Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Such a shame that uniformed military personnel are ordered to run and hide on base. If some of the service personnel were allowed to at least carry a side arm then the "active shooter" would no longer be active.
Such a shame that uniformed military personnel are ordered to run and hide on base. If some of the service personnel were allowed to at least carry a side arm then the "active shooter" would no longer be active.
Some personnel do carry firearms. They're called MPs. They're trained to carry and use them. I have a friend who was an Army MP. I once asked him about this 'Just let everyone in uniform carry a weapon all the time' magical solutions. He just rolled his eyes. That about sums up my assessment, too.
Outside of combat zones, military bases have never been crawling with armed personnel. Never. For the glaringly obvious reason it would cause more problems than it would solve.
The idea that a mechanic or a quartermaster or a truck driver - who doesn't lug his M-16 around everywhere for reasons that should be obvious to everyone - isn't wearing a 9mm is because they probably last fired one during weapons familiarization as a recruit. What, we're now going to be sending every soldier, sailor and airman off to a two-week "How to Neutralize an Active Shooter" course? Maybe fit that in between basic and AIT/A School/Tech, etc.?
Every time we have one of these situations, people act like getting rid of the armory and having everyone just permanently carried their weapons with them so they can engage in firefights on base - you know, whenever that sort of thing would be useful - is some sort of obvious solution, and that the brass has somehow never thought of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHDave
Or confusion from the exercise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent
And now that looks like what it was, but originally base communications stated that it was unrelated to the exercise. Guess time will tell.
No shooter?
Think of the fiasco if every E-3 and NCO in the mess was running around base during the confusion, 9mm in hand, looking for someone suspicious to shoot?
Yes, that sure would have made for an excellent outcome to this unfounded non-event!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- is some sort of obvious solution, and that the brass has somehow never thought of it. 
