View Full Version : Army tells recruiters: treat armed citizens as security threats if you feel 'threatened' by them.
sellersm
07-23-2015, 09:23
Hmmmm, not sure that this is the desired response of those 'protecting' the Recruitment centers?
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/22/army-to-recruiters-treat-armed-citizens-as-security-threat.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm
Snippet:
WASHINGTON -- The Army (http://www.military.com/army) has warned its recruiters to treat the gun-toting civilians gathering at centers across the country in the wake of the Chattanooga, Tenn., shooting (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/16/four-marines-gunman-killed-in-chattanooga-shooting.html) as a security threat.
Soldiers should avoid anyone standing outside the recruiting centers attempting to offer protection and report them to local law enforcement and the command if they feel threatened, according to a U.S. Army Recruiting Command policy letter issued Monday.
BPTactical
07-23-2015, 09:30
But of course, haven't you been paying attention the last couple of years?
Veterans, TEA party members and just about any other red blooded American are the biggest terror threat in the nation according to the powers that be.
I suppose the recruiters would feel more comfortable with some Hadji strolling up yelling Aloha Snackbar.....
"if they feel threatened."
The pictures I've seen don't look too threatening. Sitting on the lawn chairs and eating Chick-fil-A. Sends chills down my spine. [LOL]
hollohas
07-23-2015, 13:03
"if they feel threatened."
The pictures I've seen don't look too threatening. Sitting on the lawn chairs and eating Chick-fil-A. Sends chills down my spine. [LOL]
Yeah. Some of the pictures I've seen are pretty humorous.
A guy with what appears to be like a 14x scope on his AR...perfect for short range defense I'm sure...
Another wearing a plate carrier so low you could confuse it with a belt.
Another wearing a handgun on his belt, cross draw style, guaranteed fastest draw in the west. ;)
While I admire the principal behind the folks "guarding" the centers, I'm not sure the follow through is very practical. I think it's more of a protest than actual defense.
Nothing but a group of idiots claiming "patriotism" but really making things more difficult for the recruiting centers and the military assigned there. No one asked for them to stand out front. There are policies and procedures for guarding fed facilities in 10 CFR that need to be followed. If people really wanted to provide security, then they can start paying out the $$$ to have a trained, uniformed, liable, and authorized force outside the centers. Until then, it's just people fulfilling their need to feel like they are doing something. The Army is trying to tell them to stop but they are too self absorbed to worry about what the recruiter/military wants. It's not like the military hasn't been guarding things for 250 yrs or more but that's OK...Joe Bob with his beer cooler knows best.
sellersm
07-23-2015, 13:31
While I admire the principal behind the folks "guarding" the centers, I'm not sure the follow through is very practical. I think it's more of a protest than actual defense.
^Agree... I think they are there to make a statement, at least some of them are, I'm sure.
thedave1164
07-23-2015, 13:55
I am hearing the order came out of the WH, didn't appear to me that the recruiters were too concerned by the guards out front
Until then, it's just people fulfilling their need to feel like they are doing something. The Army is trying to tell them to stop but they are too self absorbed to worry about what the recruiter/military wants. It's not like the military hasn't been guarding things for 250 yrs or more but that's OK...Joe Bob with his beer cooler knows best.
Is there a safety vacuum?
Has DoD even tried to fill it?
If you can't answer "no" and "yes" I'd say it's about more than feelings. The message itself is valuable (for multiple groups).
Since there is a policy already in place and NG recruiters offices are located at their armories, then yes, they've considered it before. Any target can be attacked and there is no way to make everywhere come felt safe. We have to deal with the core problem, not put band aids on the issue.
I just want to know why all these armed people aren't pulling a post in Afghanistan? Servicemembers get attacked there every day.
hollohas
07-23-2015, 15:50
I just want to know why all these armed people aren't pulling a post in Afghanistan? Servicemembers get attacked there every day.
Seems to me these people standing outside the facilities are there in an effort to show support for our military and protest current policy, not because they actually think they're providing defense.
Your wording here appears as if you believe armed civilians are nothing but wannabes afraid to serve...am I wrong?
I think they have good intentions but bad application. The military already has the policies and procedures for guarding their facilities. Making the job tougher for them because Joe Bob wants to feel patriotic is absurd. Again, how many servicemembers are killed each year but yet no one has protested or picked up guns until now. Hell, 22 vets commit suicide EACH DAY. and there is not call to arms over that. It is all misplaced emotional responses, not a rational or realistic plan.
While the initial shooting occurred at a recruiting office in a strip mall, I don't believe the murderer hit anyone inside. The local police began chasing the criminal but were several minutes behind. The murderer then crashed a Reserve Center and began shooting people after he got out of his car and went inside.
Most Reserve Centers already have some form of barrier in place and the general public doesn't routinely wander into them.
The recruiting office was a soft target of opportunity and fortunately the murderer did not succeed in killing anyone there. It sounds like the killer planned on his assault on the Reserve Center and took advantage of a place he believed that no one would be armed. I understand from my reading that at least two members of the military at the Reserve Center had weapons and at least one of them fired at the dead criminal. It sounds like all five members of the military were killed by the same weapon, the killer's AK rifle, and the handgun and another long gun in the killer's possession were not used.
I hope the military members who possessed firearms at the Reserve Center will not face any form of punishment either civilian or UCMJ.
Standing in front of a recruiting center in a show of solidarity and in support is laudable but probably misplaced. Lobbying Congress for support in eliminating "gun-free" killing zones would be a good option, IMO.
Bailey Guns
07-23-2015, 18:04
What a knucklehead. Just what we need.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/armed-civilian-guarding-ohio-army-recruitment-center-accidentally-fires-weapon/
And now this. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/23/recruiting-center-shot-fired.html
Somedays I can't help but hate other gun owners. How the fuck do you do something high profile like this, and manage to do something stupid as squeeze one off. Like to me it speaks to the IQ of those doing this. It's a warm fuzzy idea on paper but in practice a bad one even without the added problem of safety negligence. Think 275RLTW is absolutely right.
ROFL, and the jackass was convicted of firing inside city limits in 2013.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/23/recruiting-center-shot-fired.html
Hope they don't return the rifle, this guy is a menace.
Aloha_Shooter
07-23-2015, 20:33
I think they have good intentions but bad application. The military already has the policies and procedures for guarding their facilities. Making the job tougher for them because Joe Bob wants to feel patriotic is absurd. Again, how many servicemembers are killed each year but yet no one has protested or picked up guns until now. Hell, 22 vets commit suicide EACH DAY. and there is not call to arms over that. It is all misplaced emotional responses, not a rational or realistic plan.
They may have policies but the procedures clearly aren't being executed (or are ineffective) when it comes to those recruiting offices. I have enjoyed effective policies and procedures when being guarded in a Priority A area and have laughed at the ineffective policies and procedures at a non-Priority A area as peace protesters got inside the gate at Falcon AFS to pour blood on the walkway annually.
Yes, the sight of a lot of these volunteers is absurd but the edict from Army Recruiting Command and the (in)actions of the White House are even more so. The policy of not allowing service members to carry their own weapons on base/post is equally ridiculous -- we had no problem with it for decades until gun control pantywaists got into policy-making positions. I welcome the volunteers showing how stupid the gun-free zone regulations ... I'm sorry, instructions, we don't have regulations anymore because they're all harsh and fascist, you know ... are. Current protocols and instructions on base for "active shooter" scenarios are stupid and would be pointless if the base simply followed local laws regarding private firearms (at least, they would be here in Colorado).
ROFL, and the jackass was convicted of firing inside city limits in 2013.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/23/recruiting-center-shot-fired.html
Hope they don't return the rifle, this guy is a menace.
He downplayed what happened. “It is what it is,” he said. “Nobody got hurt.”
This is why pro gun idiots do more harm than anti gun plotters. The latter doesn't play it off like it's nothing.
I could see perhaps the logic in standing guard outside of a nursing home, or some other location where people are disadvantaged, or left extremely vulnerable such as a nursing home, or a hospital. Schools are out since in today's society children of all ages and stages of life are not worth protecting and do not recieve equal treatment and protection under the law, but I digress.
However the majority of the members of the armed services have been trained to defend themselves. If the DoD doesn't see fit to authorize the arming of at least one properly trained individual at EVERY DoD, building, structure, and base I certainly am not going to do it for them. The individual is responsible for thier own safety. Since the Military is a collective they must provide a means to protect the whole, which still includes the individuals safety and we'll being. God forbid a command not educate thier Men and Women on the dangers of alcohol, or sexual assault but when it comes to self defense from a terrorist on American soil our heroes are supposed to be sheep lined up for the slaughter. Fuck. That.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Aloha_Shooter
07-24-2015, 04:04
I question your assertion that "the majority of the members of the armed services have been trained to defend themselves." My experience has been to the contrary with the possible exception of Marines.
First, there's a long tail to tooth ratio; it's gotten better in recent years as we've replaced some non-combat specialties with contractors in order to meet decreasing personnel ceilings and still maintain an ability to field combat troops but we're still a long way from "the majority" being line troops. Second, even among line troops, there's a difference between being trained to bring awesome firepower to bear on our enemies and being trained to defend yourself with small arms.
Qualifying on the range isn't the same as training for self-defense but beyond that, I think what most of these people are protesting against is that troops are being prevented from defending themselves properly through these gun bans on base/post. Active shooter drills I've seen on base consist of people hiding away, not engaging in active defense. Every time I see it, I shake my head in disgust -- and I'm not alone, lots of retirees working as contractors or GSes that remember when they could keep something in the trunk.
BREATHER
07-24-2015, 04:26
This could be a patriotic response, it could be a protest, then again it could be a genuine attempt to help out troops.... Then I have to wonder how many military members will fire on American citizens if the Commander and Spoof orders them to....
BREATHER
07-24-2015, 04:28
How many of these mercenaries/"contractors" will fire on American citizens if ordered to....
This could be a patriotic response, it could be a protest, then again it could be a genuine attempt to help out troops.... Then I have to wonder how many military members will fire on American citizens if the Commander and Spoof orders them to....
How many of these mercenaries/"contractors" will fire on American citizens if ordered to....
too much tinfoil on... Using the word "mercenary" shows how ignorant you are about us.
BREATHER
07-24-2015, 10:17
US,,??????????
US,,??????????
Yes. Some of the people you are talking shit about are on this forum.
US,,??????????
The members of the United States Armed Forces, Army, Navy, Air-Force, Coast Guard and Marines.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
You should be far more concerned about the atf than any member of the military.
But...but....but...Jade Helm, and Alex Jones said that everyone in the gubbment is evil an worships Satan
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Satan loves guns though so...
BREATHER
07-24-2015, 12:28
You know, I am not being a wise ass... I am a veteran and I took the oath, several times... and I still believe in it...
....one of these things is not like the other..
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
TEAMRICO
07-24-2015, 14:54
You know, I am not being a wise ass... I am a veteran and I took the oath, several times... and I still believe in it...
John Kerry is a veteran............
You know, I am not being a wise ass... I am a veteran and I took the oath, several times... and I still believe in it...
So did they change the oath or something? I don't get it.
BREATHER
07-25-2015, 05:55
I am sure you are all aware that American Military has fired on citizens in the past. At least two were during union disputes with companies belonging to wealthy men who had close friends in Washington.
Mine was just a question. How many would fire on citizens if ordered to. Would the military remember that most citizens support them. In these times this is not far fetched.
I am sure you are all aware that American Military has fired on citizens in the past. At least two were during union disputes with companies belonging to wealthy men who had close friends in Washington.
Mine was just a question. How many would fire on citizens if ordered to. Would the military remember that most citizens support them. In these times this is not far fetched.
Yes I think we are all aware of the whiskey rebellion in the late 1700's, the draft riots in NYC in 1864, and what happened at Kent State in the 1970's.
The answer to your question is that there would be extremely few Service Members that would obey any orders to fire on their fellow citizens even if they were justified in doing so.
Btw, what branch of service where you in Breather?
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
I'm pretty sure our volunteer military members understand that the people of this country have their backs more than the government does.
BREATHER
07-25-2015, 09:14
You know what Brothers, I hope and pray. If it comes to a revolution or a race war or marshal law, there will be no winners.
theGinsue
07-25-2015, 10:24
Yes I think we are all aware of the whiskey rebellion in the late 1700's, the draft riots in NYC in 1864, and what happened at Kent State in the 1970's.
You forgot the vicious attack on the Bonus Army camp in 1932.
You know what Brothers, I hope and pray. If it comes to a revolution or a race war or marshal law, there will be no winners.
If/when such events occur, I guarantee that there would be no winners, regardless of the outcome.
ETA: Perhaps this should be covered in a thread of its own, but now & here seems appropriate.
In one of his speeches, Abraham Lincoln borrowed from the bible (Matthew 12:25, Mark 3:25 & Luke 11:17) when he said "a house divided against itself cannot stand." There are many powerful players in our nation right now, some in advanced positions of government, who recognize this fact and are seemingly making it their goal to divide this nation. It seems that their ultimate goal is to tear down this nation and later rebuild it into the socialist dream state they desire; and it appears to be working quite successfully.
Americans have a very short attention span and an even shorter memory. We rely more on our "feelings" than we do actual facts - particularly when it comes to world history. The power players are taking advantage of this fact and every time we seem to focus on real events another "squirrel" is put before us.
Rather than uniting and focusing in what we all have in common (i.e. "the American dream") and utilizing our unique backgrounds and skills to further the common goal of the American experience/experiment, as we once did in our "Melting Pot" society, we're told to celebrate diversity. This focus on diversity, focusing solely on our differences, is dividing us. We are no longer concerned with working in unity towards any common goal with one another. This behavior & ideology is dividing this house we call America. The coming (and I do believe we're headed towards these events) revolution/race wars/socio-political revolts will ensure we will fall. As such, there will be no winners.
From Merriam-Websters dictionary:
Unite [abridged]1. to become one or as if one; to become combined by or as if by adhesion or mixture
2. to act in concert
Unity [abridged]
1. the quality or state of not being multiple : oneness
2. a condition of harmony : accord
3. the quality or state of being made one : unification
Diversity [abridged]
1. the condition of having or being composed of differing elements : variety; especially : the inclusion of different types of people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group or organization <programs intended to promote diversity in schools>
2. an instance of being composed of differing elements or qualities : an instance of being diverse <a diversity of opinion>
Diverse [abridged]
1. differing from one another : unlike <people with diverse interests>
2. composed of distinct or unlike elements or qualities <a diverse population>
Scanker19
07-25-2015, 12:02
I don't understand why anyone expects our military to behave any different than others in history. It is because we have eagles and iPhones, or that we some how think that we are any different mentally than every other culture? Police do it regularly, when needed, and I'd be willing to bet that some officers don't agree with some of the laws they enforce. Yet they still do.
I'm sure that the individual soldier would say they wouldn't, but what about the group? See the Milgram experiments.
Nobody wins in a dairy challenge!
https://youtu.be/enY771qAmvk
BushMasterBoy
07-25-2015, 12:09
Trust the US military? hahahaha
I also forgot the U.S. civil war, and the rounding up of the Americans ofJapanese descent post Pearl Harbor.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
BREATHER
07-26-2015, 06:19
USN 1971-1975
BladesNBarrels
07-26-2015, 08:58
Yes I think we are all aware of the whiskey rebellion in the late 1700's, the draft riots in NYC in 1864, and what happened at Kent State in the 1970's.
The answer to your question is that there would be extremely few Service Members that would obey any orders to fire on their fellow citizens even if they were justified in doing so.
And, closer to home, the Ludlow Massacre -
The Ludlow Massacre was an attack by the Colorado National Guard and Colorado Fuel & Iron Company camp guards on a tent colony of 1,200 striking coal miners and their families at Ludlow, Colorado, on April 20, 1914. Some two dozen people, including miners' wives and children, were killed.
theGinsue
07-26-2015, 10:12
TIN-FOIL HAT TIME
Scenario:
Step 1: Create a situation where the PEOPLE cry to arm up more of the government.
Step 2: Once you have significantly increased government entities being armed, create a situation, or series of situations (tragedies, civil unrest, etc.) where you PEOPLE demand the government intervene (typically with armed response).
Step 3: Use the events to implement martial law &/or suspend citizens rights. Use the traditional organizations (LEO, Nat. Guard, etc.) in combination with the newly armed government entities to enforce the new restrictions. Remind the PEOPLE that this is what they asked for.
Something to consider or just wild conspiracy thinking? Sometimes the wildest theories only seem possible in hindsight.
hollohas
07-26-2015, 10:36
There are over 4 million federal employees (including uniformed military) and more and more agencies that that didn't historically have any involvement in LE, now have armed LE personnel. That's not a good trend and DOESN'T indicate a good future for us, IMO. I don't believe an armed government is a good government.
BushMasterBoy
07-26-2015, 10:47
top it off with reading everybody's email and tap all the phones with colossal mega computers...
TEAMRICO
07-26-2015, 13:58
Yeah, your typical Gov. employee with a gun scares me.......Unions would pitch a fit if they had to fight us early in the morning, overtime, in bad weather. God forbid they don't get birth control.
What percentage would actually die for thier Cush Job?
To answer the OP: this is a difficult call. On one hand, you have patriots that are both horrified and outraged that the Joker-in-Chef seems to be doing absolutely squat with regard to these attacks. People want the troops know they support any and all measures to keep them from being slaughtered; as the Administration in its infinite wisdom has determined that military cannot protect themselves through arms, the People will do it for them. At least, that's the impression I get.
On the other hand, although the spirits seem willing, the flesh is weak. Most of these sentinels are untried, out of practice, or completely untrained. As it stands, they could be considered a liability. If you've got someone that knows what they're doing, I doubt the soldiers would be concerned. If you've got someone that barely knows which end of the rifle to hold, and the place he's guarding is in a shopping center...well, that's a dangerous situation.
There's got to be a happy medium somewhere.
hollohas
08-02-2015, 16:27
Allen West says he has inside information that the Sailor that discharged his personal weapon in defense will be charged.
http://allenbwest.com/2015/08/whats-happening-to-this-heroic-navy-officer-from-the-chattanooga-shooting-will-make-your-blood-boil/
And the Navy denies the story stating that no charges have been filed.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/2015/8/2/305393/Roy-Exum-Navy-Denies-Any-Changes.aspx
hollohas
08-02-2015, 16:46
We'll see what happens.
But to be fair, West said he "will be charged" not he "has been charged".
I'm not reading anywhere that the Navy says there "won't" be any charges, just that there aren't any yet... from the article above...
“Stories of Navy personnel being charges with an offense are not true. There is still a long way to go in reviewing the facts of this tragic incident, but at this time we can confirm no service member has been charged with an offense.”
I'm reading that as they're leaving the possibility open.
Agreed. We will all wait to see what will happen. It just hasn't happened yet, if in fact it ever does.
HoneyBadger
08-02-2015, 17:19
The Navy has officially denied any pressing of charges at this time.
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/08/navy_denies_reports_sailor_wil.html?hootPostID=f05 7a4dc4c89b3d1baa2763341244c83
Does that mean that this LCDR won't lose his job, career, rank, etc? Nope. I'm more interested in finding out whether or not his bullets stopped the threat. If his shots all missed, then the left will jump up and say "See? He was armed and it didn't do any good! He just endangered everyone!". If his shots did connect with the target, the right (most of us, I'm guessing) will jump up and say "See? Having someone armed can stop the threat and save lives!"
Either way, this guy is now a part of the political circus, whether he is hoisted up on a pedestal or quietly sent to a federal prison. The sad reality is that his life is probably going to suck for a long time, either way.
sellersm
08-03-2015, 16:26
According to both Allen B. West, and former Texas Congressman Steve Stockman, they will be pressing charges against Lt Cmdr White.
The word from Steve Stockman came from an audio interview, I don't have the link to it.
EDIT: the link below is same as posted above, sorry...
http://allenbwest.com/2015/08/whats-happening-to-this-heroic-navy-officer-from-the-chattanooga-shooting-will-make-your-blood-boil/
Whether or not he's charged, this stinks... As HB said, his life is a mess no matter what.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.