How would APSers reconcile military personnel being armed (duty issue weapons) while in uniform/on duty with the philosophical aversion of an armed standing army wandering around off base?
Has the threat level reached the equivalent of, for instance, Israel, where they carry their duty weapons (but with no magazine inserted)? Are we going to turn our troops loose to deal with the (organized?) criminal element, side by side with the civilian police, like Mexico?
If the threat level is sufficiently high I do not think .mil personnel should have to shoulder the cost of arming themselves while on duty. Once they are off duty the game changes to be more like you or I carrying for self defense.
stay safe.
Well, I've been thinking about that for the last day or so.
Let me first be clear: While I am a Soldier, I in no way speak for the Army, the DOD, or my COC. These are my personal opinions. No one quote me.
After some thought, I don't feel we should issue duty weapons and ammo to US Military state side. Here's why:
1. Those are controlled weapons. Civilians can't have M16's, M4's and M-249's to "protect" themselves. Military members are not special.
2. The US Military is not a police force, we suck at it when we try, and giving us duty weapons is a step a lot closer to using us as a domestic police force then I am comfortable with. (See Mexico)
3. As skid mentioned, our threat level is orders of magnitude below Israel, and they don't even get to load their weapons. Carrying an unloaded machine gun is stupid, and security theater and I don't support it.
4. Having the US military walk around loaded would be too much of a temptation to politicians the next time some Boston Bomber event happens and we go all "Martial Law". Except that it really would be that time.
In short, while I mourn my brothers in arms, the actual, considered threat level of lone wolf ISIS douches is not worth the negatives of the US military loading up 24/7 when they are off base.
That said, there is a real residual risk to making service members such soft targets. I would support, and think we should, remove any restrictions at the federal law, and DOD policy level of troops carrying weapons in any way that would be legal for a civilian in the state you are stationed in. In an OC state (and have a holster that complies with 670-1); OC. CC state and have a permit? CC. Stationed in Cali or Chicago? Sorry. Maybe we can work on Imminent Danger Pay. Treat weapons like our knives, multi-tools or cell phones. You can have your civilian one as long as you carry it in a fashion that works with the uniform regs. (Sorry MSG in the motor pool, you can't have a lowslung gunfighter rig the same way you need to take that *expletive deleted*ing keychain off your belt).
I want to double tap Item 1 above. Military Members are NOT a special class of citizens. We get cool toys, in clearly defined roles, because we volunteered for a semi nasty job. A job that we get paid decently for, I might add. I absolutely
DO NOT support carving exemptions out of law for military members unless it's required for our job. i.e. unless we are expecting ACTUAL COMBAT, the combat toys stay put away. Sorry folks, being a victim of a crime, even a politically motivated crime, isn't combat. Having seen first hand the real results of modern combat, I am not willing to unleash the dogs of war in this country (ala Mexico). I almost don't care how many lone wolves show up.