

I no longer sign any petition. Ever. I have little faith in how much good they do, and suspect that some are susceptible to abuse.

Sorry.

 

[KSDeputy]

Our warriors protect our country with arms. If they are armed protecting our country, they should be allowed to be armed on base. I have the greatest respect for our service members. The situation here is like the reason for concealed carry permits to protect your life, your family's lives, and even total strangers lives. To deny them them the right to carry on base is like the gun free zones that we know are magnets for mental cases with guns. They know they will face no armed resistance there. They are armed protecting our country, they should be armed on base. Had they been these shootings would be much shorter, if they occurred at all.

 

[H Richard]

Interned petitions are not acceptable by any entity. A legal petition must have an actual signature. They are a waste of broadband.

 

[Iggy]

As much as I agree with the sentiment of the petition, anything sent to the WH is like wiping your *** with a hula hoop.

 

[badge]

Personally I have no issue with allowing our service members to have their weapons available or on their person. I do not know all of the nuances of military base life so I would defer to anyone who is or has been in the military as long as they are of the " working man's ", military. They KNOW what is best for them, not some out of touch General or other higher ranking person. If you don't wish to arm all members at least allow NCO's or someone in whatever area of the base that people are in have a weapon available for instances such as this. Just my thoughts.

 

[luangtom]

While I see the sentiment behind the petition, I am still confused over one issue. Why were civilian law enforcement summoned to a military installation? Did the military also disarm its military police, too?

 

[shouldazagged]

While I see the sentiment behind the petition, I am still confused over one issue. Why were civilian law enforcement summoned to a military installation? Did the military also disarm its military police, too?

No, it was a female MP who engaged the shooter with her weapon, leading to his shooting himself in the head. Last I heard her name hadn't been released, but post command was praising her for her courage and adherence to what she had been trained to do.

 

[Ranger514]

What's wrong with the idea of having designated armed NCO's assigned at every building? I'd leave it to them to decide who should be entrusted. In my experience, someone with NCO rank and experience should be able to open carry a sidearm and have a locked M4 readily available to protect our personnel. I'm not dissing our troops, but some don't have the maturity level to act responsibly, and some have issues they brought with them when they enlisted. A few are gang bangers, mental misfits, skinhead racists, or religious fanatics. Ask yourself why the DOD has historically not allowed personal carry on bases, and has controlled access to all manner of weapons. Admittedly, the Military is behind the power curve in addressing the security issue of installation shootings. I would hope that we're going to see that change rather quickly, starting with Ft. Hood.

 

[mg357]

I signed the petition and I think its a good idea our nation's fighting men and women carrying weapons to defend our freedom's.

If they have a concealed carry license and a concealed carry handgun they should be allowed to carry it with them on base.

 

[Jessie]

What's wrong with the idea of having designated armed NCO's assigned at every building? I'd leave it to them to decide who should be entrusted. In my experience, someone with NCO rank and experience should be able to open carry a sidearm and have a locked M4 readily available to protect our personnel. I'm not dissing our troops, but some don't have the maturity level to act responsibly, and some have issues they brought with them when they enlisted. A few are gang bangers, mental misfits, skinhead racists, or religious fanatics. Ask yourself why the DOD has historically not allowed personal carry on bases, and has controlled access to all manner of weapons. Admittedly, the Military is behind the power curve in addressing the security issue of installation shootings. I would hope that we're going to see that change rather quickly, starting with Ft. Hood.

I agree with this. Officers and NCOs should be armed and after all, they are charged with the welfare of their soldiers aren't they?
If you can't even entrust them with this then take their weapons away period and give them slingshots for cryin' out loud.

 

[Rangerpat]

While on guard duty (U.S. Naval Base Gitmo) I had access to 300 rounds of ammo and eight hand grenades; off-duty my rifle was locked up without any ammo. It was a good idea, too much alcohol and testosterone were a very bad mix at times.

 

[4011]

When Texas first got the rights to conceal carry the local PD put signs on the doors of the station. No conceal carry! When the powers at be we're questioned. How do the narcs and plain clothes guys get in. No place to lock up the arms? Took awhile but they removed the signs. Here's your sign!

 

[Cooter Brown]

Out of curiosity, were personal weapons ever allowed on military bases?

I talked to my father about this last nite--he's a WWII combat vet. He said that firearms and ammo were strictly controlled on any stateside base he was on and that a personal firearm would have been a HUGE infraction.

I suspect that may not have been the case in earlier times, but I'm wondering about WWI and later.