Civilians guarding recruiting centers...."Stand Down"

[Biker Dash]

I did recruiting for 3 years, we had office in Portland

Portland, Maine? Portland, Oregon? Portland, some other state?

 

[dannymax]

Talked with a Young Marine who was deployed to an area that is ISIS rich. I'm omitting the location to protect him and others. There will be future deployments. He told me that if there had been an attack, he and all of his Marine buddies would have died. Their weapons and ammo were all locked down and would have taken more than a few minutes to get them and actively respond.... This is SO WRONG.......:bang head::bang head::bang head:

New 'Rules of Engagement'? What a crock.............:damn angry:

 

[eggohead]

Portland , or. I lived and worked in Vancouver


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[silverado6x6]

Better to ask forgiveness than permission.
Just do it, volunteer, be ready but don't provoke the situation by parading.
Its going to get worse, feds will ignore the terrorists and will target the good people.
Like CAIR suing the gun shop owner, and they will win.

 

[dannymax]

Better to ask forgiveness than permission.
Just do it, volunteer, be ready but don't provoke the situation by parading.
Its going to get worse, feds will ignore the terrorists and will target the good people.
Like CAIR suing the gun shop owner, and they will win.

Ah...the ol 'path of least resistance' approach ey? Sounds EXACTLY like what the feds will do!

They already have the public phobia'd out on guns.....one civilian said she didn't like armed guys guarding recruitment centers because they may go crazy and start shooting the place up!

But the bad guy...who DID shoot the place up.... ruining countless American lives.....was never mentioned. :ummm:

Think this is an isolated incident?.....no chance it will happen again?....think again!! Meet the new 'poster child for domestic terrorism' (quote from local news)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/officials-son-boston-police-captain-arrested-terrorist/story?id=32414150

 

[old timer]

Notice a lack of coverage on this kid ? :bang head:

 

[mt-pockets]

In 1992, when Bush was president, the Department of Defense issued a directive related to firearms for military personnel. That directive replaced an earlier one from 1986. The directive doesn’t specifically address recruiting offices, but it applies broadly to military sites.

The 1992 directive, signed by then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Donald Atwood, didn’t outright ban military personnel from carrying weapons. Instead, it said that only certain employees could carry weapons, including those who worked in law enforcement, security and prisons. The directive also did not apply in certain situations, such as in war zones.

The policy explains that the intent is "to limit and control the carrying of firearms by DoD military and civilian personnel." So the policy did cover most military personnel.

Those who have opposed this policy have sometimes referred to it as a Clinton-era policy because the Army did release a regulation that implemented the Defense Department directive in March 1993, two months after Clinton took office

 

[mt-pockets]

A new Defense Department directive issued in April 2011 after a mass shooting at Ft. Hood in Texas tweaked the policy with some new phrases, including that workers have an "inherent right to self-defense." However, the overall policy essentially remained the same.