Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Maybe we should let US servicemen keep their weapons as a crime deterrent?

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Lately I've been reading a lot about crime and gun control, the crime rates --- things have just gotten out of hand.
Then I think about places like Switzerland, Sweden, Israel I think Canada still gives an option to let their out going troops buy their issued FN? Not really sure but they used too.At one time The Norwegian home guard used to keep their G3's at home, not any more but...

So anyway here we have this huge well trained pool of manpower who's already trained in the use of weapons and understands use of deadly force.

so why not tap the pool let them keep or buy their issued M16/M4 or M9 pistols, and give then carry permits. Even without pay I think a lot of Vet dad's like myself wouldn't mind volunteering for some kind of civil security force that protects our schools. I can see something like that making a huge dent in the chicago homicide rate.

Even if I have to use my own dime to attend training or other classes I'd do it. pretty sure lots of my brother and sisters in arms would too.

So what do you guys think? Bad idea good idea is it even worth a shot?
I think so.




posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   
If it was with regular training to keep up their skills and should they fail to keep up those skills then they get their state provided guns taken away



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by MajorMayhem
 


Have you seen the suicide rate for military personnel? Add to it the vet unemployment rate, the devastation on families that over ten years of war has caused and I'm thinking it's not such a great idea, but that's just me....



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Well OP, I am sure the men at Fort Hood would agree wholeheartedly. Those who weren't killed, unarmed and unable to defend themselves, anyway. It is more than a little insane, isn't it?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I don't mean this to be facetious or a slight against servicemen, but have you ever been out to a bar near a Marine Base? It's just not a good idea to give those guys authorization for deadly force in civilian matters, Jacksonville NC for example, would be like a Road Warrior sequel in about a week.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
John Needham

Ronald A. Gray

Robert Bales

PTSD related suicides on the rise

Maybe once returning soldiers have been cleared this is a viable option, though what's the difference between a soldier having an issued firearm and one he bought himself? Besides the cost to tax payers?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 

Perhaps that is a real good statement about the selection, training and retention of some in the military. As well as the tendency to be given Honorable discharges when that may not be appropriate in all cases ... more than a thing to paint all people in Uniform with.

Aside from that, there isn't a state in the nation where it's legal to handle a firearm after consuming alcohol and being intoxicated to my knowledge. That law is already covered, isn't it?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I think what I was trying to get at is probably closer to "Combat veterans WILL shoot you, cops MIGHT shoot you." Of course the difference is narrowing everyday, but the bar thing was probably not a good analogy on my part. Combat vets walking about in American cities with the authority to shoot people just doesn't sit right with me. I'm all about gun rights, but cops and military are a seperate entity for really good reasons and Katrina was a good example of the complete mess it makes when Posse Comitatus is suspended.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Garkinisswhat's the difference between a soldier having an issued firearm and one he bought himself? Besides the cost to tax payers?


Liability.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


'xactly. Thanks for getting my point.





edit on 31-1-2013 by Garkiniss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Yes people some of the military commit suicide they always have but hey they are good enough to go fight all those wars.

Standards for recruitment have been drastically reduced that is a fact there are quite a few who would have never made it in your fathers military or grandfathers



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMayhem
Lately I've been reading a lot about crime and gun control, the crime rates --- things have just gotten out of hand.
Then I think about places like Switzerland, Sweden, Israel I think Canada still gives an option to let their out going troops buy their issued FN? Not really sure but they used too.At one time The Norwegian home guard used to keep their G3's at home, not any more but...

So anyway here we have this huge well trained pool of manpower who's already trained in the use of weapons and understands use of deadly force.

so why not tap the pool let them keep or buy their issued M16/M4 or M9 pistols, and give then carry permits. Even without pay I think a lot of Vet dad's like myself wouldn't mind volunteering for some kind of civil security force that protects our schools. I can see something like that making a huge dent in the chicago homicide rate.

Even if I have to use my own dime to attend training or other classes I'd do it. pretty sure lots of my brother and sisters in arms would too.

So what do you guys think? Bad idea good idea is it even worth a shot?
I think so.


That seems like it would be a public relations nightmare. I can't imagine arming a bunch of vets and letting them go through the ghettos in Chicago and "policing" the area would end well. I mean, if you're going to do that, then you might as well just turn the army loose on the population.

I think that I'd rather their not be armed posse's or gangs roaming the streets in the interest of offering "protection" while maintaining some sort of legitimacy.

However, I don't think it's any worse letting veterans keep their guns than letting them buy their own guns. On the other hand, it might make it harder to keep the "army" guns off the streets.





new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join