News & Entertainment

I think this is an excellent idea. But I have one question, why limit it to active duty and retired military? I’m not trying to get into the whole active duty-reservist debate, but an infantry Marine reservist is better trained with his weapon and has more trigger time than an active duty admin clerk. Just saying, theres alot of benefits out there that exclude reservists, even if they spend their entire career deployed and or on active duty state side. I will send this article around, I hope to see it get more attention.

Semper Fi

Hell yes.

@SH i think it meant to include reservists, it would also make alot of sense seeing as reservists are spread through out the country while AD is only in certain areasand if they’re going along the lines of giving military personal the right to carry nation wide to help protect people wouldnt it make sense for reservist to be included.

but yea, i think this is a excellent idea

@SH, I agree that this should be extended to every citizen to be honest. However, we have to start somewhere, and trying to go full-force into having it approved nationwide for all citizens would more than likely never happen.

I’d even be in support of allowing citizens who have taken the proper classes and gone through the proper screening process the right to carry on trains, planes, and automobiles, into sporting events, etc. It would cut costs in security, as every citizen would be financially responsible for paying for their own training, background checks, etc. There is nearly no excuses for not implementing a program like this.

Imagine having several trained and licensed “weapons” on board a cruise line, flight, train, at sporting events, etc. Self-paid security and extra peace of mind.

Traveling is one of the biggest reasons to carry a concealer weapon, and having states that do not allow a certain state’s reciprocity limits a person’s ability to protect themselves when traveling, or it limits the states in which they will travel to.

@SH @evan My thinking was the same “rules” that apply to LEOSA would apply to service members.

LEOSA applies to current and retired law enforcement officers with a few qualifications, so applying that paradigm to service members, this would include any service member who holds a military ID card.

Kevin,

I would like as much information on this as possible. I am very involved in shooting communities in OK and TX as well as my home state of Alaska and I would like to help spread the word. Who is pushing this bill? Politically who has backed it. Etc. etc.

Really appreciate the information and For the Record… im with you on that P238.. I own two of them now!

V/R

Nick Capozzi

I am in total agreement with this. I have been in for 21 years and counting. If we can carry them 24/7 while deployed, why do we have to go unarmed in our own country. Face it most bases in CONUS(I have been to) are not in the best part of town. If you serve/served country honorably then you should be granted this right.

I think this is a great idea, and lets put emphasis on the “cleared” part, because you know someone out there is going to spring into action using the argument of “disgruntled servicemember” PTSD, and gangs in the military to shoot this program down, the majority of people Ive had the pleasure of serving with are of good moral character, and gun owners, and on the reservist side of the house many are law enforcement officers, I say let our service members have their guns, and use them too, lord knows that the comment about bases not being in the best part of town is true. Im currently in California, and the gun laws almost make it impossible to obtain a carry concealed weapons permit, and open carry is just an invitation to be harrased by the police, and you can’t carry your weapon loaded in the state of California, but this would change things, at least for folks who have served or are currently serving, please keep us updated, I will pass this along to my buddies, who will hopefully pass it on to theirs, and raise awreness among the military community, and we can back this up

I agree with this as well. I know many military are better trained and see more trigger time than some law enforcement. All depends on the job, level of necesity, and available funds. I am also curious as the extent of expanding the authorized areas of concealed carry. I have started many conversations about the ability for service members to carry on post/installations. If we are authorized to take over countries with lethal force and allowed to conceal carry stateside to protect oneself and other victims, why not carry on post/forts,camps? With the growing number of shooting and attempts on military installations, we should be able to protect ourselves. Military police can only do so much. Eveer see the food court during lunch. Only takes a few seconds to execute a mass casualty event. I believe we should be able to carry on military installations as well. We wear the uniform, receive the training, and authorized by the local state. If we get national authorization to carry, we should get authorization to carry on military installations.

I fully agree. I’ve carried most of my life ,both while on active duty & after I retired .Thankfully I never had to use my weapon out of uniform ,but am secure with the knowledge I am prepared to protect my family . This just followes the second ammendment .

I think its a good idea if and only if it allows servicemembers to carry on base. It should also include anyone with an honorable discharge and is not disqualified from owning a firearm for whatever reason to have the same benefits. It would get many more folks who have been trained to use a firearm out in the streets, that fact alone would scare the hell out of criminals and make them think twice before commiting a violent crime against someone.