Now, after reading your posts I understand why some were deleted.
Please feel free to enlighten me.
Now, after reading your posts I understand why some were deleted.
What about when your duties take you off post? Stick to what you know Kut.
I was thinking about your post above. When I was going thru old photos of my father when he was on active duty during 1941-1945 there were multiple pics in his scrapbook while he was at home on leave and he was dressed in his military uniform. Guess, perhaps either he didn't own any civilian clothes OR he was proud to be seen in uniform. When I returned from Southeast Asia and traveling home thru Seatac I recall I also wore my uniform going thru the airport and then home. Although I believe my father in uniform in the 1940's was viewed with more respect than I was I'm the 1960's, regardless, I think the wearing of the uniform was/is appropriate while not on a military base. In fact, I think it's rather sad AND a statement of our times that wearing a military uniform results in individuals being specifically targeted. Therefore, I don't quite grasp your apparent concept of limiting service men/women to wearing their uniforms only on post or (on duty).
I'm don't understand how implementation of your viewpoint would have provided any degree of protection to the Marines recruiters (who were "on duty" ) at the site where they were murdered. As I interpret your last sentence you are suggesting the Marine recruiters should, at best, only have had access to a military issued firearm while on post, and since they were not on post when they were murderd they should not be armed, either with a military issue or EDC weapon. The alternative would be to allow recruiting only on a military base I suppose.
Sorry, not buy'in you're solution as a method ensuring the ability of our servicemen and women to protect themselves. Perhaps as a member of law enforcement ( which I interpret you are from your sign on name and posts ) you believe that the fewer guns in "civilian hands" the safer law enforcement officers are. I' vet not seen you express that opinion previously so only take this as an observation and an attempt on my part to try to rationalize your position as stated above.
Back when I was in the Army as an MP I carried my issued 1911 while on duty but couldn't carry a personal weapon when off duty. When I lived on post I had to keep my personal firearms locked in our company's armory. If I wanted to take my gun of post I had to sign it in and out of the armory but wasn't allowed to carry it on post. This was back in the 70's, I imagine it's still the same way today.
I'll take the heat for not being clear. I have no issue with off post soldiers working in a military capacity, being armed. So yes, recruiters, guys in convoys, etc should be armed (if they wish). However, rocking your uniform off duty, or not in a military capacity, should not be done. If we're having a uproar about how safe soldiers are, and how they're being specifically targeted, then let's lower the possibility by cracking down on lax adherence to uniform policy.
View attachment 40110
This embarrasses me. Representatives of the most powerful military in the history of this planet have to be guarded by some dumpy rent a cop. Hell the K-9 is embarrassed too. As far as "Officer Mullet" goes, WHISKEY-TANGO-FOXTROT, OVER??!!
View attachment 40110
This embarrasses me. Representatives of the most powerful military in the history of this planet have to be guarded by some dumpy rent a cop. Hell the K-9 is embarrassed too. As far as "Officer Mullet" goes, WHISKEY-TANGO-FOXTROT, OVER??!!
I think that's a chick
It sends the wrong message, particularly to those who would do us harm. That makes me mad. If you're going to look that unprofessional while in any uniform while providing security to professionals? Yeah, you'll catch it from me.I understand and agree with your frustration, but your cheap shot at a guy doing a job he was hired to do, just because he doesn't look all that "cool," is misplaced and really doesn't help your case.
Be mad at the people who necessitated a rent-a-cop, not at the rent-a-cop himself.
It sends the wrong message, particularly to those who would do us harm. That makes me mad. If you're going to look that unprofessional while in any uniform while providing security to professionals? Yeah, you'll catch it from me.
It's good to see you focus on substantive issues.