Robbery outside Home Depot

[jgcoastie]

I should mention that barracks residents must store their personal weapons at the MILPOL armory (accessable 24/7). Either that, or store them at your unit's armory (if so equipped, with unit command approval, and space is available).

EDIT: I should also mention that what restrictions our base commander places on his personnel, I am only subject to his policies while I am actually on base, he cannot prevent me from carrying while off-base. That would be a command decision, enacted by my own unit, which is completely seperate and is in no way suboordinate to the base.

 

[JohnKSa]

The base commander decides what policy he wants to enact on his base. Seems like most of them want disarmed soldiers.

 

[trooper3385]

A good friend of mine that was a police officer that I worked with had just got back from Iraq. He had like 10 yrs in the Army and then went into the guard when he got activated the last time. He did a year and a half in Iraq and had been back 2 weeks. He went back for his weekend warrior training and left the base that night to go eat. He went to the ATM to get money and got shot 2 times. Died a week later from a blood clot. He was the 3rd person they had shot that night. The other 2 also died. None of the 3 had been robbed. Just shot and left there. Before he died, he was doing good while he was in the hospital In stable condition and I went to visit him. I asked him if he was armed, because I knew he never went anywhere off duty without being armed and he said he didn't have a weapon because he was leaving base. He couldn't bring his weapon on base with him while he was there for training so he would leave it at home since he didn't have anywhere else to keep it. He said he was aware of his surrounding and saw them coming and knew something was about to go down, he just didn't have anywhere to go or anything to defend himself with.

 

[Daugherty16]

Sell your soul to the government: Just sign this enlistment form right here...

I have a hard time understanding the scope of a standing order that would impact or control a soldier's actions while off duty, off base. Besides which, it is impossible to enforce.

How exactly does a base commander's standing order overrule state law when one is acting as a private citizen? (i understand that soldiers would obey the CO's order, but what is the legal authority for such an order?) And the preamble to that piece states as an uncontravertible fact that having soldiers carrying a concealed deadly weapon (could this be any broader? how about a nail file?) is a significant risk to the safety and welfare of the (this) command. Suppose the CO had a dislike for Sorel boots - could he forbid his soldiers from wearing them anywhere on or off base?

It is hard for me to even guess at the thinking that went into that policy. You could argue that carrying a concealed or open weapon, as protection against rape, robbery, etc is a proper action to preserve their lives, and in the process preserve the accumulated value of a soldier's training.

Is this commonplace elsewhere? Is it purely the whim of a specific base commander, or is this actual widespread US Military policy?

 

[matolman1]

Just like the recruitment soldiers in Little Rock that were gunned down by the Islamic terrorist recently.
Why are our soldiers unarmed??

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Why are our soldiers unarmed??

Now there's a point we can agree on!

Pretty stupid isn't it? You can go to war and die for your country when you're 18, you can come home after seeing your friends die for your country.... but you can't have a beer when you get back and we can't trust you to be armed no matter how old you are....
:barf:

 

[LightningJoe]

Well, it's the Federal government. Unless they're planning to fight a battle at the Home Depot, how does the Federal government benefit from having soldiers armed there? They might get robbed every once in a while, but that doesn't affect the guys in Washington. Get real.

 

[Hook686]

'Fragging' happens in the military. During the Vietnam era I was in the USAF. I had my hunting rifle and a handgun in my locker. One day I got back from my duty station. Lockers in each room in the barracks were open and any firearms were on the bunk, with a note to store the firearm and the base security police building. No penalties, no problem retreiving the firearms 24/7. I was on the base rifle team and kept ammo for that in my locker without any problems, just personal ammo was barred. Figure that.

It might have been inconvenient to wait until off base to load and holster a CCW handgun, but it was doable. With the tight security on base, what's to fear while on base ?

 

[Rich Miranda]

I drive a motorcoach (charter/tour bus) and I transport soldiers to and from Camp Bullis for training every so often. All of the soldiers carry their weapons (which is really cool because I get to see the SAWs and so forth) but no ammo is permitted, with the exception of exactly one magazine of 'security ammo' which is not permitted to be loaded into the weapon unless needed.

As soon as we arrive at the destination, a higher-ranking soldier (I don't know ranks) comes into the bus and takes back the ammo.

Of course, if anyone tried to anything, the sight of 40 M4s and M249s might be enough to scare them off, even without ammo.

 

[hogdogs]

Let the stupid ol' redneck opine on this a bit...
Anytime the armed forces are used in the states it brings all kinds of strife on them as "the armed forces shouldn't be against the citizenry..." Like in Alabama when we had the mass shootings near me and the sheriff asked Ft.Rucker for help. It was actually posted here on TFL. So soldiers leaving base armed to go buy ply wood at Homer's Depot would result in a jillion cell phone vids on you-tube and the mass lib media outlets worse than a couple open carrying folks in NH...
Brent

 

[Lee Lapin]

Brent,

That's because during Reconstruction after the Late War, troops WERE used to control the citizenry in the defeated South. That resulted in something called the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

Of course, in recent years, things have changed... http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/Trebilcock.htm .

And if you spent any time at all around most servicemembers, you'd be terrified at the thought of them carrying loaded weapons in public. The troops scare their own command structure so bad, they barely tolerate it even in combat zones. Trainer John Farnam rants about the level of firearms training our servicemembers get a lot- see http://www.sofmag.com/news/permalink1/2006/7/16/12063929635.html , http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2004/04Sept04.html , http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2004/22Jan04.html etc.

On a more specific note, I was across the street from that Home Despot yesterday. It isn't in what you might call the best part of town, if it's the one on Skibo in Fayetteville. The wooded area is within just a few yards of the parking area and there is no visible barrier on the property line- no chainlink fence, etc. There are housing areas nearby. Definitely some vulnerabilities there for unarmed folk...

fwiw,

lpl

 

[hogdogs]

I realize we entrust service folks during combat with a different level of trust than peace time. But the fact remains that even if they were all 100% crack shots of the safest nature and guaranteed to not use their arms for anything that a citizen were not authorized... the populace would still feel they were in a police state type setting. I do, however, feel that service persons should be able to have a CCW on them whenever they wish as a LEO may.
Brent

 

[wally626]

Hooke686

With the tight security on base, what's to fear while on base ?

It is pretty rare but people have been known to kill people even on secure facilities. Happened last year (maybe the year before) at NASA JSC. They have armed guards at the gates and patrolling the grounds, they do random car searches coming and going and allow no weapons (except for security personnel, and a couple of other exceptions) on the center. All employees have extensive background checks. This did not stop a man from coming on the center with a personal weapon and killing, IIRC, two people. I have been on a few facilities with 100% search on entering and leaving, with lots of security, on those I feel pretty safe, on your typical federal facility you are lots safer than the bad part of town, but bad things can still happen.

 

[Lee Lapin]

...service persons should be able to have a CCW on them whenever they wish as a LEO may.

In a lot of places, even LEOs can't carry outside their own jurisdiction... the average citizen these days actually has more leeway with a concealed carry permit that's recognized in a lot of states.

I believe in the Lott Theory (More Guns, Less Crime - http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html ) as much as anyone, but unfortunately I don't get to make the rules...

lpl

 

[MLeake]

Lee...

... if you were across the street, then you were probably at BW3, or maybe PetSmart or Dick's Sporting Goods.

I can't see you coming to town and going to Food Lion, or Michael's...

But yes, it's that Home Depot, and no, it isn't a great neighborhood.

As far as HogDogs argument, people might react badly to overtly armed troops, but how would they know if troops were carrying concealed?

If a soldier, marine, airman, or sailor qualifies for a CCW, why should he be more restricted than any other citizen?

Just my take on things.

BTW, the answer to the large percentage of troops who aren't necessarily proficient or skilled in firearms law is not less weapons, but more training, IMO.

Cheers,

M

 

[Lee Lapin]

One of the happiest days of my life was seeing Ft. Bragg in my rearview mirror for the first time as a newly retired uncivil serpent 8^). And I only come to Fayettenam any more to see my doctors. In this case I went home by way of PetSmart to get some woofer food.

Everyone has to go 'by the rulz' when going on post. I have a NC CCH, and can't carry on post- not that I have any reason to go back on post, since they issued my last ID with an indefinite expiration date. And since the DoD parking stickers on both vehicles are good till 2011, it'll be at least that long before I have reason to go back.

I know servicemembers with CCHs too- they can't carry on post. Why is that so? Because Uncle Scam wants it that way, and so it is. It isn't the way it ought to be, but that's the way the nanny-statists want it.

I remember that old "two armies" quote from Larteguy that a bunch of the old time SF NCOs used to have framed on their office walls or their desks...

I'd like to have two armies: One for display with lovely guns, tanks, little soldiers, staffs, distinguished and doddering generals, and dear little regimental officers who would be deeply concerned over their colonel's piles, an Army that would be shown for a modest fee on every fairground in the country. The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflaged uniforms, who would not be put on display but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That's the Army in which I should like to fight.

One of my old friends, then a captain (most likely the oldest DOR captain in the US Army, too) had PT tee shirts printed up (back before there were official PT uniforms) that said: "If we could shoot, we wouldn't have to run." See why Uncle Mikee was a captain for so long? 8^)

That's always reflected my attitude too...

FWIW,

lpl

 

[jgcoastie]

How exactly does a base commander's standing order overrule state law when one is acting as a private citizen? (i understand that soldiers would obey the CO's order, but what is the legal authority for such an order?) And the preamble to that piece states as an uncontravertible fact that having soldiers carrying a concealed deadly weapon (could this be any broader? how about a nail file?) is a significant risk to the safety and welfare of the (this) command. Suppose the CO had a dislike for Sorel boots - could he forbid his soldiers from wearing them anywhere on or off base?

(Emphasis added by me)

Because all military members are subject to the articles set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) while on or off duty. From the day you swear in to the day you are discharged or retire, the UCMJ applies everywhere, local, state, and federal laws aside. Servicemembers may be charged with local/state/federal charges and still face judicial proceedings as applicable to the UCMJ.

The fine print's a real b***h...

EDIT: Why are our servicemen/women unarmed when out in public? B/c if we were constantly armed while in uniform, it would set the environment of marshall law. It may not be in effect, but I think the visual display of weapons would entice severe outrage amongst many citizens. Personally, it wouldn't bother me a bit, but everybody ain't like me.

 

[SoupieXX75]

After six years in the Army...

I can understand why ANY chain of command wouldn't want a base full of young soldiers carrying weapons. Young soldiers get into enough stupid stuff without the help of weapons.

Personally, when I was living in the barracks, I didn't like the idea of keeping my weapons in the unit arms room. I didn't like the thought of Pvt. Joe Snuffy messing with my gear. I just kept my stuff at the house of a trusted squad leader. It was a lot easier to get my weapons from them then from the unit arms room. Once I moved off post and got my CCW, I just locked and cleared my pistol before entering base. A hassle? Yes. But easy enough to get around post regs regarding concealed carry.

 

[danbrew]

As a former grunt who served at Ft Wainwright in the early 80s, I recall a gunfight between a bunch of drunk troopers in Alpha and Bravo Companies, 1/327th. These loons got liquored up one night and starting blasting rounds back and forth between the buildings. A handful of folks got busted - don't recall exactly what happened to them.

While probably not the reason for the restrictive policies on base in Alaska, it has to figure in the institutional memory. There were policies preventing POWs in the barracks before this incident, but things became much more restrictive afterwards.

As SoupieXX75 says, there's a lot to be said to restricting access to dangerous things to a bunch of young soldiers with no supervision. Whether that be guns, booze, fast motorcycles without helmets, etc.

For every "i can't believe somebody wrote a policy on that" regulation that you don't like, some moron was awarded the darwin award. I recall a guy in an aviation unit at Wainright had cut down a small pine tree as a Christmas tree. The resulting "regulation" was "No Christmas Trees", although that was later revised to "No open flame". He had put a bunch of candles on the tree and lit them and then passed out and the thing caught fire. Go figure.

 

[N.H. Yankee]

Well thats a switch, usually the ROBBERY is at the CHECKOUT!!!!!

Having retired from the Air Force ( lucky me ) I also could never figure out the unarmed soldier on base. I have heard of shootings on base, one in particular, a civilians enlisted wife's cheating with an airman, civilian goes to the dorm the airman lives at with a gun from his offbase home, confronts airman in parking lot, and BANG! The airman never had a chance, had he been armed when confronted he may have had a chance when things escalated. The airman shouldn't have been messing with the guy's wife, but he didn't deserve a death sentence either.

The Air Force feels that if you live on base, the SP's will protect you. Problem is on some bases, the SP's aren't supposed to shoot until shot at! Local commanders and wing also can play a role in firearm usage/storage. A female NCO was murdered within sight of the gate at March AFB years ago and the SP's at the gate could not shoot at the gangbangers, because it was outside the main gate!! I never understood why military personnel can have machineguns, grenades, etc while training or in a combat zone and be trusted then, but not allowed a personnal firearm on base. I guess the powers to be think your less likely to go ward 8 in a stressful warzone, than peacefully stateside on base.

I was fortunate enough ( or not ) to have written permission from command to carry concealed on base due to certain circumstances. I also had to have a copy of the letter on my person, the CC had a copy, SC had a copy, and the gate guardhouse had a copy. I always felt military members should have the right to protect themselves, especially on an open base. Not sure if there are any open bases left since 9/11.