Huh?

[meltoine]

www.stripes.com/congress-pushes-to-allow-troops-to-be-armed-on-military-bases-1.358555

^o)

I'm ragey at these lunatics using the deaths of four Marines to advance their crazy cakes agenda. 

[meltoine]

Jul 17, 2015 20:09:13 GMT -5 Stan said:

I'm so scared for H right now. This job was supposed to be safe. But I wouldn't want him walking around with our gun and he's qualified on it. And guns on base should be as insanely regulated as they are.

I can see the desire/need to keep a firearm in a recruiting station and make sure that all the recruiters stationed there are qualified on it. 

But on base? No. Just no. There are heavily armed guards at the gate. The only thing that will come of allowing guns on base is more accidents. 

[dcn]

That is a terrible idea.

[amaristella]

It sounds to me like there is no especially good reason to change current on base policy as it is written.

I think maybe I've had my head in the sand lately about all the details. No real idea what the circumstances have been of this trend(?) of incidents.

I recognize that recruiting centers can be all over the place and not necessarily near an active base, so I'm not really sure what is the best solution for that situation. So obviously you can't just reassign some MP from base to come over see the recruiting stations for a while. Perhaps it would help to build alliances with local law enforcement that way the roles remain separate. Recruiters can focus on recruiting and law enforcement can focus on identifying and dealing with threats?

I mean, if our country can successfully post a sheriff or police on most high school campuses it doesn't seem like that much of a challenge.

[amaristella]

This sucks. Supply Corps is a small community.

www.navsup.navy.mil/navsup/news/sc_flashes/056-15

[meltoine]

Jul 20, 2015 19:39:00 GMT -5 amaristella said:

This sucks. Supply Corps is a small community.

www.navsup.navy.mil/navsup/news/sc_flashes/056-15