It’s Time to Let Military Members Carry Firearms on US Soil

[mmckee1952]

It’s Time to Let Military Members Carry Firearms on US Soil

By Dan Cannon

Today’s attacks in Chattanooga, TN represent the latest attack on our nation’s military members on US soil.

Currently, regulations prevent most military members (with the exception of some law enforcement and security personnel) from carrying side arms on duty and on base in the US.

This policy combined with the fact that the Islamic State (aka ISIS/ISIL) has called for their supporters in the US to carry out attacks have made members of our military sitting ducks as they do their day to day jobs.

Traditional US military culture along with DoD regulations are to blame for the problem. Following the Civil War, it has rarely been standard practice for US troops to be armed while on US soil on a day to day basis. In many ways, this makes sense. We have never had to face a guerrilla warfare siege in the mainland United States. However, that is exactly what we are facing now. DoD and Army regulations also govern the possession of firearms on military bases.

Read more: http://controversialtimes.com/op-ed/opi ... z3g6BBYZkP

My Thoughts:
Considering that military members and their families are being been targeted by ISIS sympathizers I feel it's an injustice to not allow them to be able to carry a weapon. Where I live, the nearest military base doesn't issue military base stickers anymore because they don't want the cars of active duty or retired military members to be able to be identified.

[skeeterss0]

I always wondered why the US military spends so much on training their personnel to shoot, but then don't let you carry unless you go into a war zone. Even then they impose strict rules of engagement that leaves our military vulnerable.

[kelu]

I always wondered why the US military spends so much on training their personnel to shoot, but then don't let you carry unless you go into a war zone. Even then they impose strict rules of engagement that leaves our military vulnerable.

Maybe because the gubmint thinks that they may get the crazy idea that the enemy they swore to fight against is not in very remote countries?

[dorminWS]

As I watch the media circus unfold around this sad event, I wonder if I am the only one struck by the irony that we see cadres of state and local police turned out at the drop of a hat fitted out SWAT-style with military garb, equipment and arms to deal with a massacre of military personnel who weren't even allowed to carry a sidearm.

And it's all our federal gummint's doing. It's hard to believe they could eff up so much stuff so bad, so consistently and in ways that are so often complimentary to reach other without a master plan.

[wittmeba]

I always wondered why the US military spends so much on training their personnel to shoot, but then don't let you carry unless you go into a war zone. Even then they impose strict rules of engagement that leaves our military vulnerable.

Maybe because the gubmint thinks that they may get the crazy idea that the enemy they swore to fight against is not in very remote countries?

I was thinking similar. Perhaps our government is uncertain if the military can determine who the enemy really is

[MarcSpaz]

Sub...