For years now my worst fear is that their would be an attack on an American military installation that would show the world that the United States military isn’t safe on it’s own bases. I came to this realization and fear when I first joined the military. I had always assumed like many Americans that Soldiers while on base are always armed. It seems logical; Our fighting forces always ready to fight.
I however quickly learned that this wasn’t true. In many cases, Soldiers are not even seeing their rifles for 6 months to 2 years at a time.
The federal government, especially the military has the biggest problem with trust. The official explanation for Soldiers not being armed is that they are all living in the safest gated community in the United States. However, on Army and Marine bases especially, the perpetrators are those already living on the inside. I’m sorry but some of our service member’s are criminals who just haven’t been caught yet, and in some cases they have been caught (that’s what a MORAL WAIVER is for). I hate to say this but the Air Force tends to have the ability to be picky about who they hire.
From a second amendment standpoint; “good” service members aren’t even safe in their own homes. While gun ownership laws continue to get stricter, most Americans still have the right to bear arms in their own home. They feel safe with a gun under the pillow. Service member’s are not allowed to possess personal firearms.
While in government housing (which is mandatory for most) the possession of a firearm is a crime. A service member can own a personal firearm but must put it in the base armory. For example, when a Soldier wants to go hunting he/she has to sign out their OWN gun from the armory.
From a security forces perspective it even gets scarier. A base with approximately 30,000 workers on it is going to have a police force of about 90 to 120 Department of Defense civilian police officers and military police combined. Most bases work with three shifts, so that’s about 30 police officers protecting sometimes up to 40 to 80 square miles at one time.
Now while the off duty officers might be only 2 to 10 minutes away, they cannot respond. Security forces (civilian and military alike) currently have to sign out their weapon at the beginning of each shift. So if their was some kind of major attack on an installation; the police force would be quickly overwhelmed as their relief would have to first arm up before responding.
We have all given up the responsibility of protecting ourselves to police officers. When a big scary person with a gun comes after you, what do you do? Call the Police? Why? It’s simple, they have guns! If this was anytime for the 1920s it was a simple solution, “Paw and Maw git yer gun!” (unless of course they were already touting it.
Excerpt from this thing called the constitution:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Some people argue that the right to bear arms is referring to that of the military. However, the use of the comma in the bill of rights is clearly used to show separate rights. The comma is kind of used as saying this is a right, and oh by the way this is also a right and don’t confuse it with the previous this I states. Like in the 1st amendment the freedom of speech is broken down with a comma showing that the freedom of the press, religion, and to peaceably assemble are all separate and equal rights. Plus, this little thing that states “The right of the people” I mean if the dudes that wrote the constitution meant it to be just the military they would have stopped at the word militia. But, they were very smart and continued on with, that’s right adding in other people, like you and me! The People!
Then their are those who say that to bear arms doesn’t include on your person. A simple look at the word “bear” in the use of a verb reveals this in my trusty dictionary; “to hold up; support; to hold up under; be capable of; to hold or carry; to exhibit; to show; to have and use.” Then my ever useful thesaurus says, “carry, convey, deliver, ferry, fetch, lug, move, pack, take, tote, transfer, transport.” To just prove a point the antonym of bear is that of which gun laws provide, “refuse, take, throw away.” Plus, the word Keep is usually a dead give away.
To boot at the end they added in this thing that says, “Shall not be infringed.” By definition adding laws that govern the right to bear arms in itself is an infringement.
My point is that if you every watch a western, all the good guys aren’t calling cops to help them. They all had guns! You defended yourself! While I believe we should have a well armed and powerful police force, I also believe that everyone has a responsibility to protect themselves.
If everyone is armed you will still see shootings, but you would never see one person kill 12 people and harm 30 others. You might get two people before the whole crowd guns you down.
Currently their is a bill before congress H.R. 675 that would change the status of DOD police officers to Federal Police Officers. They would be allowed to carry weapons at all times, make arrests and enforce laws. They currently can subdue civilians but have to turn them over to local police. Who in many cases just release them. For an example, if a civilian brought a firearm onto a federal installation the DOD police would then arrest them, call the county police department, who would then show up and release the person because they didn’t break a state law.
While I think all citizens should be able to carry firearms on their person at all times without the government arresting them, I do think the DOD police should be able to enforce other laws.
When I use the term DOD police I’m referring to th Department of Army, Department of the Navy, and the Department of the Air Force police.
Tags: army, congress, DOD, fort hood, ft. hood, gun rights, H.R. 675, hood, massacre, military, police, rights to bear arms, safety, shooting, soldiers, texas
Ok. most of what you say I agree with but there are some flaws in you quoting that all soldiers are not allowd to have fireamrs in there possession. this is untrue soldiers who live barracks which are like appartments for single soldiers, are not allowd to have firearms in there rooms. however if they live in base housing they are allowed to have them in their quarters. the only stipulation to this is, if you live on a military instalation you must have the weapon registered on post threw the provost marshalls office. this also applies to civilian employees who would like to bring weapons on a military istalation weather to hunt or to use the private owned weapons ranges on post.
You are correct. Families living in base housing can possess weapons… minus those who live in single officer/enlisted barracks.
However, so far to my knowledge civilians who work on the installation but do not live on base (unless your a military spouse/child) cannot bring weapons on a federal installation.
This includes any kind of weapon; crossbow, firearm, etc. be for hunting or protection.