After the murder of four Marines and a U.S. sailor at a recruiting station, the smart people immediately got to work thinking about how to improve security. I know the first thing that came to all of our minds was not the knee-jerk "Hey, these guys have been trained in weapons, right; suppose they carried some?" but the much more sensible proposal to close some recruiting stations and advise recruiters not to wear their uniforms at others.
Via Maggie's Farm, which is experiencing technical difficulties this week.
4 comments:
The officers corps is worried about the suicide problem. In fairness, suicide kills a lot more of us than ISIS-inspired terrorists -- 22 a day according to the number I keep hearing. Increasing the number of servicemembers carrying pistols is thought to increase the opportunity for a moment of weakness to combine with immediate access to a method. Many times, if you get through the moment, you'll be OK later.
Still, my sense is that arming them is the right thing to do. We have to have purpose in life for it to be worth living. If you've joined the Marines, your purpose in life is to defend the people and things that you love. If you want to destroy morale, tell soldiers and Marines that they can't be trusted to actually do the thing they've enlisted to do. Tell them they can't be trusted with the tools. Tell them the uniform has to be hidden away, and donned only in safe places.
1) the 22 a day figure is based on a flawed study, so the number itself was questionable.
2) the vast majority of that 22/day figure was veterans over the age of 60, not freshly returned wartime vets.
3) the figure contained almost NO active duty military whatsoever. In fact, the suicide rate for active duty military is BELOW the national average for their age group.
4) Recruiters are not first term soldiers, sailors, airmen, or Marines. They are all NCOs who have all served at least one full term, and therefore hardly fresh-faced recruits with no maturity. In fact, I received a document stating that "The President of the United States has reposed special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities" of me when I was promoted to SGT. But apparently, I'm not to be trusted in my ability to carry a weapon for self-defense? Doesn't sound like there's actually ANY trust in the patriotism, valor, fidelity, or abilities of an NCO if that's the position the command is taking.
5) Failing to trust active duty servicemembers with weapons is probably the most infantalizing, stupid, cruel, and insulting thing I can possibly imagine. You're saying that you trust this servicemember enough to perform their job in wartime, and even make the ultimate sacrifice if duty calls for it, but that you cannot trust their judgment with a weapon other than in the field of combat? Frankly, I cannot print my actually response here, because I try to watch my language around the Hall. But suffice to say, I cordially invite the leadership at the Pentagon to go fornicate with themselves in the Devil's home.
Increasing the number of servicemembers carrying pistols is thought to increase the opportunity for a moment of weakness to combine with immediate access to a method.
This is like the argument about rape victims on US bases.
You're saying that you trust this servicemember enough to perform their job in wartime, and even make the ultimate sacrifice if duty calls for it, but that you cannot trust their judgment with a weapon other than in the field of combat?
You're just cannonfodder to the Democrat regime. Always have been, even before WWI.
Post a Comment