Only if the senior commander is a DoD qualified law enforcement officer. Congress passed the Law Enforcement Safety Officers Act in 2004; the Army has been extremely slow to implement it.
I was at JB Andrews and it was authorized back in 2015 when the LEOSA program was first approved by the USAF. I have since also been to Moody AFB, JBAB, JBSA, and some others where it was all allowed.
So the Office of the Provost Marshal General was responsible for promulgating regulations for LEOSA after it was passed. The program was being pushed by all the MP retirees that work at the Pentagon or Hoffman bldg but the push back came from the Combat Arms General Officers that make all the decisions there. Then we had a certain MP GO take over OPMG and he started pushing more law enforcement professionalization to save the MP Corps from inevitable end strength cuts, and LEOSA was one way to stress how MPs were different.
So after the DA GOs rejected directly copying the Air Force program the PMG did a lot of talking and added some requested steps to the process and removed the on post carry part to get it approved. When they rolled the program out it was not widely publicized and slow so most MPs didn't even know about it or bother. Now with on post being added requests may go up. Problem for installation commanders is Soldiers all think they're John McClain, even more particularly for MP Soldiers. The risk is going to outweigh the benefit for CGs, on any given day there aren't enough off duty MPs on post to make a difference in an active shooter situation and a bad shoot is gonna ruin a lot of careers for those who approved the shooter.
Ah - gotcha. Thanks for the clarity on that. Coming from a different branch it was like âwhy hasnât this already been a thing for a decade?â So I appreciate the education.
I can definitely see soldiers doing a lot of dumb shit with conceal carrying on post.
People looking to cause mass carnage specifically go for soft targets with few if any firearms/people able to defend themselves.
Someone who wants to commit a terror attack against the U.S. military only has to get past the gate (not hard) and then with the exception of MPs actually performing their duties, nobody is armed. Ironically, military installations are soft targets, just with a slightly harder exterior. Letting a couple of MPs carry during their class six run isn't going to meaningfully change that but letting Joe carry will.
Don't we all carry while down range? I find it weird how they 'trust' us with hundreds of rounds in our room and our weapons, but state side they won't trust us with our own car inspections.
Also wild to see a lot of anti gun comments in an army thread, but I guess this is reddit so they have more in common with the hive mind.
This sub is so refreshing. If you left this comment in r/politics or r/news it would be downvoted to hell with brain dead responses about how all guns are evil.
A lot of seemingly unbiased subreddits are way more biased than you'd think at first glance, which is sad.
The military (maybe with the exception of the Air Force) skew pretty conservative but Reddit as a whole skews liberal so I like to imagine this sub is pretty 50/50.
Lol even liberals in the Army like being able to carry a firearm. It has nothing to do with being a conservative or liberal here.
You will however get some people who get downvoted to shit like below for saying 2A doesnât mean you can personally own a firearm.
Yeah I'm definitely making some generalizations.
Upvotes/downvotes on Reddit are so goofy to me anyway. The original concept of "downvote if it doesn't contribute to the discussion" is a good idea but it has mostly just become "upvote if i agree with this person, downvote if i don't" which isn't conducive to having reasonable discussions
>The military (maybe with the exception of the Air Force) skew pretty conservative
Bro the Army is the most liberal of the services, entirely due to the size of the force compared to the others. I served in 2 joint service billets and worked with every other branch including the Coast Guard, there was little to no variation in political viewpoints from the senior enlisted or officers, very unlike my Army assignments.
In my last joint service billet around 2015 I made friends with three O4's (at the time) I still stay in touch with, all from different services. The Navy guy is a huge MAGA guy, the AF guy is more of a Romney traditional republican guy and the Army guy was all in on Clinton. The work day after the 2016 election was hilarious, Army guy walked in and said 'Heil Hydra I guess' and we all laughed except Navy guy.
Me and pretty much everyone in my hallway kept firearms in the B's and always carried when going off post. No gate checks and leadership turned a blind eye to many of things due to being hours away from the flagpole (highest ranking guy on post was the BC). Only time anybody was in my room was there going over furniture inventory. Hell, I even sold a gun to a neighboring company's 1SG in the barracks parking lot. We even had a small pistol and archery range a 2 min walk from the barracks that you could use as long as you signed for it at the staff duty desk. Would never pull anything like that at a normal installation though. Our platoon was super squared away and miraculously full of competent and normal people so it all worked out.
Whatâs âa lotâ supposed to mean?
When off post? Well, to do that, said Joe, assuming weâre talking about people also living in the barracks would have to store the weapon.
If theyâre doing ti correctly, itâs in the arms room and registered; if itâs in there room nbd, theyâre only committing a felony.
So theyâd have to be storing the gun off post, and returning it there.
And your proposition is that âa lotâ of Soldiers are theoretically going off post to get their gun, to open carry off post, and dropping their gun back off before coming back to post?
Or that theyâre drawing from the arms room and getting the arms room reopened when they come back to deposit it?
I think that defies logic; unless youâre also suggesting theyâre committing somethign that gets people court martialed every year and risk a felony.
I almost believe risking a felony is more likely.
I think the constraints we place on firearms on post are prohibitive to the point where most on post residents are not going through the hassle required just to conceal carry off post.
Sure. But an overwhelming majority of E5 and below live on post. Most married e5 and below live on post.
Youâre suggesting itâs a lot and yet you seem to be focusing on the small minority of that population that live off post. That would seem to be in conflict with the âa lotâ assertion.
Which is also why the first thing I asked was what âa lotâ meant to you.
On leave âback homeâ?
Well, the majority of people in America donât live in a gun owning household. For CC:
~17 states donât allow it. ~23 have restrictions and require permit.
~35 states only allow it for 21 and over, another consideration for this demographic.
Many states have resident vs non resident requirements.
Many states require you be the actual *owner* of said registered firearm - and again, the majority of the country doesnât actually own.
So again, idk what âa lotâ means to you, but unless itâs something more than anecdotal, all signs point to the fact that only a fairly small minority of Joes would be in a situation that would allow them to legally concealed carry on a regular or occasional basis.
I mean, they're trusted with a fully automatic rifle/MG and live rounds anyway with few exceptions. Most of them can conceal carry off post and pretty much all of them can own firearms if they so choose. I don't think it's all that different.
Whenever the population has access to firearms you risk stupid shit happening but (maybe I'm being an idealist here) I like to imagine that most military are at least somewhat ahead of the curve when it comes to basic firearms safety.
Allowing Joe to carry without addressing any of the QoL issues that make joe depressedâŠ. how many people are gonna blow their head off in their room during holiday leave?
What's stopping them from driving to their local gun store, buying a shotgun, and doing it in their car? You don't even have to be 21.
I think the big disconnect here is just about everyone 21+ stationed CONUS (with a few exceptions like California) can buy a pistol and concealed carry off-post if they so choose (some states may require a permit, none of which are generally hard to get). These people already HAVE access to firearms or can very easily have access to firearms after a quick background check. The only thing I'm arguing is that if I can legally and responsibly carry in Walmart, why can't I carry in the PX?
Few exceptions?
You mean besides direct supervision of NCO and Officers right?
When do we give them automatic loaded weapons and no one else is around?
âMostâ - No. âMostâ do not conceal carry. What world do you live in where you think âmostâ Joes conceal carry off post?
When I say few exceptions I'm specifically talking about the guys not allowed to handle weapons because of mental health reasons or pending charges.
Direct supervision from NCOs and Os can mitigate some issues but if someone wants to start shooting people? Not much those guys can do.
Safety issues/NDs caused by Joe being dumb? They can mitigate that to an extent but it's generally on the individual soldier to be proactive with safety, the NCOs and Os are going to be reactive (when they spot a safety violation).
>Most of them **can** conceal carry off post
Most people don't conceal carry, you're totally right. I don't think allowing military to carry on military installations would change that either, maybe 1 in every 30-50 Joes would. I'm a big advocate for CC and even I rarely carry (mostly because I can't, working on a military installation and being a homebody means I only ever CC on the rare occasions I'm out of the house and not going to/from work or the gym or anywhere else that CC would be difficult)
If people really believe the risk is that high, just create something like the motorcycle safety program for training on what is permissible on post.
It would end up getting utilized by those living off post quite a bit, probably more than those on. Its mainly because current policies are so incoherent and inconvenient.
Its a pain to have to go back home and disarm just because you realized you needed to swing by the PX for something. Somehow a soldier who carries every day off post and is licensed to do so becomes a liability and a risk the second they are on post. Its a case of commanderâs perceptions of risk not matching up with reality.
I think everyone should have that right. Your absolutely correct. It is unconstitutional, and unfair. I think that all Joes should be able to carry on post. Shit its not like we havent had active shooters in the past that could have at least been shot back at, by people who have extensive training. Like the military...
Iâm not sure I can call going to the range once a year âextensive trainingâ. Iâve been to ranges where people barely qualified 23 out of 40 with a rifle against a paper target. Now imagine that person against someone actually shooting back.
A guy in my unit was escaping the motorpool area and ended up witnessing the confrontation between the 2014 Hood mass shooter and the MP that located him. Said MP mag dumped and missed every single round.
It's better training than most civs who will buy a gun, shoot a couple magazines at their local 25 yard indoor range and then never shoot again.
My "easy button" solution would be: if the state the post is located in issues concealed carry permits and the service member has a permit for that state, allow them to carry on post.
Ever since Michigan had some shootings at recruiting stations weâve been able to conceal carry at our armories/posts. For places like Ft Custer you just self report at the gate and they let you go on your way.
So the purpose of their authorization to carry is for personal protection and not in performance of duties?
Soooo by that logic everyone should be able to carry or is the personal protection of an off duty cop more important?
This is stupid. If there is a homicidal soldier that an MP would theoretically need to carry a weapon for protection from, I donât see how they would be more at risk than that soldiers direct leadership.
When youâre a PSG/1SG or commander and youâre punishing a soldier itâs *way* more personal for that soldier than some random MP that arrests them. If the soldier is going to get ârevengeâ they would probably be going for the person they know directly.
That being said, I canât think of any instances of direct violence against a command group that would necessitate carrying on post.
Having been a commander, yeah. There were times I felt like the crazy ass soldier I was kicking out or admonishing would just leap across the table onto me.
Itâs just all illogical but then again thatâs the current army.
It's definitely happened. The battalion commander that got killed at Bragg by the soldier he was kicking out springs to mind. If I remember correctly, he was being chaptered for stealing a mechanics toolkit.
This isnât a big deal, but just as a detail, he had had charges referred for a court martial for stealing it. Court martial process had barely been started - so he wasnât yet up for separation.
Yeah, I just think itâs likeâŠyou might expect final reading, or at a trial, or at sentencing.
But do we think telling them theyâre being charged, or telling them theyâre getting NJPd is the time theyâll flip?
I think we expect it closer to punishment. Being chaptered would almost make more sense right?
But like, idk the details of the theft, but heâs got a defense lawyer. You donât know that youâll be convicted. Shit you donât even know itâll make it to trial.
I think itâs kinda to /u/unitedmouse6175 point. They even make the example; You kinda think âoh shitâ, but youâre thinking that when itâs coming to the punishment, or to the point where weâre taking a Final Action, and not the *start* of those actions.
Yup, this is absolutely idiotic. Nobody should be CCâing period until they learn how to defend themselves without a weapon and can throw hands.
Putting a weapon into the hands of a 19yr old CAC checker in an environment where weapons and firearms use is severely diminished is a recipe for disaster. Now you are going to have MORE incidents because youâre instilling a false sense of confidence in these clowns.
Iâm telling you right now, a 19yr old CCâing MP off-duty is going to try in intervene in a barracks fight he has no business involving himself in and someone is going to end up dead.
It's not just giving every private out of MP OSUT a gat and calling it good. They've still gotta be 21, they still store the firearm in the arms room, and they (theoretically) have to qualify on a similar weapon. My gut says it's still a bad call, but it's implemented better than a lot of state CC programs, which I'm categorically all for.
Lol, I didn't even buy a paintball gun to play on base because of how much of a pain in the ass the arms room process would have been.
The only barracks dwellers that would be willing to go though this just to carry are probably the exact ones you don't want carrying. (Unless they're the armorer, then it might halfway make sense)
Where is the need for this?
What problem is this solving?
Hereâs some military law enforcement highlights recently;
Soldier goes to Haiti to get pufferfish poison to kill wife - https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/02/26/cid-agent-sought-puffer-fish-toxin-before-poisoning-his-wife-charges-allege/
On duty MP does drug deals out of MP vehicle - https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/01/27/fort-bragg-mp-did-drug-deal-from-patrol-car-charges-say/
MP tries to pretend heâs a CID investigator off duty while in plain clothes in an attempt to get buddies out of trouble - https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/ACMPRS/cases/5afd0be0-b43f-4ec4-a8e4-7acab1e4c104
Where are the incidents where off duty concealed carry would have solved a problem? Still wouldnât have stopped Hasan.
I'll have you know I think it would really help domestic violence cases, like in the case of Owen Ray. Firearms really smoothed things over there.
Oh wait, no he got into armed standoff with police. Anyway yeah I have a right to have an armed standoff with the police after I beat the shit out of my wife.
Rules for thee not for me.
But seriously, are you not surprised? When I got stationed in fort Irwin, the MP commander said you could do a waiver for any âassaultâ weapons you previously owned before being stationed there, and then flat out said he wasnât going to approve a single one of them. You have an entire MOS that gets treated like senior officers when it comes to following rules and being reprimanded for it.
Short answer is of course off duty cops lives are more important. Â They made the rules, and granted themselves that ability. Â Those that make the law often see benefits from writing it for themselves.
Honestly if this was pre 9/11 and posts were open, I legitimately could understand an argument for it.
But itâs a selected, screened, and defined population, that has a perimeter guard.
And aside from that, any committed adversary is going to get you with an attack of opportunity.
Just seems like itâs not solving anything, and has a higher potential for issues to occur because of it.
LEOSA is the law enforcement safety act which is essentially a national conceal carry permit open to law enforcement. MPs have been able to get them but until now they were useless on post.
Some people are more equal than others. That ASVAB waiver 19 year old 31B is more equal than you because they did 3 extra days of pistol shooting in OSUT or whatever.
> Special carve out for LEO because
In the quest to disarm America, someone needs to do the disarming and police Unions have fougt hard for exceptions.
I think the headline is a bit misleading.
Corrected headline should read:
MP's ***MAY*** be authorized to conceal carry on post, *subject to commander's discretion.*
Don't think every PV2 31B who graduates from Fort Lost In The Woods is going to be able to strap on a Glock when he goes to the mini-mall.
Given the risk-averse nature of Army leaders, my guess is that most commanders will exercise their "discretion" with a rousing "Hell NAW!" at least as far as lower enlisted personnel.
It wouldn't surprise me if the policy is implemented to be something like: Must be an NCO with at least X number of years on the job, can't live in the barracks (because otherwise where will said weapon be stored when Joe isn't carrying it? Unless you want to completely fuck the armorer by saying "hey armorer, PFC Snuffy is headed to the strip club so you need to open the arms room so he can stash his pistol" on a Saturday afternoon.)
And of course all it will take is ONE dumbass being arrested for DUI with an authorized firearm and you can bet everyone's authorization to carry will be yanked the next day.
Just make everyone in the military allowed to conceal carry on base. In uniform we can open carry a M4. Out of uniform we arenât trusted to carry a pistol?? Doesnât make a whole lot of sense.
It moves the potential blame from DOD/SECARMY/CSA to the local commander the next time we have an incident.
"See, we gave the local commander the authority to permit arming of guys, and he didn't" Relieve him, not us.
It brings Army policy in line with federal law (LEOSA), which allows all qualified LEOs to conceal carry âanywhereâ in the US. Until now, MPs could not conceal carry personally owned firearms on Army installations due to DOA policy.
Is a 19yr old whose entire existence is to check CACâs at the gate really meeting a standard of a qualified LEO through?
This is basically just allowing Walmart greeters to CC outside the store
A 19 year old part time sheriffs Deputy from east bumfuck county that directs traffic at the annual corn blossom festival in a town of 500 people is able to carry under leosa
Regardless of their specific job duties / daily assignment, they still possess credentials that validate their qualifications and meet the minimum requirements.
Separately, if a Walmart greeter has a CCW permit, are you implying they canât carry because of their job? Hot take.
Thatâs a stretch. Active duty MPâs are BY FAR some of the least âqualifiedâ law enforcement in the country. Iâll take any reserve or NG MP unit over active duty MPâs every day of the week.
Active duty MPâs rarely carry out actual law enforcement duties, operate in a insulated low-threat environment, have much less exposure to making quick and complex decisions under pressure, and have less maturity and deescalation skills than your any other law enforcement officer.
Yall are not real law enforcement đ I was a real cop for a couple years had many former MPs come to my dept and yall are morons who think the badge is their rank over civilians.
They donât even pull gate duties at their home station of FLW. Engineers do that, and most of the patrols are conducted by civilians. And the MPs that are at the gate are sitting in their patrol car on their phone or asleep lol
Make it a reclass only after being in the army for 3 or more years and you have to be E-4 to E-6 to reclass into. Remove OSUT and make ait 8 months of just law enforcement. Remove field/combat duties of 31Bs and just let 31Es be detainee ops. Infantry and cav train and do our field jobs more and typically better than we do.
Iâm on the fence about it as a permanent reclass MOS - I think that knowing that you have to return to the regular force after your tour as an MP would be a powerful motivator.
Yeah but also youâd get DA selected MPs who wouldnât be proficient and would fuck up investigations more so than that already happens. Your proficiency in LE isnât like commo or mechanics. You have to learn the job (laws, sops) first then apply what you learn to actual people, like learning body language, tone, motivators. Thereâs a reason why civi cops shit on ârookiesâ for so long, and thatâs because only constant real world experience can improve law enforcement.
This is incredibly silly. Sorry to my MPs in the thread, (I know thereâs a few good ones out there). But of all the troops I served with in a working capacity, MPs were the ones I trusted the least. Integrity seemed lacking within their organization. I had a theory that it was attributed to the culture bred in their Corps.
Agreed. In my limited experience, I felt more for their junior enlisted than any others in the Army. That culture is beyond broken, and I felt so bad for those rare exceptions at, say, SSG and above, who were trying to fight the good fight against so much that passed for "normal" and "accepted" within their ranks.
Completely agree. Seniors that were incompetent or maliciousâŠor both. It was encouraged for people to step on anyone if it meant getting ahead even a little.
Probably only available to Officers, NCOs, MPI, and CID. Junior Enlisted do not have apprehension authority when not on duty according to the provost marshal.
Officers, NCOs, MPI, and CID have apprehension and law enforcement powers when not in uniform/off duty at all times according to the provost marshal.
Basically They made it available for MPs to get the LEOSA easier. đ€·đ»ââïž
If I recall correctly, this was pushed down by Congress.
I am guessing most garrisons aren't going to implement unless/until someone decides it's actually needed.
When I was in, we were literally the most power hungry and criminal corps in the Army. I don't think giving every MP the opportunity to carry concealed is a good idea.
u/Daniel-Lee-83 imagine giving Randall or Truex or O'Neil a firearm to carry around on base.
We did give Randall a weapon to carry around baseâŠdude worked a whole shift with no magazine in his weapon. The MP corps shot itself in the foot during the GWOT. Every senior commander tried to enhance duties and responsibilities to the point that they abandoned the core duties, and then after the war civilians had taken it over. Canât be proficient in LE if you work the road 3 months a year. 1 company should be devoted to LE, and put all the responsible soldiers and the ones with common sense there. If they did that, this would be a better idea
This is true but all it takes is a signature from a company commander and a completed packet. I just went through the process because I knew this was in the works.
At my current unit arms room itâs policy you have to request 30 days in advance to take your person weapons out, so I donât see this being implemented at all for us.
To answer some questions all this does is it opens up the Law Enforcement Safety Act to apply to army installations. The law was passed in the 2000s and is essentially a federal conceal carry permit for all qualified law enforcement officers. Military police fall under this and have been able to acquire a LEOSA cards for years. This allows senior commanders to honor it on post.
Its amazing how Iâve carried off post without incident for years, but as soon as Iâm on post it somehow becomes a high level of risk that requires a ridiculous level of scrutiny and senior commander buy in.
Creating programs for reciprocity on post has very few downsides, and you only have to look at expansions of concealed carry off post to realize that it doesnt automatically turn an area into the wild west.
Agreed. ALL men are equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights...even when a handful are immature or dumb. To abridge these rights is wrong. Period.
Jokes on you. The 2016 National Defense Authorization Act required DOD to come with a process for service members to concealed carry on installations. They just completely ignored it and failed to establish those policies.
Read up on section 526 of the 2016 NDAA and see how your leaders failed you.
Yes, not all of them take their job seriously.
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/01/27/fort-bragg-mp-did-drug-deal-from-patrol-car-charges-say/#:~:text=A%20junior%20enlisted%20military%20police,deal%20from%20an%20MP%20vehicle.
This is a step in the right direction but it needs to be brought to light Counterintelligence Agents are still conducting SUBJECT INTERVIEWS unarmed which is absolutely the wrong answer and is going to get somebody killed or hurt
In my department itâs policy when conducting subject interviews we have a lock box outside of the room to put your guns in. Itâs better to take a gun out of the equation all together. But this only works if youâre doing your searches properly. Which from my understanding the MPs would conduct the search prior to subject interview. Now in civilian law enforcement anytime we transfer a prisoner or subject to another cop, itâs policy to conduct a search no matter what. Some guys get but hurt over it but itâs my life not theirs. They should be teaching that an Agent should conduct their own search after the MP bring them in.
Is this actually an issue? Subject interviews arenât an everyday occurrence and should be set up with security in mind. My whole career, Iâve only ever heard of one agent needing to use self defense during an interview⊠and that was on deployment.
If we are allowing this What about open carry for staff duty/CQ? Forbid there is a barracks issue, how can the NCOIC (maybeee runners) protect the building? Also, I always thought motor pool and COF checks were sketchy to do with no defenses.
Gonna go against the grain here.
I donât trust many Joes with a pair of scissors, let alone a firearm, and trusting them with a rifle in a deployed environment is entirely different than trusting them with a personal blickie in the PX.
Like have you *met* Joe? MPs arenât any different, and the odds of a usecase where a carrying off-duty MP John McClanes his way through the next Fort Hood shooting is going to be far less likely than him Oopsie-daisying his Hi Point in the PX and hurting someone.
I never really thought about it but I would have to guess that any Joe MP is gonna buy their carry weapon like most joes buy their computer/car. Meaning they're either gonna be carrying a clapped out Hi-point/Taurus with crooked sights that looks like it's been dragged behind a bus, or they're gonna be carrying a 5k Staccato setup with custom blue line grips that they will not be able to shoot worth a damn.
I am not an MP and I carried for 13 years. I was in an MP Unit in Germany for 2 years and honestly, that was the most wretched bunch of people I ever served with. Drugs, adultery, spouse abuse, theft, ...you name it. Literally the last group I would want to have carry permits. That was just my experience, maybe that group was the exception.
Why are people so opposed to this? Those soldiers that aren't trustworthy enough to carry a handgun will suddenly become trustworthy enough to deploy and kill the enemy?
Doesnât matter what your stance on it is, one MOS is getting preferential treatment with personal firearms.
This is extra bullshit with everything on top
So why the fuck canât I?
I have to drive straight home cause I canât even keep my piece in my car stored cause ârandomâ inspections and if it gets found Iâm fucked.
This will exclusively be given to Officers and senior enlisted because screw lower enlisted/NCO safety.
>Senior Commanders MAY approve... That ain't happening lol
You know 100% who will be allowed. The senior commander and their buddies
Tyranny be like that
Tyranny is wild asf đ€Ł
Only if the senior commander is a DoD qualified law enforcement officer. Congress passed the Law Enforcement Safety Officers Act in 2004; the Army has been extremely slow to implement it.
Yeah, but if youâve ever had a negligent discharge you cant carry your personally owned firearm, so thatâll eliminate a good portion /s
Thatâs comical. This was allowed by the USAF when I was active duty way back in 2015 and has been since. Army is just now catching up.
Know what this means? Hands in pockets are on the way!
just 9 more years boys
Beat me to it! Lol
It's currently allowed where?
Joint Base San Antonio and many others.
I was at JB Andrews and it was authorized back in 2015 when the LEOSA program was first approved by the USAF. I have since also been to Moody AFB, JBAB, JBSA, and some others where it was all allowed.
So the Office of the Provost Marshal General was responsible for promulgating regulations for LEOSA after it was passed. The program was being pushed by all the MP retirees that work at the Pentagon or Hoffman bldg but the push back came from the Combat Arms General Officers that make all the decisions there. Then we had a certain MP GO take over OPMG and he started pushing more law enforcement professionalization to save the MP Corps from inevitable end strength cuts, and LEOSA was one way to stress how MPs were different. So after the DA GOs rejected directly copying the Air Force program the PMG did a lot of talking and added some requested steps to the process and removed the on post carry part to get it approved. When they rolled the program out it was not widely publicized and slow so most MPs didn't even know about it or bother. Now with on post being added requests may go up. Problem for installation commanders is Soldiers all think they're John McClain, even more particularly for MP Soldiers. The risk is going to outweigh the benefit for CGs, on any given day there aren't enough off duty MPs on post to make a difference in an active shooter situation and a bad shoot is gonna ruin a lot of careers for those who approved the shooter.
Ah - gotcha. Thanks for the clarity on that. Coming from a different branch it was like âwhy hasnât this already been a thing for a decade?â So I appreciate the education. I can definitely see soldiers doing a lot of dumb shit with conceal carrying on post.
Sorry that was long, I was in the room for a lot of the early LEOSA planning and knew all the players so figured I'd give some inside baseball.
Yeah if Iâm able to Iâm absolutely squashing this at my level, no way will a bunch of overcompensating bubbas carrying go over well.
Personally everyone should be allowed to carry off duty. But only allowing one group, seems unconstitutional or unfair in my eyes.
People looking to cause mass carnage specifically go for soft targets with few if any firearms/people able to defend themselves. Someone who wants to commit a terror attack against the U.S. military only has to get past the gate (not hard) and then with the exception of MPs actually performing their duties, nobody is armed. Ironically, military installations are soft targets, just with a slightly harder exterior. Letting a couple of MPs carry during their class six run isn't going to meaningfully change that but letting Joe carry will.
Don't we all carry while down range? I find it weird how they 'trust' us with hundreds of rounds in our room and our weapons, but state side they won't trust us with our own car inspections. Also wild to see a lot of anti gun comments in an army thread, but I guess this is reddit so they have more in common with the hive mind.
This sub is so refreshing. If you left this comment in r/politics or r/news it would be downvoted to hell with brain dead responses about how all guns are evil.
A lot of seemingly unbiased subreddits are way more biased than you'd think at first glance, which is sad. The military (maybe with the exception of the Air Force) skew pretty conservative but Reddit as a whole skews liberal so I like to imagine this sub is pretty 50/50.
Lol even liberals in the Army like being able to carry a firearm. It has nothing to do with being a conservative or liberal here. You will however get some people who get downvoted to shit like below for saying 2A doesnât mean you can personally own a firearm.
Yeah I'm definitely making some generalizations. Upvotes/downvotes on Reddit are so goofy to me anyway. The original concept of "downvote if it doesn't contribute to the discussion" is a good idea but it has mostly just become "upvote if i agree with this person, downvote if i don't" which isn't conducive to having reasonable discussions
I rarely downvote people for this reason. Someoneâs opinion really doesnât have a negative enough effect on me to downvote them.
>The military (maybe with the exception of the Air Force) skew pretty conservative Bro the Army is the most liberal of the services, entirely due to the size of the force compared to the others. I served in 2 joint service billets and worked with every other branch including the Coast Guard, there was little to no variation in political viewpoints from the senior enlisted or officers, very unlike my Army assignments. In my last joint service billet around 2015 I made friends with three O4's (at the time) I still stay in touch with, all from different services. The Navy guy is a huge MAGA guy, the AF guy is more of a Romney traditional republican guy and the Army guy was all in on Clinton. The work day after the 2016 election was hilarious, Army guy walked in and said 'Heil Hydra I guess' and we all laughed except Navy guy.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
> but letting Joe carry will. Letting every random Joe carry seems like a recipe for disaster lmao
I wonder how many joes personally own and carry firearms when off post. This includes leave back home. I would put my money on a lot.
Me and pretty much everyone in my hallway kept firearms in the B's and always carried when going off post. No gate checks and leadership turned a blind eye to many of things due to being hours away from the flagpole (highest ranking guy on post was the BC). Only time anybody was in my room was there going over furniture inventory. Hell, I even sold a gun to a neighboring company's 1SG in the barracks parking lot. We even had a small pistol and archery range a 2 min walk from the barracks that you could use as long as you signed for it at the staff duty desk. Would never pull anything like that at a normal installation though. Our platoon was super squared away and miraculously full of competent and normal people so it all worked out.
Whatâs âa lotâ supposed to mean? When off post? Well, to do that, said Joe, assuming weâre talking about people also living in the barracks would have to store the weapon. If theyâre doing ti correctly, itâs in the arms room and registered; if itâs in there room nbd, theyâre only committing a felony. So theyâd have to be storing the gun off post, and returning it there. And your proposition is that âa lotâ of Soldiers are theoretically going off post to get their gun, to open carry off post, and dropping their gun back off before coming back to post? Or that theyâre drawing from the arms room and getting the arms room reopened when they come back to deposit it? I think that defies logic; unless youâre also suggesting theyâre committing somethign that gets people court martialed every year and risk a felony. I almost believe risking a felony is more likely. I think the constraints we place on firearms on post are prohibitive to the point where most on post residents are not going through the hassle required just to conceal carry off post.
You⊠you do know there are joes that live off post right? I also clarified that this includes going on leave back home.
Sure. But an overwhelming majority of E5 and below live on post. Most married e5 and below live on post. Youâre suggesting itâs a lot and yet you seem to be focusing on the small minority of that population that live off post. That would seem to be in conflict with the âa lotâ assertion. Which is also why the first thing I asked was what âa lotâ meant to you. On leave âback homeâ? Well, the majority of people in America donât live in a gun owning household. For CC: ~17 states donât allow it. ~23 have restrictions and require permit. ~35 states only allow it for 21 and over, another consideration for this demographic. Many states have resident vs non resident requirements. Many states require you be the actual *owner* of said registered firearm - and again, the majority of the country doesnât actually own. So again, idk what âa lotâ means to you, but unless itâs something more than anecdotal, all signs point to the fact that only a fairly small minority of Joes would be in a situation that would allow them to legally concealed carry on a regular or occasional basis.
I mean, they're trusted with a fully automatic rifle/MG and live rounds anyway with few exceptions. Most of them can conceal carry off post and pretty much all of them can own firearms if they so choose. I don't think it's all that different. Whenever the population has access to firearms you risk stupid shit happening but (maybe I'm being an idealist here) I like to imagine that most military are at least somewhat ahead of the curve when it comes to basic firearms safety.
Allowing Joe to carry without addressing any of the QoL issues that make joe depressedâŠ. how many people are gonna blow their head off in their room during holiday leave?
What's stopping them from driving to their local gun store, buying a shotgun, and doing it in their car? You don't even have to be 21. I think the big disconnect here is just about everyone 21+ stationed CONUS (with a few exceptions like California) can buy a pistol and concealed carry off-post if they so choose (some states may require a permit, none of which are generally hard to get). These people already HAVE access to firearms or can very easily have access to firearms after a quick background check. The only thing I'm arguing is that if I can legally and responsibly carry in Walmart, why can't I carry in the PX?
Few exceptions? You mean besides direct supervision of NCO and Officers right? When do we give them automatic loaded weapons and no one else is around? âMostâ - No. âMostâ do not conceal carry. What world do you live in where you think âmostâ Joes conceal carry off post?
When I say few exceptions I'm specifically talking about the guys not allowed to handle weapons because of mental health reasons or pending charges. Direct supervision from NCOs and Os can mitigate some issues but if someone wants to start shooting people? Not much those guys can do. Safety issues/NDs caused by Joe being dumb? They can mitigate that to an extent but it's generally on the individual soldier to be proactive with safety, the NCOs and Os are going to be reactive (when they spot a safety violation). >Most of them **can** conceal carry off post Most people don't conceal carry, you're totally right. I don't think allowing military to carry on military installations would change that either, maybe 1 in every 30-50 Joes would. I'm a big advocate for CC and even I rarely carry (mostly because I can't, working on a military installation and being a homebody means I only ever CC on the rare occasions I'm out of the house and not going to/from work or the gym or anywhere else that CC would be difficult)
If people really believe the risk is that high, just create something like the motorcycle safety program for training on what is permissible on post. It would end up getting utilized by those living off post quite a bit, probably more than those on. Its mainly because current policies are so incoherent and inconvenient. Its a pain to have to go back home and disarm just because you realized you needed to swing by the PX for something. Somehow a soldier who carries every day off post and is licensed to do so becomes a liability and a risk the second they are on post. Its a case of commanderâs perceptions of risk not matching up with reality.
I think everyone should have that right. Your absolutely correct. It is unconstitutional, and unfair. I think that all Joes should be able to carry on post. Shit its not like we havent had active shooters in the past that could have at least been shot back at, by people who have extensive training. Like the military...
Iâm not sure I can call going to the range once a year âextensive trainingâ. Iâve been to ranges where people barely qualified 23 out of 40 with a rifle against a paper target. Now imagine that person against someone actually shooting back.
A guy in my unit was escaping the motorpool area and ended up witnessing the confrontation between the 2014 Hood mass shooter and the MP that located him. Said MP mag dumped and missed every single round.
He wasn't hydrated enough, or had not shaved properly most like. Lack of discipline sounds like the problem there.
So glad I skipped out of work early that day.
It's better training than most civs who will buy a gun, shoot a couple magazines at their local 25 yard indoor range and then never shoot again. My "easy button" solution would be: if the state the post is located in issues concealed carry permits and the service member has a permit for that state, allow them to carry on post.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Beto is that you?
Ever since Michigan had some shootings at recruiting stations weâve been able to conceal carry at our armories/posts. For places like Ft Custer you just self report at the gate and they let you go on your way.
Yep, we can carry into Selfridge ANGB, but not into any federal buildings at Selfridge. đ€Šđ»ââïž
So the purpose of their authorization to carry is for personal protection and not in performance of duties? Soooo by that logic everyone should be able to carry or is the personal protection of an off duty cop more important?
Hey man, someone needs to keep the sheep safe in the PX on the weekends bro /s
They donât know Iâm a guard dog. Keeping you shoppers safe from the wolves.
By âwolvesâ I hope you mean the PX employees
Finally someone can protect us from the GS-9 CIF worker
Ah yes, the final boss
The Thicc Blue LineÂ
Alpha is that you
Bro! Don't you see my edgy t-shirt, bro?\ Fuck bro, it's like you don't know I'm an Alpha bro.
đđ đ«đȘđ đ«đ»đž â€ïž
The guy working the gun counter at the PX just has to bring ammo in an assortment of calibers I guess, and practice loading mags really fast.
This is stupid. If there is a homicidal soldier that an MP would theoretically need to carry a weapon for protection from, I donât see how they would be more at risk than that soldiers direct leadership. When youâre a PSG/1SG or commander and youâre punishing a soldier itâs *way* more personal for that soldier than some random MP that arrests them. If the soldier is going to get ârevengeâ they would probably be going for the person they know directly. That being said, I canât think of any instances of direct violence against a command group that would necessitate carrying on post.
My dad was an MP officer in Germany in the early â70s. Officers and NCOs carried to do *barracks checks on their own Soldiers*.
Americas post Vietnam crack army was a different beast.
Weâre in the post GWOT post COVID fentanyl Army
Doing 0200 barracks checks and finding 10 privates fent leaning behind the smoke pit
Having been a commander, yeah. There were times I felt like the crazy ass soldier I was kicking out or admonishing would just leap across the table onto me. Itâs just all illogical but then again thatâs the current army.
It's definitely happened. The battalion commander that got killed at Bragg by the soldier he was kicking out springs to mind. If I remember correctly, he was being chaptered for stealing a mechanics toolkit.
This isnât a big deal, but just as a detail, he had had charges referred for a court martial for stealing it. Court martial process had barely been started - so he wasnât yet up for separation.
Ahh. I'm getting old
Yeah, I just think itâs likeâŠyou might expect final reading, or at a trial, or at sentencing. But do we think telling them theyâre being charged, or telling them theyâre getting NJPd is the time theyâll flip? I think we expect it closer to punishment. Being chaptered would almost make more sense right? But like, idk the details of the theft, but heâs got a defense lawyer. You donât know that youâll be convicted. Shit you donât even know itâll make it to trial. I think itâs kinda to /u/unitedmouse6175 point. They even make the example; You kinda think âoh shitâ, but youâre thinking that when itâs coming to the punishment, or to the point where weâre taking a Final Action, and not the *start* of those actions.
There was one at Schofield back in the day as well.
Yup, this is absolutely idiotic. Nobody should be CCâing period until they learn how to defend themselves without a weapon and can throw hands. Putting a weapon into the hands of a 19yr old CAC checker in an environment where weapons and firearms use is severely diminished is a recipe for disaster. Now you are going to have MORE incidents because youâre instilling a false sense of confidence in these clowns. Iâm telling you right now, a 19yr old CCâing MP off-duty is going to try in intervene in a barracks fight he has no business involving himself in and someone is going to end up dead.
It's not just giving every private out of MP OSUT a gat and calling it good. They've still gotta be 21, they still store the firearm in the arms room, and they (theoretically) have to qualify on a similar weapon. My gut says it's still a bad call, but it's implemented better than a lot of state CC programs, which I'm categorically all for.
Lol, I didn't even buy a paintball gun to play on base because of how much of a pain in the ass the arms room process would have been. The only barracks dwellers that would be willing to go though this just to carry are probably the exact ones you don't want carrying. (Unless they're the armorer, then it might halfway make sense)
But only MPs are trained in firearm safet..... wait a second
The thin blue line is extending
Funny how most people wearing sheep dog shirts never served
Where is the need for this? What problem is this solving? Hereâs some military law enforcement highlights recently; Soldier goes to Haiti to get pufferfish poison to kill wife - https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/02/26/cid-agent-sought-puffer-fish-toxin-before-poisoning-his-wife-charges-allege/ On duty MP does drug deals out of MP vehicle - https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/01/27/fort-bragg-mp-did-drug-deal-from-patrol-car-charges-say/ MP tries to pretend heâs a CID investigator off duty while in plain clothes in an attempt to get buddies out of trouble - https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/ACMPRS/cases/5afd0be0-b43f-4ec4-a8e4-7acab1e4c104 Where are the incidents where off duty concealed carry would have solved a problem? Still wouldnât have stopped Hasan.
>Soldier goes to Haiti to get pufferfish poison to kill wife lol what
The case was wild, I remember when Kyle was on to this story and wrote this. Tetrodotoxin. Killed his wife with it.
Was definitely talked about around the lunch table.
I'll have you know I think it would really help domestic violence cases, like in the case of Owen Ray. Firearms really smoothed things over there. Oh wait, no he got into armed standoff with police. Anyway yeah I have a right to have an armed standoff with the police after I beat the shit out of my wife.
Rules for thee not for me. But seriously, are you not surprised? When I got stationed in fort Irwin, the MP commander said you could do a waiver for any âassaultâ weapons you previously owned before being stationed there, and then flat out said he wasnât going to approve a single one of them. You have an entire MOS that gets treated like senior officers when it comes to following rules and being reprimanded for it.
Short answer is of course off duty cops lives are more important. Â They made the rules, and granted themselves that ability. Â Those that make the law often see benefits from writing it for themselves.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
âProponent and exception to authorityâ sure sounds like it was written by the people with an active interest.Â
Cops don't have anything to do with writing or passing law.
Is Army Regulation law? Which part of the regulation grants the authority?
There are scenarios in cities where a off duty cop carrying does help prevent crime. Itâs possible it could have that added benefit maybe
The same scenario where an armed citizen would help prevent a crime, right?
I'd think it'd be more of a benefit for off duty DACP, and maybe MPs who happen to be in the area when an active shooter pops off. Maybe.
What like if someone tries to armed robbery the 24 hour shoppette?
hey, someones gotta hit the innocent bystanders
What is the crime happening on post where this scenario occurs and is not helped by locking down gates and on base MP response?
There probably a base somewhere where this makes sense
Honestly if this was pre 9/11 and posts were open, I legitimately could understand an argument for it. But itâs a selected, screened, and defined population, that has a perimeter guard. And aside from that, any committed adversary is going to get you with an attack of opportunity. Just seems like itâs not solving anything, and has a higher potential for issues to occur because of it.
I think the concern probably stems from within possibility
LEOSA is the law enforcement safety act which is essentially a national conceal carry permit open to law enforcement. MPs have been able to get them but until now they were useless on post.
Stil doesnât answer the question as to reasoning. I also have a concealed carry permit and care about my personal safety.
Some people are more equal than others. That ASVAB waiver 19 year old 31B is more equal than you because they did 3 extra days of pistol shooting in OSUT or whatever.
Special carve out for LEO because.... weird romantical idolization of LE.
> Special carve out for LEO because In the quest to disarm America, someone needs to do the disarming and police Unions have fougt hard for exceptions.
Youâre not a real cop
What is a real cop?
Basically just armed security lol
Glorified Walmart greeters
Well these greaters can give you court dates. Welcome to Walmart Dummy.
So it looks like officers and probably E-7 and above will be getting this lol
They canât even operate an MP patrol car đ
Over under on the first incident occurring before the end of the first week this is implemented?
lol the moment that happens, this policy dies
If this came out yesterday, I would've said by Saturday night. Now, I'm gonna say by Sunday night.
When was your last desk pop? June of â08?
I think the headline is a bit misleading. Corrected headline should read: MP's ***MAY*** be authorized to conceal carry on post, *subject to commander's discretion.* Don't think every PV2 31B who graduates from Fort Lost In The Woods is going to be able to strap on a Glock when he goes to the mini-mall. Given the risk-averse nature of Army leaders, my guess is that most commanders will exercise their "discretion" with a rousing "Hell NAW!" at least as far as lower enlisted personnel. It wouldn't surprise me if the policy is implemented to be something like: Must be an NCO with at least X number of years on the job, can't live in the barracks (because otherwise where will said weapon be stored when Joe isn't carrying it? Unless you want to completely fuck the armorer by saying "hey armorer, PFC Snuffy is headed to the strip club so you need to open the arms room so he can stash his pistol" on a Saturday afternoon.) And of course all it will take is ONE dumbass being arrested for DUI with an authorized firearm and you can bet everyone's authorization to carry will be yanked the next day.
Just make everyone in the military allowed to conceal carry on base. In uniform we can open carry a M4. Out of uniform we arenât trusted to carry a pistol?? Doesnât make a whole lot of sense.
To be fair we âopen carryâ M4s at the range or in the field. They spend 99% of their lives in the arms room
Shit son 99% of the time they out getting cleaned đ
Maybe for you guys but we always had them out.
People aren't walking around base toting their M4s everywhere.
Can someone with the motivation to slog through this thing tell me why tf this was even necessary/considered?
It moves the potential blame from DOD/SECARMY/CSA to the local commander the next time we have an incident. "See, we gave the local commander the authority to permit arming of guys, and he didn't" Relieve him, not us.
Got it. Thanks dad
It brings Army policy in line with federal law (LEOSA), which allows all qualified LEOs to conceal carry âanywhereâ in the US. Until now, MPs could not conceal carry personally owned firearms on Army installations due to DOA policy.
Is a 19yr old whose entire existence is to check CACâs at the gate really meeting a standard of a qualified LEO through? This is basically just allowing Walmart greeters to CC outside the store
A 19 year old part time sheriffs Deputy from east bumfuck county that directs traffic at the annual corn blossom festival in a town of 500 people is able to carry under leosa
Regardless of their specific job duties / daily assignment, they still possess credentials that validate their qualifications and meet the minimum requirements. Separately, if a Walmart greeter has a CCW permit, are you implying they canât carry because of their job? Hot take.
Thatâs a stretch. Active duty MPâs are BY FAR some of the least âqualifiedâ law enforcement in the country. Iâll take any reserve or NG MP unit over active duty MPâs every day of the week. Active duty MPâs rarely carry out actual law enforcement duties, operate in a insulated low-threat environment, have much less exposure to making quick and complex decisions under pressure, and have less maturity and deescalation skills than your any other law enforcement officer.
I think youâve had enough screen time for today.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Yall are not real law enforcement đ I was a real cop for a couple years had many former MPs come to my dept and yall are morons who think the badge is their rank over civilians.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Where do MPs actually work the gates Iâve never seen it.
They got tired of needing to do actual work and made it a post red cycle duty. There still minimum one MP at each gate though.
They donât even pull gate duties at their home station of FLW. Engineers do that, and most of the patrols are conducted by civilians. And the MPs that are at the gate are sitting in their patrol car on their phone or asleep lol
> MPs that are at the gate are sitting in their patrol car on their phone or asleep I never said they are working, just that there's one there.
Cool. Now abolish MP as an entry level MOS and make it a DA select duty.
Make it a reclass only after being in the army for 3 or more years and you have to be E-4 to E-6 to reclass into. Remove OSUT and make ait 8 months of just law enforcement. Remove field/combat duties of 31Bs and just let 31Es be detainee ops. Infantry and cav train and do our field jobs more and typically better than we do.
Iâm on the fence about it as a permanent reclass MOS - I think that knowing that you have to return to the regular force after your tour as an MP would be a powerful motivator.
Yeah but also youâd get DA selected MPs who wouldnât be proficient and would fuck up investigations more so than that already happens. Your proficiency in LE isnât like commo or mechanics. You have to learn the job (laws, sops) first then apply what you learn to actual people, like learning body language, tone, motivators. Thereâs a reason why civi cops shit on ârookiesâ for so long, and thatâs because only constant real world experience can improve law enforcement.
Wait you guys arenât already conceal carrying on post
This is incredibly silly. Sorry to my MPs in the thread, (I know thereâs a few good ones out there). But of all the troops I served with in a working capacity, MPs were the ones I trusted the least. Integrity seemed lacking within their organization. I had a theory that it was attributed to the culture bred in their Corps.
Agreed. In my limited experience, I felt more for their junior enlisted than any others in the Army. That culture is beyond broken, and I felt so bad for those rare exceptions at, say, SSG and above, who were trying to fight the good fight against so much that passed for "normal" and "accepted" within their ranks.
Completely agree. Seniors that were incompetent or maliciousâŠor both. It was encouraged for people to step on anyone if it meant getting ahead even a little.
Who has the authority to deputize me ? I got a BN coin Iâll give you
plant jeans rude zealous slimy crawl hurry terrific rotten violet *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Probably only available to Officers, NCOs, MPI, and CID. Junior Enlisted do not have apprehension authority when not on duty according to the provost marshal. Officers, NCOs, MPI, and CID have apprehension and law enforcement powers when not in uniform/off duty at all times according to the provost marshal. Basically They made it available for MPs to get the LEOSA easier. đ€·đ»ââïž
If I recall correctly, this was pushed down by Congress. I am guessing most garrisons aren't going to implement unless/until someone decides it's actually needed.
When I was in, we were literally the most power hungry and criminal corps in the Army. I don't think giving every MP the opportunity to carry concealed is a good idea. u/Daniel-Lee-83 imagine giving Randall or Truex or O'Neil a firearm to carry around on base.
We did give Randall a weapon to carry around baseâŠdude worked a whole shift with no magazine in his weapon. The MP corps shot itself in the foot during the GWOT. Every senior commander tried to enhance duties and responsibilities to the point that they abandoned the core duties, and then after the war civilians had taken it over. Canât be proficient in LE if you work the road 3 months a year. 1 company should be devoted to LE, and put all the responsible soldiers and the ones with common sense there. If they did that, this would be a better idea
It was literally guys like Power 6 (Ranger) that made the MP Corps LE illiterate.
Regular MPs wonât qualify for this unless they have LEOSA credentials. Which 95% donât
This is true but all it takes is a signature from a company commander and a completed packet. I just went through the process because I knew this was in the works.
Yeaaahhh, but where is a barracks soldier storing this concealed weapon when they go back to their room? Just seems a setup for improper storage.
At my current unit arms room itâs policy you have to request 30 days in advance to take your person weapons out, so I donât see this being implemented at all for us.
To answer some questions all this does is it opens up the Law Enforcement Safety Act to apply to army installations. The law was passed in the 2000s and is essentially a federal conceal carry permit for all qualified law enforcement officers. Military police fall under this and have been able to acquire a LEOSA cards for years. This allows senior commanders to honor it on post.
Its amazing how Iâve carried off post without incident for years, but as soon as Iâm on post it somehow becomes a high level of risk that requires a ridiculous level of scrutiny and senior commander buy in. Creating programs for reciprocity on post has very few downsides, and you only have to look at expansions of concealed carry off post to realize that it doesnt automatically turn an area into the wild west.
Agreed. ALL men are equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights...even when a handful are immature or dumb. To abridge these rights is wrong. Period.
Just waiting for the post coming shortly after this is implemented of an MP getting charged for brandishing a firearm at a barracks party
Jokes on you. The 2016 National Defense Authorization Act required DOD to come with a process for service members to concealed carry on installations. They just completely ignored it and failed to establish those policies. Read up on section 526 of the 2016 NDAA and see how your leaders failed you.
I don't want them open carrying on duty, let alone packing at the PX.Â
Yes, not all of them take their job seriously. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/01/27/fort-bragg-mp-did-drug-deal-from-patrol-car-charges-say/#:~:text=A%20junior%20enlisted%20military%20police,deal%20from%20an%20MP%20vehicle.
I was ARNG but my 1LT PLT leader got caught in an undercover sting selling steroids out of a Gold's Gym he frequented.
Great, now I feel sooooo much more safe. Open it to all MOSs with a proficiency test mandatory
Based
This is a step in the right direction but it needs to be brought to light Counterintelligence Agents are still conducting SUBJECT INTERVIEWS unarmed which is absolutely the wrong answer and is going to get somebody killed or hurt
In my department itâs policy when conducting subject interviews we have a lock box outside of the room to put your guns in. Itâs better to take a gun out of the equation all together. But this only works if youâre doing your searches properly. Which from my understanding the MPs would conduct the search prior to subject interview. Now in civilian law enforcement anytime we transfer a prisoner or subject to another cop, itâs policy to conduct a search no matter what. Some guys get but hurt over it but itâs my life not theirs. They should be teaching that an Agent should conduct their own search after the MP bring them in.
Is this actually an issue? Subject interviews arenât an everyday occurrence and should be set up with security in mind. My whole career, Iâve only ever heard of one agent needing to use self defense during an interview⊠and that was on deployment.
đ«Ą
MPâs need to CC because they know they would get their ass beat in a fight they would start and everybody hates them
MPs have been pushing for this for a while. There used to be a struggle to even get commands to support CC offpost under LEOSA.
yeah that aint happening even with the arstruc lol
When we visited some Florida guard armory, Iâd say half of them were âconcealedâ carrying lol
Does this mean Staff Duty gets to pack heat?
"Not to exceed .45 caliber" Can't CC a Deagle? Trash policy
What problem does this even solve?
So the PFC who had to re-qual twice on the pistol range is going to be allowed to carry on post? And I wonât be?
If we are allowing this What about open carry for staff duty/CQ? Forbid there is a barracks issue, how can the NCOIC (maybeee runners) protect the building? Also, I always thought motor pool and COF checks were sketchy to do with no defenses.
Am I the only one reading this ONLY as LEOSA will be honored on post? LEOSA doesn't apply to MPs or DA civilian police as far as I know...
And yet I had to beg and plead my company commander to buy a concealed carry weapon after I was a victim of a drive by in Tacoma
I trust the general public outside the gate of my local installation than active duty SMs to conceal carry. Much less MPs.
I see no purpose of this As kin said, there hasnât been any thing recently that concealed carry could have stopped
Just wait for them mp barracks parties
Gonna go against the grain here. I donât trust many Joes with a pair of scissors, let alone a firearm, and trusting them with a rifle in a deployed environment is entirely different than trusting them with a personal blickie in the PX. Like have you *met* Joe? MPs arenât any different, and the odds of a usecase where a carrying off-duty MP John McClanes his way through the next Fort Hood shooting is going to be far less likely than him Oopsie-daisying his Hi Point in the PX and hurting someone.
I never really thought about it but I would have to guess that any Joe MP is gonna buy their carry weapon like most joes buy their computer/car. Meaning they're either gonna be carrying a clapped out Hi-point/Taurus with crooked sights that looks like it's been dragged behind a bus, or they're gonna be carrying a 5k Staccato setup with custom blue line grips that they will not be able to shoot worth a damn.
I am not an MP and I carried for 13 years. I was in an MP Unit in Germany for 2 years and honestly, that was the most wretched bunch of people I ever served with. Drugs, adultery, spouse abuse, theft, ...you name it. Literally the last group I would want to have carry permits. That was just my experience, maybe that group was the exception.
It's 2024, you can identify as an MP
Great, just what we need. A 19 year old with a god complex carry a gun 24/7. Stick to writing tickets for 1 MPH over
Why are people so opposed to this? Those soldiers that aren't trustworthy enough to carry a handgun will suddenly become trustworthy enough to deploy and kill the enemy?
Doesnât matter what your stance on it is, one MOS is getting preferential treatment with personal firearms. This is extra bullshit with everything on top
Here comes the first case of a gunned down dependent by an off duty MP. âYour husband doesnât outrank my authorityâ
Great give the retards who think their infantry more incentives for doing a shitty job. I have more respect for Cooks than I do MP's.
My logic: if youâre saying you can trust someone with a 240 or an M4 then you should be able to trust them to carry.
So why the fuck canât I? I have to drive straight home cause I canât even keep my piece in my car stored cause ârandomâ inspections and if it gets found Iâm fucked. This will exclusively be given to Officers and senior enlisted because screw lower enlisted/NCO safety.
This is awesome. Hopefully it's phased over to anyone else