Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine Barracks

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine Barracks

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could’ve Cleared that Building,’ Son at Navy Yard Told Dad
    September 17, 2013 - 5:24 PM, By Matt Vespa

    "I know a lot of people are concerned about guns these days, but you know if everybody had arms, then there wouldn't be these problems. "My son was at Marine Barracks -- at the Navy Yard yesterday - and they had weapons with them, but they didn't have ammunition. And they said, 'We were trained, and if we had the ammunition, we could've cleared that building.' Only three people had been shot at that time, and they could've stopped the rest of it."

    The Navy Yard shooting brings up the legitimate issue of carrying - and using - firearms on military installations.

    http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/matt-v...-yard-told-dad
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Red Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eastern VA, with too many people
    Posts
    404
    YEP!!! It so bothers me that these kids carry in foreign countries ready to go, and can't even protect themselves and others in their home state/country. They live and work together in "barracks" overseas, with guns at their side....What makes it so different here? Baffles me, and has for a long time..
    The Second Amendment is in place
    in case the politicians ignore the others

    A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    The only thing that stops a BG with a gun, is a GG with a gun.

    Signs and rules stop GGs. They don't stop BGs.

    So, GFZ, like elementary schools and (ironically) military installations, will only see guns in the hands of BGs and VERY late-arriving police.

    Therefore, BGs will shoot up these GFZs until those late-arriving police finally kill them in the blaze of glory the BGs are looking for--after the carnage has piled up.

    Thanks a lot, you "gun-controlling" morons.

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    The only thing that stops a BG with a gun, is a GG with a gun.

    Signs and rules stop GGs. They don't stop BGs.

    So, GFZ, like elementary schools and (ironically) military installations, will only see guns in the hands of BGs and VERY late-arriving police.

    Therefore, BGs will shoot up these GFZs until those late-arriving police finally kill them in the blaze of glory the BGs are looking for--after the carnage has piled up.

    Thanks a lot, you "gun-controlling" morons.
    Absolutely spot on correct.

    One has to wonder how and why the other side doesn't see this but the answer is as clear as the nose on one's face. To them, it matters not how many people are sacrificed on the alter of their agenda. It's that agenda that is paramount to everything and to hell with reality and facts.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    A tragedy made worse by Diane F calling for more gun control discussion - on the back of this incident like a tick on blood.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690
    I think the order to disarm our soldiers originates from Bush Sr., but I could be wrong. I'll dig a bit deeper.
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    I think the order to disarm our soldiers originates from Bush Sr., but I could be wrong. I'll dig a bit deeper.
    It must go back WAY further than that. I entered the AF in 1973. No carry on any base I have been assigned to since that time.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    I think the order to disarm our soldiers originates from Bush Sr., but I could be wrong. I'll dig a bit deeper.
    It started with Nixon and Clinton put the nail in it.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...itary-gun-free

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-base-gun-ban/
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    I think the order to disarm our soldiers originates from Bush Sr., but I could be wrong. I'll dig a bit deeper.
    Judge Andrew Napolitano weighs in gun free zones at military bases
    The question of why military members aren’t armed on base garnered attention back in November 2009 when Army Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at Ft. Hood and killed 13 people. He was sentenced to death on August 28. Now, nearly four years later, many are asking the same question.

    So what’s the answer? It appears this “gun-free zone” type policy can actually be traced back to Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5210.56, signed into effect in February 1992 by Donald J. Atwood, deputy secretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush. . . .

    It looks like the Clinton administration may have simply reissued these orders in March 1993.
    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2013/0...hs-in-gun.html
    Last edited by Nightmare; 09-18-2013 at 12:09 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690
    That's what I heard. I know Ft. Carson had a gun restriction in '86 when I was visiting my sister and her old man (he was a tank mechie, I think).
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

  11. #11
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    Even when I was deployed to Kosovo we had a mag in the well, and nothing in the chamber. On a post the only people with guns, and ammo are the MPs/SP that are actually on duty. In 21 years the only time I had a round in the chamber was when I was at the qualification range. For that the ammo needs to be ordered months in advance. I probably have more ammo in my bedroom than what is readily available on most posts. This is why mass shootings happen in GFZ's, they know they are "safer". Since I retired I can carry locked and loaded more often now.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    It must go back WAY further than that. I entered the AF in 1973. No carry on any base I have been assigned to since that time.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    None of my bases either ... but I could crawl over any bombs that I wanted to.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Judge Andrew Napolitano weighs in gun free zones at military bases


    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2013/0...hs-in-gun.html
    Judge Napolitano did not do his research very well. Again, I joined the AF in 1973. Not one base that I have ever been assigned has allowed carry. None.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Judge Napolitano did not do his research very well. Again, I joined the AF in 1973. Not one base that I have ever been assigned has allowed carry. None.
    USAF and Navy bases have always been the most restrictive when it comes to guns, but the Army wasn't far behind them.

    What the Clinton order did was standardize things across the services, then after Hood in 2009, DoD standardized it some more.

    Before that, installation commanders had a lot of lattitude based on the unique needs of their installation. Many Army posts had public roads through them, and sections that were open for public recreation and hunting. I know that in 2005, I researched the regulations at Fort Knox because my son was graduating OSUT there, and they allowed licensed carry by visitors, just not inside any buildings.

    In typical bureaucratic top-down control freak fashion, the outcome of the Navy Yard shootings will be even further restrictions.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Here's a clue: don't join the military.

    I served long ago but I would never enlist today. the military is now being used to control us...overtly.

    I don't like seeing active members in fatigues off base, walking among the civilian population. And the guys don't even know why this is an issue.

    I chewed out a Capt. the other day .. in fatigues, shoes not shined, looked like a bum.

    And since congress broke the line that soldiers can now operate against US citizens, I take a dim view of soldiers in uniform (not dress uniforms) walking amongst us.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Eeyore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I chewed out a Capt. the other day .. in fatigues, shoes not shined, looked like a bum.
    Better check your meds, I think you had a flashback. Fatigues went out in the early- to mid-80s; BDUs were the utility uniform until about 2005, when they were replaced by the current plethora of uniforms. Boots are now suede--polishing would be highly inadvisable.
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  17. #17
    Regular Member MagiK_SacK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    VA Beach, VA
    Posts
    264

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Eeyore View Post
    Better check your meds, I think you had a flashback. Fatigues went out in the early- to mid-80s; BDUs were the utility uniform until about 2005, when they were replaced by the current plethora of uniforms. Boots are now suede--polishing would be highly inadvisable.
    What branch are you referring to? I ask because in the Navy the suede are optional and majority of Sailors choose the leather boots over the suede.
    .45 ACP - Because shooting twice is silly

    A cop pulled me over and said, "Papers..." So I said "Scissors, I win!" and drove away.

  18. #18
    Regular Member MagiK_SacK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    VA Beach, VA
    Posts
    264

    Judge Andrew Napolitano was on the right track

    Judge A.Napolitano was on the right track with DODD 5210.56. I think 'blame' was placed on Bush Sr. becuase that was the earliest (1992) copy of that Directive that could be found.

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a272176.pdf

    The Directive was somewhat recently revised (2011):

    http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/c...df/521056p.pdf

    There is an older copy dated 1969 which I would imagine contains instruction that bans personal weapons on military bases. Problem is that I cannot find a copy of it, I just know it exists through this search:

    http://www.dtic.mil/CanceledIssuances/search

    **If the site pulls up a blank search just search 5210.56 in the Issuance Number block and it will be the bottom result**

    I kept hearing about this so called "1993 Clinton Issued Order" but no link to what that order was. I search and searched and found nothing. I looked at all the EOs he issued in '93, nothing. I read through the "Brady Bill", nothing. As far as I could tell Clinton did not order anything relating to firearms and military bases. It wasn't until I found the following article on 'The Blaze' that I believe I was lead in the right direction.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...lintons-fault/

    If you pay close attention to the signers of the two issues of the DODD 5210.56 the signers both were the Deputy Secretary of Defense. The DEPSECDEF is a position that appointed by POTUS, with the consent of the Senate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ary_of_Defense

    He is basically the right hand man to the SECDEF. Although it is a position appointed by POTUS, IMHO, it should be safe to say they act on guidance/approval of the SECDEF and not POTUS. So the decision to carry on a ban of personal firearms on base was more than likely one that was made without approval/guidance of POTUS. It is my opinion that placing blame on any president for review/revision/re-issuance of any Directive at the DEPSECDEF/SECDEF level is not fair blame.

    I think finding the root of this is finding a copy of the 1969 Issue of DODD 5210.56. If anybody finds a copy of it please PM me, this is something I am very interested in.
    .45 ACP - Because shooting twice is silly

    A cop pulled me over and said, "Papers..." So I said "Scissors, I win!" and drove away.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Eeyore View Post
    Better check your meds, I think you had a flashback. Fatigues went out in the early- to mid-80s; BDUs were the utility uniform until about 2005, when they were replaced by the current plethora of uniforms. Boots are now suede--polishing would be highly inadvisable.
    He always has a story that smells of BS.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Again, the regulations may have been standardized to some extent under Bush I, but every base to which I have been assigned since I entered the AF in 1973 has not allowed carry. There was a further push at standardization after Ft. Hood.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  21. #21
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by MagiK_SacK View Post
    Judge A.Napolitano was on the right track with DODD 5210.56. I think 'blame' was placed on Bush Sr. becuase that was the earliest (1992) copy of that Directive that could be found.

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a272176.pdf

    The Directive was somewhat recently revised (2011):

    http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/c...df/521056p.pdf

    There is an older copy dated 1969 which I would imagine contains instruction that bans personal weapons on military bases. Problem is that I cannot find a copy of it, I just know it exists through this search:

    http://www.dtic.mil/CanceledIssuances/search

    **If the site pulls up a blank search just search 5210.56 in the Issuance Number block and it will be the bottom result**

    I kept hearing about this so called "1993 Clinton Issued Order" but no link to what that order was. I search and searched and found nothing. I looked at all the EOs he issued in '93, nothing. I read through the "Brady Bill", nothing. As far as I could tell Clinton did not order anything relating to firearms and military bases. It wasn't until I found the following article on 'The Blaze' that I believe I was lead in the right direction.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...lintons-fault/

    If you pay close attention to the signers of the two issues of the DODD 5210.56 the signers both were the Deputy Secretary of Defense. The DEPSECDEF is a position that appointed by POTUS, with the consent of the Senate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ary_of_Defense

    He is basically the right hand man to the SECDEF. Although it is a position appointed by POTUS, IMHO, it should be safe to say they act on guidance/approval of the SECDEF and not POTUS. So the decision to carry on a ban of personal firearms on base was more than likely one that was made without approval/guidance of POTUS. It is my opinion that placing blame on any president for review/revision/re-issuance of any Directive at the DEPSECDEF/SECDEF level is not fair blame.

    I think finding the root of this is finding a copy of the 1969 Issue of DODD 5210.56. If anybody finds a copy of it please PM me, this is something I am very interested in.
    The Secretary of Defense is also appointed by the president.

    Pretty sure that the disarming of soldiers on military bases started due to soldiers shooting each other on base.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by MagiK_SacK View Post
    Judge A.Napolitano was on the right track with DODD 5210.56. [ ... ] I think finding the root of this is finding a copy of the 1969 Issue of DODD 5210.56. If anybody finds a copy of it please PM me, this is something I am very interested in.
    Thanks for all of your efforts, better than droning on about 95 personal anecdotes, eye-did-this and eye-did-that. Two anecdotes do not data make.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  23. #23
    Regular Member MagiK_SacK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    VA Beach, VA
    Posts
    264

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    The Secretary of Defense is also appointed by the president.

    Pretty sure that the disarming of soldiers on military bases started due to soldiers shooting each other on base.
    If you re-read my post you will notice that I mentioned that about POTUS.

    That may be the case but what I am hoping to find is when the disarming happened, what directive did it, and who signed that directive.
    .45 ACP - Because shooting twice is silly

    A cop pulled me over and said, "Papers..." So I said "Scissors, I win!" and drove away.

  24. #24
    Regular Member MagiK_SacK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    VA Beach, VA
    Posts
    264

    ‘If We Had the Ammunition, We Could've Cleared that Building,' Son at Marine ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Thanks for all of your efforts, better than droning on about 95 personal anecdotes, eye-did-this and eye-did-that. Two anecdotes do not data make.
    Your welcome. As I mentioned I take great interest in this topic. It is absolutely pathetic to me that when something like a 'mass shooting' happens our own military can't properly respond due to being disarmed. I mean what does this say to the world about our ability to respond to an actual attack on a military base?

    I don't mind placing blame, but lets place blame where blame is due. Not where it is convenient.
    .45 ACP - Because shooting twice is silly

    A cop pulled me over and said, "Papers..." So I said "Scissors, I win!" and drove away.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690
    AFAIC once they are trained in BCT/AIT, they are good enough to open carry on base while on duty. Off duty, that's their call.
    What good is an unarmed soldier? A well trained soldier indeed can do a lot, but I'd rather that they are armed.
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

Posting Permissions

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