Gov. Robert Bentley is moving ahead with plans to arm Alabama's National Guard.
The governor's office announced yesterday National Guard officials in the state were reviewing policies and procedures related to putting weapons in the hands of service personnel. Governors of six states – Florida, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Indiana and Oklahoma – have already announced plans to arm their guards following last week's slaying of five service members in Chattanooga.
More @ AL
More stupid posturing.
ReplyDeleteNational guard are only on duty a few day a month.
National guard commanders won't want the risk of a military guy killing other military guys, or even worse, an accidental discharge.
National guardsmen performing training on federal lands will still be disarmed. (armed with weapons but no ammo except on ranges).
Sergeants Majors heads will explode if non-standard holsters are used.
national guards don't have ammo stored locally and wouldn't dare issue it out.
Our armed forces have been this way going back to ww2. They are helpless in garrison.
Rememer when the national guard were sent to the airports after 9-11 to provide security? They deployed with no ammo and got no training about how to spot terrorists or what to do about it. If there had been a shootout, the guard would have slaughtered a hundred innocent bystanders.
The metaphone of shutting the barn door after the horse leaves comes to mind.
Asinine. Civilians carry all the time and I have no idea why the military shouldn't. I've had people visit me at USARV carrying loaded weapons right out of the field. In fact, that's where I was given a chrome plated AK and a rough field recovered one. We drove to *Saigon late at night in the middle of the night during Tet and the only thing to MP at gate said is that we were crazy for not being more armed, but sent us on our way.
Delete*Seeking damsels in distress. :)
http://www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=19&highlight=tet
My first trip to Honduras, I carried a loaded 45 in my fatigue pants. They wouldn't issue me a holster because my assigned weapon was an M-16. it was definitely concealed. "hey soldier, is that a .45 in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?" In Bosnia, I carried everywhere.
DeleteBut where I work today, if I even mention privately carrying, I will get frog-marched out of the building and told not to come back. It is not open to discussion here. The entire leadership is openly hostile to the very idea of it.
The concept of military not carrying is probably closely linked to the draft, when men were forced against their own interests to participate in war. you don't really want such people to have the ability to say "no".
DeleteThe entire leadership is openly hostile to the very idea of it.
DeleteMind boggling.
======================
linked to the draft,
Hadn't heard that, but certainly possible. Thanks.
The military carried until 1993 when Bill (coward) Clinton decided it wasn't a good idea. I heard some liberal on CNN the other day try to lay it off on
DeletePosse Commutates (sp) saying the constitution didn't allow soldiers to carry weapons in the USA. What a crock of crap.
Now days the Marines that live on base even have to check their hunting weapons when the come onto base and get them back when they go off base to hunt. It's crazy. When I was a student at NC State U. in the late 60's guys had shotguns and scoped high powered rifles propped up in the corners of their dorm room so they could go hunting in the afternoons and on weekends. Lots of guys had pistols too. I never heard a word said about it or any trouble ever come from it.
Mind boggling and as I've said before, PC will be the death of us all yet.
DeleteOath Keepers are requesting people that are able to be armed and are willing to station themselves at recruiting centers in states that will not provide "Protection for the Protectors" and to keep the active duty service members from violating the UCMJ regulations they are now forced to follow by presidential directive.
ReplyDeleteI saw that. Thanks.
DeleteOath keepers is once again self-serving in the community. Everyone in the community is equally at risk of armed danger. There is absolutely no reason to single out military members for protection. In most cases, they have more protection than the rest of us (at our expense).
DeleteYou are much more likely to drown in a swimming pool, than be killed by a terrorist. And I say this as a supporter of constitutional carry.
Thanks.
DeleteI carried several times on post prior to 1993 but that was when I didn't know any better. At that point in my life, it never occired to me that anyone would tell me I couldn't. I was caught my MP's in 1984 at Ft Benning shooting in the woods near a training area. They just glared at me and told me not to discharge a weapon within 50 ft of a road.
ReplyDeleteAs I recall, the rule changed as a result of a shooting at the Ft knox Burger King. The rule change was instituted at the request of Army brass, not the Clinton Administration.
This goes back to my "there is no purge" rant. There isn't a purge needed because most Army Generals are 95% liberal to the core. It comes from living on a military base, total government provided health care, housing, food, child care, and schools. 100% controlled communities and commanders who can interfere in evey aspect of your personal life, even your sex life.
100% controlled communities and commanders who can interfere in evey aspect of your personal life, even your sex life.
DeleteSad.