quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

A bit late to say God Save the Queen in French eh Lucy.

Chip chop, chip chop [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
More bad news.

And some good news...
Gov. Fallin authorizes officials to arm full-time military personnel at certain facilities
OKLAHOMA CITY – In response to the attack on Marines in Tennessee, Gov. Mary Fallin has authorized Oklahoma military officials to arm full-time personnel at facilities similar to the ones that were attacked on Thursday... “Four unarmed Marines were killed in what appears to be a domestic terrorist attack,” Gov. Fallin said. “It is painful enough when we lose members of our armed forces when they are sent in harm’s way, but it is unfathomable that they should be vulnerable for attack in our own communities" ...The personnel may be armed with weapons that “adequately provide for security of the facilities and their occupants.” Those facilities include military recruiting offices.
More to follow, one may hope.
K.

Wasn't this a "drive-by" shooting? How would those soldiers being armed have helped?

I don't like knee-jerk reactions, even when it's a jerk in the direction I support. I support the military being armed. I just don't want to see this action as being the something in the "we have to do something" scenario. We do not have to do something. We should have done something long ago, but, let's not kid ourselves. A drive-by shooting isn't going to be prevented by a soldier carrying a gun at his side.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I don't see where this needs to be another gun rights issue. It has nothing to do with personal rights and should not.
This is a common sense law enforcement issue. There have always been armed military in the U.S. such as guarding armories. As needs arise they need to be addressed without hysteria.

For now it would be prudent to have armed military police at recruiting areas and anywhere else our servicemen could be vulnerable.

We sure as hell don't need to be arming our national guards as they are demanding in Missouri...More the sky is falling out state republican foolishness.

Butch

quote:

Military Police Corps Mission / Vision
Mission

"Provide professional policing, investigations, corrections, and security support across the full range of military operations in order to enable protection and promote the rule of law."
Vision

"A premier integrated Military Police force recognized as policing, investigations and corrections professionals who enable the Army's decisive action in unified land operations in concert with our partners to achieve tactical, operational, and strategic outcomes in unstable and complex worldwide environments."

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Don't you think military police are capable of protecting these facilities? I do...The last thing we need is citizen soldiers with ammunition outside of training. They are taught to kill not protect and are more likely to make mistakes... That is the job of those trained for the job.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

I think National Guard offices are likely a lesser target than US military, but they can't be overlooked. And it is up to each State to insure the safety of those National Guardsmen, so seeing Governors take necessary steps in that direction seems like a good thing to me.

Government at all levels need to remain vigilant, and continue the necessary security for any possible targets of terrorism within our military, police forces, infrastructure, travel systems, etc. Being complacent in matters of local security, because of political infighting or any other reasons, is inexcusable knowing that attacks have taken place, and that more are likely imminent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

The purpose of our armed forces is not law enforcement... their use over the years are great for emergencies such as the movement of aid and fire fighting. Their use in enforcing the law has usually been a failure... just take Ferguson for an example or any past riots. They are not trained for law enforcement duties... Especially where there will surely be civilians involved.

What is so hard to understand that using untrained soldiers with killing weapons is irresponsible...especially when we have trained soldiers for just this purpose... We don't need to arm the National Guard to assure their safety.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Bama I think that many recruitment centers are embedded in civilian areas where untrained soldiers with standard weapons issued to soldiers with armor piercing ammo would most likely kill or injure more civilians than combatants. Same with bases like Fort Leonard Wood... Too many civilians around the entrances to the base.

I believe armed military police guards with a reactionary platoon on call would work just fine.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Do you really think those yahoos in your link could stop shit? I could take both out in seconds. If they really want to protect recruitment centers it will be with security doors, pylons, and parking restrictions along with trained properly armed and protected guards and scanners... Just like federal buildings.

Putting armed guards out front is just giving them targets.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

No bama it is not...

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Do you really think those yahoos in your link could stop shit? I could take both out in seconds. If they really want to protect recruitment centers it will be with security doors, pylons, and parking restrictions along with trained properly armed and protected guards and scanners... Just like federal buildings.

Putting armed guards out front is just giving them targets.

Butch