Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 97

Thread: Should Military Recognize State Concealed Carry Licenses

  1. #61
    Council Member Kiwigrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    ...never run when you can walk, never walk when you can ride -- use the Bike...
    Me 'n u both.
    Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)

    All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)

    ONWARD

  2. #62
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    Uh, what's a menu?
    Um, in Kansas City they're something like this.

  3. #63
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default And going completely OT...

    Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
    Actually the point of a broadhead can due severe injury
    Absolutely... but I'm having trouble envisioning the "concealed" aspect of it all, both for the weapon and the ammunition supply!

    Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
    Nyah. Earlier this year I completely blew out my ACL while sparring. I'm running as much as I can to get the leg back into shape. I've got a marathon to run, and a 100 miler next year I want to run. I'm slow but I still got some go.
    Good luck with that. I kept running for quite a while in hope that a foot injury would work through, eventually had to take up cycling when it became clear that it was not going to work through, and that repeated impact is no longer in the picture. Fortunately I've come to like cycling.

    There are places where age just gets you, and recovery is one of them. When the ortho guy starts invoking "long term management" as the goal, beware. Didn't believe him for a while but at a certain point the message becomes unmistakable. Pain doesn't lie.

  4. #64
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
    Actually the point of a broadhead can due severe injury and a well tuned bow is nearly silent.
    And much like an old and wise NCO told Tom "(a machete) doesn't click on empty"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    Are their more people in both professions who don't act that way? Sure. Most do not -- but there are some that do.

    Some are smug in their own ability to have or handle weapons but most aren't so it's complex. Regardless, the attitude existed long before Bill Clinton went to High School and when the NRA had well less than a million members.

    The fact that it won't happen is pretty much a given. That some in the services and LE do not think any civilian should have a weapon and some who disapprove of CCW is also a fact. Unlike the first fact, it isn't terribly relevant. It's just a comment on human factors.
    Ken,
    I was referring to perhaps the worst stage (of over abusing the use of Anti and Pro Second Amendment) of the Clinton and NRA era together under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. As I said, I'm an NRA life member and have a nice collection of practical firearms in addition to having had concealed permits. What I don't take stock in is the empty and ludicrous use of "Second Amendment" to support or destroy an argument that is far more complex.

    Because most of us herein are military and/or law enforcement, and the subject has more to do with what happens on a military base, I take our opinions and concerns much more seriously. Much more per se than someone arguing for or against gun ownership, standing on the Second Amendment soap box, in a heated political debate without ever having fired a weapon
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  5. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    As I said, I'm an NRA life member and have a nice collection of practical firearms in addition to having had concealed permits. What I don't take stock in is the empty and ludicrous use of "Second Amendment" to support or destroy an argument that is far more complex.

    Because most of us herein are military and/or law enforcement, and the subject has more to do with what happens on a military base, I take our opinions and concerns much more seriously. Much more per se than someone arguing for or against gun ownership, standing on the Second Amendment soap box, in a heated political debate without ever having fired a weapon
    I, too, am a combat veteran, lifelong shooter, own and carry guns and I am an NRA member as well.

    So what?

    Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein own guns and have permits to carry concealed…’nuff said.

    The way you simply dismiss the 2A/RKBA argument is far more telling when it comes to your credibility regarding the issue of gun ownership; whether on post or elsewhere. Furthermore, being military or law enforcement doesn’t make any of us all that special…where I live you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting someone who is either current or prior military/LE. It doesn’t make me (or you) any more or less qualified to comment on this thread.

    Back to original point of this thread…

    The two points I made in my earlier post were that I was frustrated with the notion that we can’t trust soldiers to handle weapons safely and with the surprising number of military and LE personnel (albeit a minority) who are opposed to the idea of the right to own and carry guns as an individual right but rather as something that should only belong to a protected class of citizens of which they are always a part.

    I also notice a certain inconsistency in the argument that on the one hand “we (military/LE) are special” while on the other hand “stupid privates” can’t be trusted not to shoot themselves or others in a drunken orgy of destruction in the barracks on any given day; as if “stupid privates” are even LESS qualified to own and carry firearms than their civilian counterparts. Which one is it?

    Finally, I am very uncomfortable with this tendency to lump military and law enforcement personnel together. We are very, very different. The fact that many in LE are former military does not change this.

  6. #66
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default How Can We Go About Getting State CCWs Recognized on DoD Installations?

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    31 JAN letter to the Army Times at http://www.armytimes.com/community/o...ditor-013111w/



    What do you think?
    Though the tread has drifted at times (bow and machete toters. Tomahawks anyone?), it seems that there are a number of SWJ forum members that think there is merit in the letter's argument.

    How do we get CCWs recognized on DoD installations? Is the National Park model a good one?

  7. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post

    How do we get CCWs recognized on DoD installations? Is the National Park model a good one?
    That's actually not a bad idea...at least as far as the issue of whether or not anyone (for example a retiree visiting the commissary) can carry on post. Doesn't fix the issue of whether soldiers are allowed to do so.

    I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I submit that every soldier should be issued an M11 pistol and a concealment holster and required to qualify with it. On post and off duty carry become mandatory. It's no longer a CCW issue, but rather a force protection issue. No different than making every soldier carry a weapon on the FOB.

    I'm not all that confident that the rent-a-cops do much to keep military facilities secure. Seems to me a second line of defense of trained, armed soldiers will do a hell of a lot more to make them hard targets.

  8. #68
    Council Member IntelTrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    RC-S, Afghanistan
    Posts
    302

    Default

    I don't know how relevant to the discussion this is, or whether it will change any opinions, but a couple weeks ago here on the Monterey Peninsula we had a captain (non-Navy type) who managed to discharge his concealed, personal weapon in class. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

    If something were to be instituted, I don't think rank, age, or time in service would necessarily be good criteria for determining whether someone is allowed to carry on post. We've had Canadian Major General have a multiple negligent discharges in theater so it's not a 100% guarantee. I think some key positions other than MP should probably be armed for the sake of security and I don't think it's something that everyone should be able to do.

    For every weapon introduced on post you're increasing the potential for an incident and that is something that should be reasonably mitigated against, but as some have mentioned there are also advantages and those should be weighed in as well.
    Last edited by IntelTrooper; 02-11-2011 at 04:30 PM. Reason: Improper use of an indefinite article
    "The status quo is not sustainable. All of DoD needs to be placed in a large bag and thoroughly shaken. Bureaucracy and micromanagement kill."
    -- Ken White


    "With a plan this complex, nothing can go wrong." -- Schmedlap

    "We are unlikely to usefully replicate the insights those unencumbered by a military staff college education might actually have." -- William F. Owen

  9. #69
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    That's actually not a bad idea...at least as far as the issue of whether or not anyone (for example a retiree visiting the commissary) can carry on post. Doesn't fix the issue of whether soldiers are allowed to do so.

    I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I submit that every soldier should be issued an M11 pistol and a concealment holster and required to qualify with it. On post and off duty carry become mandatory. It's no longer a CCW issue, but rather a force protection issue. No different than making every soldier carry a weapon on the FOB.

    I'm not all that confident that the rent-a-cops do much to keep military facilities secure. Seems to me a second line of defense of trained, armed soldiers will do a hell of a lot more to make them hard targets.
    No flame here. Substitute M16/M4/Galil/Tavor for M11 and this seems roughly the Israeli approach. All combat arms soldiers, and many support soldiers, are required to take their rifle and one or two loaded magazines whenerver they leave the base including home on pass.

  10. #70
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Somebody say accidental discharge. Redneck 911 call


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja-dg89wr-s

  11. #71
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Copperhead,
    Thanks for a better detailed post than your previous !

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    I, too, am a combat veteran, lifelong shooter, own and carry guns and I am an NRA member as well.

    So what?
    Good point, similar to my distaste with flying the Second Amendment flag vs stating something of substance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein own guns and have permits to carry concealed…’nuff said.
    Don't know them personally, have no real desire to listen to politicians who purport to hold both the NRA card and spout...could care less too.


    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    The way you simply dismiss the 2A/RKBA argument is far more telling when it comes to your credibility regarding the issue of gun ownership; whether on post or elsewhere. Furthermore, being military or law enforcement doesn’t make any of us all that special…where I live you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting someone who is either current or prior military/LE. It doesn’t make me (or you) any more or less qualified to comment on this thread.

    Perhaps you consider my posts to be a dismissal of the Second Amendment where I try not to mask things and hop on that soap box. I'm of the opinion that it is little more than a crutch vs stating and backing up one's opinion with facts. Because this current thread concerns concealed carry on a military installation vis-à-vis what is permitted off-base in Texas, who else would be more qualified to discuss the subject ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    Back to original point of this thread…

    The two points I made in my earlier post were that I was frustrated with the notion that we can’t trust soldiers to handle weapons safely and with the surprising number of military and LE personnel (albeit a minority) who are opposed to the idea of the right to own and carry guns as an individual right but rather as something that should only belong to a protected class of citizens of which they are always a part.
    Who else should then be making this relatively significant decision? Yet another politician instead of the military that have to live with what comes next. I think those that are opposed to the idea have been up front with why.

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    I also notice a certain inconsistency in the argument that on the one hand “we (military/LE) are special” while on the other hand “stupid privates” can’t be trusted not to shoot themselves or others in a drunken orgy of destruction in the barracks on any given day; as if “stupid privates” are even LESS qualified to own and carry firearms than their civilian counterparts. Which one is it?
    I think I made it quite clear that most of the nut cases were not stupid privates. In fact, I argued that rank and age was not nearly enough to gauge responsible firearms use.

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    Finally, I am very uncomfortable with this tendency to lump military and law enforcement personnel together. We are very, very different. The fact that many in LE are former military does not change this.
    We are different. But, I don't know anyone else that has sufficient background on concealed carry on a military installation and I could care less what Chuck thinks.
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  12. #72
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default And no flame here either

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    No flame here. Substitute M16/M4/Galil/Tavor for M11 and this seems roughly the Israeli approach. All combat arms soldiers, and many support soldiers, are required to take their rifle and one or two loaded magazines whenerver they leave the base including home on pass.
    In fact I second that thought as it has been my beef we are considering permitting concealed carry without training in the use of a sidearm.
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  13. #73
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IntelTrooper View Post
    I don't know how relevant to the discussion this is, or whether it will change any opinions, but a couple weeks ago here on the Monterey Peninsula we had a captain (non-Navy type) who managed to discharge his concealed, personal weapon in class. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

    If something were to be instituted, I don't think rank, age, or time in service would necessarily be good criteria for determining whether someone is allowed to carry on post. We've had Canadian Major General have a multiple negligent discharges in theater so it's not a 100% guarantee. I think some key positions other than MP should probably be armed for the sake of security and I don't think it's something that everyone should be able to do.

    For every weapon introduced on post you're increasing the potential for an incident and that is something that should be reasonably mitigated against, but as some have mentioned there are also advantages and those should be weighed in as well.
    Agree competence, not rank, is the more important critieria. But I think there is the assumption on the part of some that if one is not an MP/LEO they are automatically either or both incompetent or untrustworthy when it comes to firearms. That is both wrong and unamerican IMHO.

    RE: incidents. I propose it would take an awful lot of ND incidents to rack up the total of 13 dead and 40 wounded that happened at Fort Hood in 10 minutes in NOV 2009 (even in Redneck areas )

  14. #74
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    Don't know them personally, have no real desire to listen to politicians who purport to hold both the NRA card and spout...could care less too.
    Stan, you don't want to know these people, they eat Tofu and other stuff, they might even be.............Zombies

  15. #75
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    But I think there is the assumption on the part of some that if one is not an MP/LEO they are automatically either or both incompetent or untrustworthy when it comes to firearms. That is both wrong and unamerican IMHO.
    Not too sure about being un-American as that presupposes some sort or norms which we obviously don't have. We are also taking about concealed weapons which, in my opinion is a sidearm. Other than specific MOSs, which I believe I was clear about earlier, most soldiers are not trained to use sidearms and certainly not trained to employ a concealed weapon. Probably why a seasoned LEO is a credible source herein.

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    RE: incidents. I propose it would take an awful lot of ND incidents to rack up the total of 13 dead and 40 wounded that happened at Fort Hood in 10 minutes in NOV 2009 (even in Redneck areas )
    I would like nothing more to agree with you, but my 23 years tells me otherwise.
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  16. #76
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Stan, you don't want to know these people, they eat Tofu and other stuff, they might even be.............Zombies
    And they are active members of the NRA with gun permits

    Just googled Diane (really had no clue who she is). Jeez, she was hot back in the day
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  17. #77
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    And they are active members of the NRA with gun permits
    Stan, just to be clear, I never said they were NRA members...in fact, quite the opposite.

  18. #78
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    Not too sure about being un-American as that presupposes some sort or norms which we obviously don't have. We are also taking about concealed weapons which, in my opinion is a sidearm. Other than specific MOSs, which I believe I was clear about earlier, most soldiers are not trained to use sidearms and certainly not trained to employ a concealed weapon. Probably why a seasoned LEO is a credible source herein.



    I would like nothing more to agree with you, but my 23 years tells me otherwise.

    To say that LEOs are automatically competent with firearms and non LEO are automatically incompetent with firearms, short of some objective measure, seems to be a "some are more equal than others" approach and thus unamerican IMHO.

    Stan - I imagine you are a great guy but if I get the honor to meet you, pardon me if I stand a couple of meters away. You seem to have had a lot of bad stuff happen within bursting radius of you when you were on active duty. In my double digits of years, been around a couple of NDs but, thank God, never had anyone I knew injured by one.

  19. #79
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperhead View Post
    Stan, just to be clear, I never said they were NRA members...in fact, quite the opposite.
    Sorry, but it was not a hit on you in any way shape or form.

    When you get to know Slap (and me) a little better, you'll understand

    We can always disagree. It's that, or the next thread we post together in will be real short... But we'll all be happy

    Regards, Stan
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  20. #80
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Hey DVC,

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    To say that LEOs are automatically competent with firearms and non LEO are automatically incompetent with firearms, short of some objective measure, seems to be a "some are more equal than others" approach and thus unamerican IMHO.
    OK, I'll give it a break
    So long as everybody completes the Army's (or equivalent service's) close quarters marksmanship course (and the heck with it, the LEOs all have to requalify too)

    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    Stan - I imagine you are a great guy but if I get the honor to meet you, pardon me if I stand a couple of meters away. You seem to have had a lot of bad stuff happen within bursting radius of you when you were on active duty. In my double digits of years, been around a couple of NDs but, thank God, never had anyone I knew injured by one.
    According to the FBI's safe distance tables you may want to make that 300 meters, deminer's helmet with visor, ear plugs optional and decent flack jacket

    Take care... I'm off to dinner with my better half !
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

Similar Threads

  1. Vietnam collection (lessons plus)
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 06-27-2014, 04:40 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-14-2010, 02:38 PM
  3. Conference on Professional Military Education
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 10:58 PM
  4. Iraqis Adapt British Military Academy as Model
    By SWJED in forum The Whole News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-27-2006, 09:16 AM
  5. Better Jointness Needed Between Military and Diplomats
    By SWJED in forum Government Agencies & Officials
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2006, 11:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •