My take:

I think it would be monumentally misguided. The ill effects from this could be catastrophic.

There is no way that all soldiers (using this as a blanket term) should be armed on domestic military bases. There are way too many of them who would go postal on someone/some people either due to a previously undiagnosed mental problem, PTSD, or simply a problem with anger or authority. More people would die as a result of such a policy than would ever be saved. Book it.

That isn't to say that there should not be more of an armed presence on military facilities. It is accurate that once you get past the entry point, hardly anyone is ever carrying a weapon. Like any other gun-free zone (I would get arrested and lose my job if I got caught carrying on base despite having a CC). Maybe measures like....moving recruitment facilities ON BASE, having armed soldiers at the entry points of every military facility regardless of the sensitivity of the operations there, increased MP presence on all bases, etc.

More of an armed presence? Absolutely.

Arming every single soldier? No.

It's not necessary, so don't do it.

Who am I to make the call? Or, really, who am I to even have a say?

This isn't something for the political process. This is a question for the military itself to decide.

I'm happy when the military is run by the military, in questions like this, instead of by politicians, crusty old people, SJW, gun nuts, anti-gun nuts, or any other group out there.

I'm fine with leaving it up to base command

No, I prefer my armed services to be unarmed.

[/sarcarm]

Everyone should educate themselves of Posse Comitatus.

The military is prohibited from engaging in any domestic law & order activity. If they are prohibited, then there can be no rationale for their being armed.

Of course, if they privately have a CC then they could have a private weapon. However, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some regulation banning carrying a private weapon while in uniform.

Regarding the two who returned fire, it has been reported that it was against regulations for them to be armed.

(07-23-2015 04:38 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Everyone should educate themselves of Posse Comitatus.

The military is prohibited from engaging in any domestic law & order activity. If they are prohibited, then there can be no rationale for their being armed.

Of course, if they privately have a CC then they could have a private weapon. However, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some regulation banning carrying a private weapon while in uniform.

Regarding the two who returned fire, it has been reported that it was against regulations for them to be armed.

As I said in another thread...I'm pretty sure that I heard in Michigan, as of March of this year, they are allowed to carry their personal weapons on duty if they have a CC license. But I'm having a hard time confirming it.

(07-23-2015 04:14 PM)Kronke Wrote:  No, I prefer my armed services to be unarmed.

[/sarcarm]

I'm completely not in agreement ....easy sarcasm

I don't even get the premise....

unarmed soldiers is an issue????? are you fk'n kidding me....

wtgf?????

did I just wake up in one of those parallel thingys?????

kronke.....I'm gonna get krunk now so I process wtf they are talking about.....

edit: I'm still clueless about the issue, but krunking has taken place I'm a cheap date.....

(07-23-2015 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-23-2015 04:38 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Everyone should educate themselves of Posse Comitatus.

The military is prohibited from engaging in any domestic law & order activity. If they are prohibited, then there can be no rationale for their being armed.

Of course, if they privately have a CC then they could have a private weapon. However, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some regulation banning carrying a private weapon while in uniform.

Regarding the two who returned fire, it has been reported that it was against regulations for them to be armed.

As I said in another thread...I'm pretty sure that I heard in Michigan, as of March of this year, they are allowed to carry their personal weapons on duty if they have a CC license. But I'm having a hard time confirming it.

That would be interesting, as it seems to conflict with everything else that is happening in this administration. Then it might be National Guard which is under state control.

I have no problem with soldiers carrying because they are trained. The Tea Party types might not like it though.

(07-23-2015 05:28 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I have no problem with soldiers carrying because they are trained. The Tea Party types might not like it though.

I gotta agree with you here.....I'm speechless with some of the responses....

(07-23-2015 05:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-23-2015 04:14 PM)Kronke Wrote:  No, I prefer my armed services to be unarmed.

[/sarcarm]

I'm completely not in agreement ....easy sarcasm

I don't even get the premise....

unarmed soldiers is an issue????? are you fk'n kidding me....

wtgf?????

did I just wake up in one of those parallel thingys?????

kronke.....I'm gonna get krunk now so I process wtf they are talking about.....

edit: I'm still clueless about the issue, but krunking has taken place I'm a cheap date.....

Someone want to translate this for me?

(07-23-2015 08:57 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-23-2015 05:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-23-2015 04:14 PM)Kronke Wrote:  No, I prefer my armed services to be unarmed.

[/sarcarm]

I'm completely not in agreement ....easy sarcasm

I don't even get the premise....

unarmed soldiers is an issue????? are you fk'n kidding me....

wtgf?????

did I just wake up in one of those parallel thingys?????

kronke.....I'm gonna get krunk now so I process wtf they are talking about.....

edit: I'm still clueless about the issue, but krunking has taken place I'm a cheap date.....

Someone want to translate this for me?

translation: it doesn't matter....

how a uniformed soldier is unarmed or how that could be an issue is shocking to me....

that is something I honestly never thought I would hear......ever......in any cuntry.....especially this one.....

I'm dumfounded....shouldn't be a surprise to some....

I think side arms should be carried by all uniformed service members on and off military bases. Weapons lockers on bases should be easily accessible and unlocked in areas where civilians aren't authorized. Any military member on post or guard should be carrying their rifle at minimum, even if they are sitting behind the welcome center or commissary service counter.

this is what I call quick and meaningful action....

missippy gets it right for once

(07-23-2015 12:46 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  More of an armed presence? Absolutely.

Arming every single soldier? No.

I advocate that all active military and reserve personnel be allowed to carry concealed and be able to do so crossing State lines. I also have no problem allowing soldiers to carry a sidearm while in uniform. Military personnel take an oath to protect America against all threats..foreign and domestic. We have a domestic threat on our hands and we should allow those in service to be able to defend themselves and stop these threats if they encounter them.

(07-23-2015 04:38 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Everyone should educate themselves of Posse Comitatus.

The military is prohibited from engaging in any domestic law & order activity. If they are prohibited, then there can be no rationale for their being armed.

Of course, if they privately have a CC then they could have a private weapon. However, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some regulation banning carrying a private weapon while in uniform.

Regarding the two who returned fire, it has been reported that it was against regulations for them to be armed.

Are we not prohibiting them from carrying out their oath if they can not defend our country against domestic threats?

I would have no issue with them being armed at their own facilities.

(07-23-2015 10:26 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I think side arms should be carried by all uniformed service members on and off military bases. Weapons lockers on bases should be easily accessible and unlocked in areas where civilians aren't authorized. Any military member on post or guard should be carrying their rifle at minimum, even if they are sitting behind the welcome center or commissary service counter.

I'm with you. Our military are some of the best trained in the world. If they can't handle a sidearm correctly, then we have a whole other issue.