Should Military Personnel at recruiting offices, outposts, etc. be armed?

Posted by: DonaldTrump

The recent attack and murder of four unarmed military personnel by an Islamic man at a recruiting office has brought up the above question.

  • Yes

  • No

88% 21 votes
12% 3 votes
  • Why not? They need protection.

  • Our military personnel deserve respect and protection as much as the next citizen. They deserve to protect themselves against irrational individuals within the US and abroad.

  • I don't see why not. They are trained for it.

  • This should be a given. These young highly-trained individuals should not have the right to defend themselves at home taken away, while simultaneously risking their lives to protect us .

  • Absolutely. The fact of the matter is that every citizen has the right to self-defense and disarming out military members in the public only puts them at risk and creates victims.

  • Why?

    Posted by: TBR
  • That's what we need...more morons with guns everywhere. Most soldiers are brain-dead idiots who I wouldn't let make me a Big Mac let alone carry a weapon.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
xhammy says2015-07-18T12:01:25.2619713-05:00
@TBR because a "gun free zone" at a military office just got shot up by some idiot who didn't know it was a gun free zone.
TBR says2015-07-18T12:27:57.5393740-05:00
The solution is always more guns xhammy. You got it, I am convinced. No way we can live until every man, woman, child and puppy are packing. Makes perfect sense.
58539672 says2015-07-18T13:15:31.5421128-05:00
@TBR These are active military personal we are talking about, not your average joe walking down the street. At the very least they could have an MP at the office.
TBR says2015-07-18T14:35:19.0805310-05:00
Again I ask why. Do we need guards at every open to the public office? Every store? This is nonsenses. If, as gun supporters want to insist, that mad gunmen are not a big issue in our culture, then this is unnecessary panic. Or is it a problem? Mad gunmen a problem in your neighborhood?
58539672 says2015-07-18T14:57:18.4401478-05:00
Mad gunman aren't the concern, its terror attacks. Recruiting stations and other military owned buildings are common targets for domestic terrorists. This has nothing to do with gun control, but rather proper levels of security military personal should have in their own installations. This is not a question about should their be armed guards in stores or along the streets. The US military already has guns and enough MPs. Why not use them on currently undefended potential targets. Treat the recruiting stations like military bases.
TBR says2015-07-18T16:20:24.9320451-05:00
Well... (sigh) I guess we could start with Posse Comitatus for the obvious reasons why military personnel should not be toting guns to work in the mall, but its even simpler. This exemplifies the silly "terror" all gun toting Americans seem to be operating under. We simply do NOT live in a world where every second of the day we need to fend of bands of killers and rapists. If these offices need security, they should use (and pay for) local police.
Forthelulz says2015-07-18T21:23:43.8219042-05:00
@TBR So... You're saying that the people we're investing our tax dollars into should be effectively hamstrung? First off, symbolically, needing police to protect your stuff makes you seem a little weak in the eyes of the average Joe. Second off, terror attacks. If a bunch of Kalishnov-wielding masked madmen show up, do you think the handgun or maybe shotgun-equipped police will be able to hold them off? Third off, the police personnel. Would you take that bunch of police off the streets to protect something that could easily protect itself if you let them be armed? Also, yes, we don't have to fend off criminals daily, but let's get that number even lower by arming everyone. If everyone's armed, it'll be something like, "Hey, let's go rob a bank" to, "Wait, everyone's armed? Oh, son of a" *BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!* Ka-dead.
TBR says2015-08-05T23:42:54.9320634Z
Again, I refer to the Posse Comitatus Act. Arming military on us soil is bad policy, and it is illegal.
58539672 says2015-08-05T23:49:52.4892460Z
@TBR Unless you are part of the Navy, Marine Corp, National Guard, Coast Guard, an MP, Special forces, or anyone working under the jurisdiction of the Insurrection Act. The Posse Comitatus Act has a lot of exclusions and limitations.
TBR says2015-08-05T23:57:49.0099006Z
@58539672 - No, not really. The military can not act on us soil as a police force. The best argument given is optics. It "looks bad" for them to not be armed. Well, it's truly poor optics to have them armed. If there places are having security issues on US soil, call the proper authorities - who are sure as hell not the armed services.
58539672 says2015-08-06T00:03:50.0693091Z
@TBR Yes, really. The Posse Comitatus Act only specifies the Army (and later the Airforce). They Navy and Marine Corp are not mentioned, but they put in their own regulations on the matter. The National Guard and the Coast Guard are not required to follow it. MPs can be armed on military facilities and special forces are also exempt. And under the Insurrection Act, if a natural disaster, terror attack, or other problem occurs that the states cant handle themselves, the President can us military personnel as a temporary police force.
TBR says2015-08-06T03:44:08.1028839Z
"National Guard and the Coast Guard are not required to follow it." - That is IT. The other branches are covered. || " MPs can be armed on military facilities" - Military bases are exempt. If the requiters want to setup on bases, fine. || " and special forces are also exempt." -I have never read of any exception of this sort. || "And under the Insurrection Act, if a natural disaster, terror attack, or other problem occurs that the states cant handle themselves, the President can us military personnel as a temporary police force." - That is true. It has nothing to do with arming guys working at a office in a strip-mall.
58539672 says2015-08-06T04:55:10.3622059Z
@TBR The special forces part is that the Joint Special Operations Command has some leeway with the act. The Navy is not mentioned in the act, but they have their own regulations on the matter within the DOD. As for the rest, you used the Posse Comitatus Act as a point toward your argument, and I was just pointing out that the act has a lot of holes in it. If the act is your only evidence against arming recruiting stations, then their is enough wiggle room to to do just that without breaking it.
TBR says2015-08-07T15:28:33.3702874Z
@58539672 - 1) I think it is plenty. 2) I honestly find this idea grotesque. The military has no business acting as military on home soil.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.