NAS Pensacola shooting leads Navy instructor pilots to tell top brass: 'Arm us'

[WillBrink]

Was it at the entrance or inside? Someone I know works on a Naval Base and the gate security is outsourced but everything inside the gate is Navy MP. So basically to enter you're dealing with a security company. Once you enter you deal with MPs

I don't know the answer to that one, but if a US military base needs to outsource their security, they're doing it wrong in my view.

[SomeOtherGuy]

A US military base outsourced their security for the base.
Let that sink in.

It totally fits with how the military has been run since 2002, and the general state of the federal empire.

We're in late imperial collapse guys, the main question is which horse gets named a senator first. (Hillary doesn't count, she's a donkey/burro/___.)

[Grand58742]

It totally fits with how the military has been run since 2002, and the general state of the federal empire.

We're in late imperial collapse guys, the main question is which horse gets named a senator first. (Hillary doesn't count, she's a donkey/burro/___.)

That also predates 2002.

Check out the A-76 studies they did

[yoni]

It is simple, if I remember correctly we have now had 2 terror attacks on basis in the USA. I am willing to bet none of the command staff of either base paid a price for these attacks.

On the other hand if you let non service members carry pistols and they had an incident, you know peoples careers would be trashed.

In Israel we have had some attacks on military bases and when even non combat troops didn't respond correctly heads rolled.

Having said that, it was a long time ago. Where today we had in the last year a co-ed infantry unit attacked outside of the base. Many of the soldiers ran away. The commander a Colonel, spent more time posting on the units Facebook page fashion tips and flower arranging.

When I commanded an anti terror unit, I spent my time building killers. I never once gave a fashion type or had a conversation about flower arranging.

Not all people in the service are warriors, they are all needed. But not all warriors.

[Firefly]

Next question, this may seem gauche but why again are we training Saudis?

Why do we always do this? If they got money for planes then they can figure it out.

[yoni]

Next question, this may seem gauche but why again are we training Saudis?

Why do we always do this? If they got money for planes then they can figure it out.

To keep the Russians from doing it. Cold War mentality. But Putin has said the USA didn't win the cold war because it isn't over.

[Firefly]

To keep the Russians from doing it. Cold War mentality. But Putin has said the USA didn't win the cold war because it isn't over.

If true then why NOT let them go to the Russians and backshoot them and die in fiery plane crashes over there?

I mean I’m not seeing too many downsides

[Grand58742]

Not all people in the service are warriors, they are all needed. But not all warriors.

That's a mindset that can and should change.

I'm "old school" USAF. I was taught our mission, in basic terms, was to kill people and break their toys.

I feel that's something our military has forgotten outside of the combat arms.

[CESwartz07]

I live in Pensacola. I work for one of the local law enforcement agencies. I can tell you one of the problems that base faces is it is an open base. Civilians can drive in with just a peek at an ID by the security guards working the gate. It’s because of the Museum, lighthouse, and other publicly open sites at the base.

Also of note, nearby Hurlburt Field allows workers to at least bring their concealed firearms on base, but they have to be secured in the vehicle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[armtx77]

I will say this in light of my former profession as a .mil LEO...

Many bases, USAF in particular, have damn good cops and DoD Police on duty and ready to go at a moment's notice. Reaction times are under five minutes for most incidents and probably less in such a situation. Fort Hood actually had a decent response time by the DoD Guard (Kim Munley) that arrived on scene first since she had been in that area. However, the damage had been done already. Why?

First off, because the military by and large loves to concentrate large amounts of people in confined spaces (briefings, processing, ceremonies, etc) without proper protection. I.E. no armed guards nearby or assigned. Should be an easy fix to have someone already armed, trained and proficient helping with force protection, right?

Wrong. The military, by and large, doesn't like for its members to be walking around with firearms because "OMG! SOMEONE HAS A WEAPON AND THAT'S UNSAFE!" Emphasis on small arms training is generally relegated to pre-deployment/deployment times and heaven forbid if they actually spent some time and effort into keeping a bunch of non-traditional combat arms folks trained AND with weapons nearby. Maybe?

Nope, let's keep them locked away in an armory somewhere else on base because heaven forbid we actually buy a safe or some form of weapon locker and keep firearms in work areas where they just might be needed. Because we have cops on base, right?

And they're minutes away when seconds count. I know this for a fact because I lived it for twenty years. Furthermore, non-combat roles that never see a weapon with the exception of deployment, think of carrying a firearm as a nuisance and have zero proficiency with it. That might involve actually spending money, time and training to ensure every Soldier, Sailor, Marine and Airman is an individual force protection asset and initial responder for times like these. Commanders don't want that. Why? It can't ever happen here...

Until it does. And do we change? Nope. The situation will continue and more unnecessary deaths will continue on military bases because:

A. They lack the funding to train even a small percentage of military members to be armed in the workplace
B. They lack the desire to have even a small percentage of military members trained to be armed in the workplace
C. They lack the weapons to actually have a small percentage of military members trained to be armed in the workplace
D. It won't affect them until it actually happens, then wait a couple of months and go back to what they were doing before
E. Frankly, military leadership doesn't trust their subordinates outside of a combat zone to carry weapons in the workplace unless they are LEOs, SOF or going to/from the range

Most every base out there worldwide, save hostile fire zones, is a potential Disneyland for an active shooter. Does the military change?

Nope.

That sheds a lot of light on it for me.

Thanks