"If we'd have had ammunition, we could have cleared that building"

[cmhbob]

Wonder if its a legit fact that every shooting since 1950 with 3 or more deaths has been in a gun free zone.........

No, it's not. Not even close. Think of all the family murder-suicides that happened over the last couple of years alone.

 

[reddog1]

It's just disgusting that our men and women EVER have to say....

"If we'd have had ammunition, we could have cleared that building"

 

[Surveyor1653]

I get the larger point everyone is trying to make, but bear in mind that the article linked only says that there were Marines at the Barracks who had weapons. That's it. It doesn't reference any context related to why they had them, in what capacity they were serving, nothing. There's no mention of them just standing around in some official capacity with empty weapons. It also doesn't say how they "had" them. Were they sitting around the dayroom playing Call of Duty with M4s body-slung? Probably not. Were the weapons locked in the arms room's racks where access, at best, would have been delayed well past the point of law enforcement showing up? Probably.

Now, as far as lawful carry of POWs on-post I'm for it. Stupid rules often breed stupid results. Prohibitions on lawful carry of firearms on-post are stupid rules. Those in uniform and the civilians who support them deserve better options than shelter/die-in-place.

 

[TerryMiller]

Or do you think this is planting the seed for the .gov to be buying all the ammo so that the typical consumer has "panic like" access to it?

They said he didn't have ammo. That likely means they weren't allowed to have it, not that there was none to be had. However the way it is worded can be construed to mean the .gov needs to be buying more because these poor guys had none.

They had guns, just no ammo. If you cant limit the guns, limit the ammo.

I'm not sure it is accurate to state that that there is ammo but they just don't get it. I know of one person in the National Guard that says that their unit hasn't "qualified" in some time because they don't have the ammo to do that. Now, I suspect, but don't know for sure, that they have some ammo, but not enough to allow everyone to qualify at the ranges.

 

[Toney]

Was on a ftx in Arkansas the year all the Cubans was there. Got the word to remove our blank adapters and unload the blanks from our mags. Was 300 rioting Cubans coming our way.

We didn't have bayonets! !!

 

[TedKennedy]

I was on active duty at NAS Millington just north of Memphis, TN when Dr. King was killed. They rounded up as many Marines as they could find, issued us M-14's, mags, bayonets and helmets and took us to downtown Memphis, where there was rioting. They stationed a Marine at each intersection, instructed us to fix bayonets and insert EMPTY mags and keep the peace.

We looked like we were ready for battle, but were almost defenseless. There were people on top of buildings firing live rounds at the rioters, and it was scarey as hell!

How many rioters did they shoot?

 

[Bluewing]

All the Military needs to do is borrow ammo from Homeland SICKurity.

 

[cichlid-dave]

I remember during the Rodney king L.A. Riots that NG units had their m16's taken away by the local friendly neighborhood street non gang bangers.

 

[dennishoddy]

I get the larger point everyone is trying to make, but bear in mind that the article linked only says that there were Marines at the Barracks who had weapons. That's it. It doesn't reference any context related to why they had them, in what capacity they were serving, nothing. There's no mention of them just standing around in some official capacity with empty weapons. It also doesn't say how they "had" them. Were they sitting around the dayroom playing Call of Duty with M4s body-slung? Probably not. Were the weapons locked in the arms room's racks where access, at best, would have been delayed well past the point of law enforcement showing up? Probably.

That's the way it probably went down, as the Marines were supposed to be "peace keepers".

How in the fawk do you be a peace keeper if you don't have a means to keep the peace?

 

[SoonerP226]

My personal experience with this stupidity was when stationed at Ft. Cambell Ky in the early 70's. We were assigned to patrol the fence perimeter of the nuclear artillery warhead storage area at night. We were issued three live rounds for our M-16's. I didn't understand then, and I don't understand now.

I have a late friend who could top that. When he was in the Navy (in basic, I think), they took a bunch of them out to a field to qualify on the M1 Garand, the 1911, and the Tommygun. He got to fire the Garand, but before he got to the others, it started raining, and they had to un-ass the AO, lest the Navy buses get stuck in the mud. When he got his qualification papers, lo and behold, the Navy certified him as qualified on all three.

Fast forward a few years, and he was temporarily stationed at a Navy base on the west coast (I think he said it was Treasure Island, but I could be mistaken). Everybody pulled guard duty, and the picket he pulled was high-security (as in, if you didn't show up at the next post when you were supposed to, they came looking for you in jeeps with guns dawn). He said he showed up at the armory to draw his weapons, and what did they give him but a 1911 and a Thompson.

As I recall the story, he tried to tell the Chief that he didn't know how to use them, but the Chief said the Navy said he was qualified, and he ended up walking his picket with two firearms that he had no clue how to operate. He said was very glad that the Soviets didn't choose that night to invade, 'cause he'd have been in deep doo.

When he got back to the armory, he had to have the Chief give him a crash course, because he didn't even know how to clear the two firearms...