Warriors Disarmed
You would think that the idea of going and shooting up an American military base would be a real “mission impossible,” wouldn’t you? Anyone brazen enough to walk into a military base and start shooting would be met with withering return fire from America’s warriors, right? Unfortunately, recent (and not so recent) history reveals the truth…that our military installations are just another example of the mythical “gun free zone,” and while on those installations, our warriors are reduced to disarmed targets.
Fenced, gated, and guarded…but still a soft target.
The original directive disarming warriors was issued under then-President George H.W. Bush, as DoD Directive 5210.56, “Use of Deadly Force and the Carrying of Firearms by DoD Personnel Engaged in Law Enforcement and Security Duties.” While this directive does not directly prohibit the carry of personal firearms by military personnel, it does so by exclusion, in that it details specific situations where a service member may go armed…and personal protection is not one of them. Following a spate of shootings on military installations a few years ago, DoD issued a new directive which would theoretically allow some troops to carry while on a military reservation. However, the directive also leaves the decision to local commanders in the grade of O-5 or higher, along with many other restrictions.
Usually, personal firearms must be kept in the unit arms room.
Allow me to be blunt here: To disarm our warriors is wrong. Period. We spend millions training them not just to use weapons, teaching them when and when not to use them. They are the best, most professional military in the world…yet to allow them to go armed for personal defense is somehow too risky? We can require them to follow detailed Rules of Engagement (ROE) in a war zone, but we don’t trust their ability to follow ROE (also known as use of force laws) while at home?
While there are an estimated 17 million concealed carry license holders in the United States, accidents involving firearms are at an all-time low. Studies show that crimes committed by concealed carry licensees account for less than 1% of total crime. It stands to reason that many of those concealed carry license holders are military service members who carry legally and safely when off-duty outside of a military installation. Why then, do we assume they will suddenly become unsafe when they cross onto military property?
That said, I can understand the reluctance to “turn soldiers loose” with weapons. I was an Army officer, and served as commander of a PATRIOT missile battery. Commanders like to be in control, and for good reason. As commander, you are responsible to your boss for everything your unit does or fails to do. As a former commander, I’ve seen soldiers do some dumb stuff…and my boss held me accountable for it. One of your soldiers mishandles a gun and blows a hole in his foot (or someone else’s), you’ll be in front of your commander explaining what happened and why. So I understand the reluctance to entrust troops with firearms without “adult supervision.”
Trust him with this machine? You can trust him with a Glock.
Although I understand it, I do not agree with it. The perks of officership and command do not come without burden and do not come without risk. Force protection is still a command responsibility, last time I checked. If you would disarm your troops…making them more vulnerable…increasing their risk… in order to reduce the risk to your career, you are a coward.
Military regulations leaving warriors disarmed need to be eliminated. They are people with lives and families, and they are vulnerable to violent crime just like anyone else. I do not believe…not for one second…that our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines are less safe, less capable, or less responsible than the average concealed carry holder. To treat them as such is an outrage.
