Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 194

Thread: Gen. Odierno: We have to be careful about over-arming ourselves

  1. #21
    Administrator UncaRastus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    MTF-HQ
    Posts
    1,196
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Maybe I am too much of a fanboy for 'No Round in the Chamber Until You Are Ready To Fire'. Maybe not.

    When I was 7 years old, I went to the neighbor's house to play Cowboys and Indians. I was a cowboy, and had the real cap gun type 'revolver' to prove that!

    Why, I fired off my cap pistol at a charging white Indian! Of course, a cap gun being a cap gun, that Indian kept on charging at me!

    This white Indian was carrying a pellet gun. Of course it was not loaded. Or so he thought.

    He was within arms length, and he shot me dead on, right into the sternum. With a pellet. He said repeatedly, "I thought it wasn't loaded!"

    I went home, and my mother had to remove that pellet from my sternum. Minimum penetration, but it did knock the wind out of me. I would have probably been hurt more if he had pumped his pellet gun up more, or maybe it was an an almost exhausted CO2 cylinder.

    Right then I did actually learn why George Custer didn't do so well at the Little Big Horn.

    Anyway, I do have a concealed carry weapons license. When I am done shooting at the firing range, I make sure that the weapon is cleared. I take it home, and I clean it. Then I insert a full clip. And I NEVER rack back the action with a clip in the weapon, unless I am on the firing range.

    Once burned, I learned what to do, and what not to do.

    And that would keep anyone using a shoulder holster from having to replace their holster.
    Last edited by UncaRastus; 07-19-2015 at 09:13 PM.

  2. #22
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Power View Post
    Go Nav..... oh ... shit.

    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  3. #23
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    A couple of different thoughts floating around in the thread:

    1. I have heard two chains of thought, one allowing recruiters to carry firearms while on duty and another to allow military personnel to carry firearms regardless of state / local laws by virtue of being in the military.

    -IMO, probably a bad idea for a couple of reasons:

    As was stated, the standard for firearms training & weapons handling varies drastically from service to service and even with each service depending on MOS/AFSC/rating & duties actually assigned. As is seen here, there is a difference in what firing condition different branches consider acceptable when not actively firing. For what it is worth, when standing post or on patrol, we maintained our weapons in Condition One: Safety on, magazine inserted, round in chamber, bolt forward, ejection port cover (rifle) closed.

    If we (DoD) came up with a legislative proposal that Congress passed that would allow the military (essentially federally backed personnel) to carry weapons regardless of state/local law (similar to FBI etc.) to whose standard would we all train? Where do we build in the various training schedules because there is the actual weapons handling to consider, marksmanship, shoot / no-shoot scenarios to practice. It is a lot more than a one or two day training evolution you are talking about because (let’s face it) DoD wouldn’t allow this without a pretty serious amount of training because when (not if … when) there is an incident / mistake DoD will take it on the chin.

    The USMC has a requirement for all Marines to qualify every year, however if you are not stationed at a base with a range unless you are in a specific billet, you will be exempt for that year (when I was a guard at Camp David the guard company was bussed from DC down to Quantico VA for our annual requal – but the folks working admin or supply were not.) I am not sure how the Army or USAF do it honestly; some Army and AF folks I have worked with were very professional with weapons, it was easy to tell who had been through the ‘minimum required training’ prior to deploying.

    Quote Originally Posted by UncaRastus View Post
    And here I thought that no one doing recruiting duty was allowed to carry a weapon. He should have been trained stringently on the weapon. Also, he should not have had a round in the chamber.
    From what I read on the Navy Command Center Page, the recruiter was carrying a personal weapon – in accordance with local law -- not a gov’t weapon.

    2. Are military shooters / firearms carriers any safer than civilians with carry permits?
    -Again, my opinion – by an large that answer is a resounding no. Many people think we must train and train with weapons since we are the ‘armed forces’, the reality is (as @Absinthe Anecdote put it) that the majority of people in the military do not use firearms on a regular basis. For those that do (infantry, post guards / watchstanders etc.) they do not go through shoot/no-shoot scenarios like law enforcement does (I was in the Marines (infantry) 10 years before going through significant shoot/no-shoot training.

    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Not sure how the AF does it but the Navy has it where once a year at least (normally done every 9 months or so) we do a full week of re-qual. 2 days in class followed by a written test (needing 80% to pass), followed by 3 days on the range. Day one of range time is always just to get you 'refamiliar' with firing the weapon. Day 2 and 3 (If needed), were to actually requalify.
    That definitely is a not a requirement by instruction any longer. Currently ships have extreme difficulty in getting all the personnel they need to get qualified as rovers / armed watchstanders qualified due to range closure / consolidation and available shooting quotas. Those that do qualify for basic qualification do an online CBT, test and then the basic course of fire (1/2 day.)

    In my 12 years in the Marines, I was an infantryman and reconnaissance Marine for a significant portion of my time, and we handled weapons extensively … and people had negligent discharges, training accidents etc. It happens – there is no 100% prevention for people doing stupid things.

    3. GEN Odierno’s statement about recruiters.

    Looking at it from his chair, I can’t find too much fault in his statement for a couple of reasons:

    -What kind of liability would the Army or he be under if he orders recruiters to arm themselves and then a bystander is accidentally shot by a Solider?

    -The optic of the Chief of Staff of the Army telling all his Soldiers to start carrying in the civilian populace at large is bad. In my hometown, not such a big deal, in Annapolis MD where I live now … big deal.

    -What about Soldiers who are stationed or live in areas where state/local law would not permit them to carry a concealed weapon? He should avoid even the inference that he is suggesting Soldiers to violate local law.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #24
    Administrator UncaRastus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    MTF-HQ
    Posts
    1,196
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    While I was standing guard, the shotgun had a round chambered, safety on. When I was doing Corporal of the Guard, we weren't allowed to have a round chambered in our .45 ACPs, unless we ran into some kind of problem with a guard calling in an area infiltrated call.

    That being said, I think that with what Mjolnir has just stated, I retract my support of arming recruiters.

    And as a point of reference, the Navy guy had his own weapon in a 'No Weapons Allowed' area. What was he thinking?

    But if recruiters are to be armed, I would insist on not having a round chambered, unless something calling for rounds downrange pops up. But then, maybe luckily, I am not in charge of making those kinds of decisions.

  5. #25
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    A big point that I left off ... I am not saying that people should not be allowed to conceal carry or open carry ... I don't think we should push for recruiters all military personnel to be allowed to carry in lieu of state/local law because they are part of the armed forces. If we wish to carry weapons off post, we should go through the same process as other citizens and follow local laws.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    965
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    A big point that I left off ... I am not saying that people should not be allowed to conceal carry or open carry ... I don't think we should push for recruiters all military personnel to be allowed to carry in lieu of state/local law because they are part of the armed forces. If we wish to carry weapons off post, we should go through the same process as other citizens and follow local laws.
    I just have two question and one point to add to post, a very good post at that.

    Cops have immunity from prosecution if they simply guess wrong, Would a Soldier/Airman/Sail or on American streets?

    How would the crazies like those going nuts about Jade Helm respond to this?

  7. #27
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeKerriii View Post
    Cops have immunity from prosecution if they simply guess wrong, Would a Soldier/Airman/Sail or on American streets?
    Police are acting as sworn law enforcement officers. If they make a judgement call (guess) based on the best information available at the time and they are wrong, they are covered; if they ignore that "best available information at the time" they tend to find themselves found to be negligent.

    I don't know if a service member would be (nor should be) afforded that same level of immunity or protection from the state or local government if they made a bad call.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,327
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Absinthe Anecdote View Post
    Those god damned shoulder holsters are scary as hell on some people. If someone fucks up removing their weapon from a shoulder holster and you are standing behind them, you have a good chance of taking a bullet to the chest or head.
    When i was deployed, even though the base PX sold shoulder holsters, we were prohibited from buying and USING one while carrying our 9mm.. All CAUSE of that above issue. And i agree they are stupid (well at least the ones that face rearward).

    That was with Marines, and you were lucky. But imagine that with Air Force and Navy types who, on a relative basis, have almost no training.
    MK. I had 20 years in the navy. Are you really saying that we are not trained?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Police are acting as sworn law enforcement officers. If they make a judgement call (guess) based on the best information available at the time and they are wrong, they are covered; if they ignore that "best available information at the time" they tend to find themselves found to be negligent.

    I don't know if a service member would be (nor should be) afforded that same level of immunity or protection from the state or local government if they made a bad call.
    Well, remembering several cases where there were calls for mil troops in Iraq to get put on trial for killing civilians, i can certainly see it happening here.

  9. #29
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    I had 20 years in the navy. Are you really saying that we are not trained?
    I would say that most Sailors today lack sufficient training to properly handle weapons, especially if because they are in the Navy is the reason to assume they are qualified / trained.



    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Well, remembering several cases where there were calls for mil troops in Iraq to get put on trial for killing civilians, i can certainly see it happening here.
    And if they are negligent (in Iraq or in the US) they should be tried.
    Last edited by Mjölnir; 07-20-2015 at 05:25 AM.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    965
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post


    MK. I had 20 years in the navy. Are you really saying that we are not trained?
    Not even close to being trained when carring weapons mixed in with the pubic, even your own statement about how much training you a have backs that up. Cops barely get enough formal raining In s when to use a weapons and there is no way in help the military can spend the resources to train, and maintain training for all the people we are talking about. I would think the level of training for a Mitary Cop would be about right, certainly not much less than that if any.
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Well, remembering several cases where there were calls for mil troops in Iraq to get put on trial for killing civilians, i can certainly see it happening here.
    Killing the people we swear to protect pretty much defeats the purpose.

    With the current suicide rate we really want ot make it easy for everyone in Uniform to swallow their gun on an impulse? We are losing to many people that way already

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •