Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SecularMotion

(7,981 posts)
Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:11 PM Jul 2015

Why Military Security Experts Know That Arming All Troops Is Not the Answer

The argument that all military service members should be armed with guns to protect themselves — proffered by GOP presidential candidates Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, and Donald Trump in the wake of the shooting deaths of four Marines and a sailor last week in Chattanooga, Tennessee — is so basic that there’s not much argument to it at all. Railing against “gun-free zones” last Friday, Trump summed the case up in this way: “This sick guy had guns and shot them down. These are decorated people. These are people who could have handled guns very easily. They would have had a good chance if they had a gun.” In making their cases, the presidential hopefuls echoed a Connecticut car repairman whose shop is near a military recruiting office, who told the Associated Press that arming its occupants made perfect sense to him. “Most of them are trained infantrymen,” the repairman asserted. “That definitely would make it a lot more safe.” They’re military, they know how to use guns, how could we not have every one of them be armed all the time, just in case?

The argument is intuitive enough for a political sound bite — and, like many sound bites, does not hold up well under fact-checking. It reflects a basic misconception about the average military member’s proficiency with guns, and it flat-out misses the reality that armed-forces installations are not “gun-free zones” by any stretch of the imagination. Indeed, the military has fairly liberal guidelines empowering its commanders to arm members to defend themselves. It’s just that those guidelines prioritize personal safety and the high likelihood of gun mishaps over statistically rare tragedies like the Chattanooga shooting.

http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/military-bases-chattanooga-gun-free-over-arming/
29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Military Security Experts Know That Arming All Troops Is Not the Answer (Original Post) SecularMotion Jul 2015 OP
Wow a blog commentary (nt) Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #1
Blog fraud. There were no military experts cited in the article stating what the headline claims. nt Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #2
I am sure the poster Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #4
So, who exactly blueridge3210 Jul 2015 #3
You think you are going to get an answer Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #5
It's worth asking the question. blueridge3210 Jul 2015 #6
I agree Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #7
I'd settle for knowing Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #8
I would be embarrassed Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #9
It's not unlike the WaPo op-ed blueridge3210 Jul 2015 #10
I call bullshit gejohnston Jul 2015 #11
"no more qualified to neutralize an active shooter sarisataka Jul 2015 #14
There must be money in disarming people; or at least future money, what's in it for Bloomy??? ileus Jul 2015 #17
Two things sarisataka Jul 2015 #21
In Bloomberg's own words: benEzra Jul 2015 #26
And what if St. Peter is cleaning his Garand when Bloomie arrives? DonP Jul 2015 #27
And I thought only Marion Barry was on crack. ileus Jul 2015 #28
Bloomberg does get around Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #15
We have Marines guarding embassies, but they're not equipped to guard enlistment stations? pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #12
Embassy guards are highly trained combat troops hack89 Jul 2015 #18
and even the admin an support types do firearms training gejohnston Jul 2015 #19
Embassy guard can be from any MOS hack89 Jul 2015 #22
Part of the requirements for Marines on oneshooter Jul 2015 #23
My jarhead friends remind me constantly that "Every Marne is a Rifleman" DonP Jul 2015 #20
Oh yeah......well aware of the point in your subject line Don. pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #29
Strawman. pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #13
I know...I know let me answer; Because guns kill people???? ileus Jul 2015 #16
When installing washerless sparkplugs, observe these rules: Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #24
I think the military experts from the OP would agree. nt Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #25
 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
3. So, who exactly
Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:35 PM
Jul 2015

recommended arming ALL the troops. Big difference between saying no troops may be armed and saying all troops must be armed. This is the problem when trying to discuss issues of gun violence; one side comes to the table with falsehoods and straw man arguments which prevents any honest discussion of the issues.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
8. I'd settle for knowing
Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:51 PM
Jul 2015

which military experts were cited to come to the conclusion the headline claims. I read the entire article. I see one quote by a Special Forces operator claiming not every service member is a steely-eyed killer, which is true enough, but not what the headline claims. Then there are a lot of policy citations. It would be laughable if the OP asserted policy = expert advice so I don't think that is it.

Nowhere is there any military expert claiming that arming troops is a bad idea. No reason as to why that would be a bad idea is offered.

That article so absolutely relies on the gullibility of the reader it's rather insulting for it to be presented as serious discussion.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
10. It's not unlike the WaPo op-ed
Mon Jul 20, 2015, 10:07 PM
Jul 2015

about the Chattanooga shooter purchasing his weapons on-line while failing to mention that they still had to go through a FFL who conducted a background check. Or that neither weapon was fully automatic. As noted above; it's hard to engage in an honest debate when one side does not observe honesty and good faith.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
11. I call bullshit
Mon Jul 20, 2015, 11:40 PM
Jul 2015
The upshot is that your average service member is more qualified than most civilians to handle guns, but no more qualified to neutralize an active shooter than the average professional mechanic is to race the Daytona 500.
Seriously? The average deer hunter is more qualified than most cops.
Yes, most are technicians, including me, who shoot at pop up or paper targets a couple of times of year. Guess what, that is exactly what most police departments do.
If it is such a terrible idea, why were Air Force finance and administration types handed rifles and expected to guard base infrastructure?
BTW, they are Bloomberg's creation. The Joyce Foundation are the same people who astro turfs Brady Campaign, VPC, and funds Hemenway's chair and department.

The Trace is organized as a nonprofit corporation and is in the process of applying for tax-exempt status with the IRS. Our seed funding was provided by the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund and the Joyce Foundation; individual donors include Ken Lerer and Nick Hanauer. Interested in supporting our reporting? Donations can be sent to: Trace Media Inc., P.O. Box 3886, New York, NY 10017. (Until The Trace’s application for tax-exempt status has been approved by the IRS, we cannot provide advance assurance that donations will be tax-deductible.)


How well to they live up to their core values? Kind of reminds you of "fair and balanced" doesn't it?
http://www.thetrace.org/about-the-trace/

sarisataka

(18,220 posts)
14. "no more qualified to neutralize an active shooter
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 01:57 AM
Jul 2015

than the average professional mechanic is to race the Daytona 500"

but they are sent to asymmetric wars where there is no "rear area" and may find themselves under attack at anytime.


Does Bloomberg own every gun control organization now?

sarisataka

(18,220 posts)
21. Two things
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 10:32 AM
Jul 2015

Elitism and politics

The elitism appeals to his ego. We saw he had no problem issuing Stasi- like orders to his "private army" when he ruled NYC. He seemed to take glee in his troops reminding dark skinned folk of their'proper place'. Was there ever one stop and frisk on Wall Street when billions were being stolen by men in suits?

It also supports his political position. He can target Democrats by attacking their gun control position. He gets Tea partiers elected to their seats while many Democrats cheer him on.

Check the results of the Arkansas and Alaska Senate elections last cycle.

benEzra

(12,148 posts)
26. In Bloomberg's own words:
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 07:14 PM
Jul 2015
But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: "I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us/bloomberg-plans-a-50-million-challenge-to-the-nra.html

hack89

(39,171 posts)
18. Embassy guards are highly trained combat troops
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 09:02 AM
Jul 2015

not every Marine, especially if they are not combat arms or assigned to a combat unit, get ongoing weapons training after they leave bootcamp. People forget that in the military, there are more admin and support types then there are trigger pullers.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
19. and even the admin an support types do firearms training
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 09:52 AM
Jul 2015

the exact same training as police departments, which is still less than many CCW holders pay for on their own. Chances are, they are better trained than the average Brinks driver.

No, embassy guards can be from any MOS, including electronics repair.
Also, Combat Camera are not viewed as "combat troops".

In the Air Force, and I'm certain the Marines and Army do as well, everyone does annual qualification and every one has to meet a higher standard than NYPD or Brinks. Also, infantry training and firearms training are two different things. Guarding a building does not require infantry training.
It looks like Bloomberg got bloggers from college or high school creative writing classes who don't know the basics of research, life in general, or even how to write well.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
22. Embassy guard can be from any MOS
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 10:36 AM
Jul 2015

but they undergo special training and are constantly training with weapons. The annual qualification does not prepare anyone to actually use a firearm in a stressful system. I understand very well why the military is reluctant to arm recruiters.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
23. Part of the requirements for Marines on
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 11:03 AM
Jul 2015

embassy duty is that they be 5'11" or taller.

Ever seen a "small" Marine as a embassy guard?

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
20. My jarhead friends remind me constantly that "Every Marne is a Rifleman"
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 09:58 AM
Jul 2015

Combat arms MOS or not, and their typical bluster aside, I have no doubt pretty much any of them are capable of standing a watch that turns a "soft target" into a "not so soft" target.

I could see allowing the OIC and NCOIC to carry, at any installation without gated and armed security.

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
29. Oh yeah......well aware of the point in your subject line Don.
Wed Jul 22, 2015, 01:07 PM
Jul 2015

Have some Marine friends, and work with a number of them as well. Of course the rest of your post is on target as well.

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
13. Strawman.
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 01:46 AM
Jul 2015

There is a sound strategy short of arming all of the troops. Posting armed sentries. Herp.....a derp.....derp.....derp derp.
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
24. When installing washerless sparkplugs, observe these rules:
Tue Jul 21, 2015, 02:52 PM
Jul 2015

1). Measure the reach of the new plug to ascertain that it is roughly equivalent with the old plug; that is, the distances from the beveled shouldersto the outside (negative-ground) electrodes are the same.

2). If possible, wipe the plug hole threads clean with a cloth. If a large accumulation of dirt/debris is present around the plugs, blow and clean this away BEFORE plug removal.

3). After removal of plugs, gap all new plugs to proper specs. If you drop one, check for damage. Reject the plug if the white insulator is cracked. Be sure to re-check gap.

4). Hand install using the plug socket wrench only -- no handles or other attachments. This will assure no cross-threading.

5). Use appropriate attachments and a "flex head" ratchet to keep the plug/socket assembly as close to perpendicular with the ratchet as possible. I've found tiny <1" extensions are far more valuable than some uncontrollable u-joint or wobbly.

6). CRITICALLY, tighten the washerless plug no more than 1/16 of a turn from where it bottoms. (Older washered plugs called for 1/8 of a turn to compress the washer.) Going beyond this turn will result in a cracked plug, an inevitable missfire and plug replacement. The effort you put into "tightening" a washerless plug is quite minimal.

NOTE: Some Ford models have a difficult and expensive procedure which is easily and expensively botched by home mechanics. Let the pros handle this.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Why Military Security Exp...