NOSC Shooting

[Gatordev]

The obvious answer, and in keeping with Theodore Roosevelt's axiom, "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are", arm the MAs and USMC MPs at the NOSCs. They are trained and know how they fit in with civ law enforcement. In cases of non-specific elevated threats due to things such as key holidays or anniversaries, pony up some extra drill pay and send those guys to the NRSs that could use extra security.

That assumes you have any Full-Time MAs or MPs. I'm actually curious if there are any MAs in the FTS world. Sending guys on drills to go get qual'ed seems to be a good use of their time at first, but then they're not actually around during a normal workweek since they're not Full Time. It certainly doesn't hurt anything, though.

What I find interesting was how someone did exactly what you're saying...made do with the conditions at hand and decided to violate DoD directives. I'm sure LCDR White will get his peepee smacked, but it's hard to argue with his actions when it turns out his actions potentially shortened the altercation.

 

[wink]

That assumes you have any Full-Time MAs or MPs. I'm actually curious if there are any MAs in the FTS world. Sending guys on drills to go get qual'ed seems to be a good use of their time at first, but then they're not actually around during a normal workweek since they're not Full Time. It certainly doesn't hurt anything, though.

I was referring to SELRES, even guys in the IRR still qualed. That was why I mentioned extra drill pay to send them to Navy Recruiting Stations. Not all NOSCs have MAs sitting around, but some do. Also have civ cops that are SELRES in other rates. That may be a bit more difficult to iron out. But clearly, the training aspect would take care of itself.

 

[Flash]

Do NOSC's not on bases have guards/MA's/MP's? I have never been to one that wasn't on a base, the ones on base just got a duty person to check ID's in the past 2-3 years and they are usually just a token E-3/4.

 

[wink]

Do NOSC's not on bases have guards/MA's/MP's? I have never been to one that wasn't on a base, the ones on base just got a duty person to check ID's in the past 2-3 years and they are usually just a token E-3/4.

The NOSC in PHX was not on a base. In a nasty part of town for that matter. One of the guys that I worked with would talk the parking lot while smoking and pick up spent bullets. The pencil tray in his desk drawer was full of them. All we had was a guy on the quarter deck standing the phone watch. There was a fence all around with concertina, but during drill weekend the main gate was always open. After 9/11 they closed the gate and put in and CAC reader and camera. On drill weekends a guy stood watch and checked ID waving people in the open gate. On week days the gate was unmanned. Swipe CAC and gate opened. Duty E-3 answered the intercom checked other IDs, listened to your official business and remotely opened gate. For a few weeks after 9/11 Marines were armed on the gate during drills. Since then no one was armed. Three years ago they closed that facility (it was 40 years old and rehabbed in mid 90s) and it moved onto an AF base. They had tried to move for a long time. Only after post 9/11 force protection problems were highlighted for that location did the moved get funded. Most all National Guard facilities are stand alone.

 

[Recovering LSO]

@Flash @Gatordev I'm trying to run down the source email or link for you on this:

Master-at-Arms (MA) VOLUNTEERS NEEDED IMMEDIATELY!
CNRFC is soliciting MA volunteers (E5/6) to provide 45 days (ADT) of armed sentry watchstander duty at 53 NOSCs commencing 17 Aug. CNRFC is seeking MA volunteers (E5/6) for 1 year (ADSW) of armed sentry watchstander duty, commencing 1 Oct 15, at 70 NOSCs. CNRFC is seeking MA volunteers (E6/7) for 1 year (ADSW) of armed security oversight duty at the 6 RCC staffs and CNRFC HQ. There is a strong likelihood that your duty can be performed at your local NOSC if your NOSC is not located on a base/installation. Volunteers must be either MA "A" school graduates or have completed the Security Reaction Force - Basic (SRFB) course, have a current 9mm semi-annual weapons qualification, and have a current OC spray qualification.
CNRFC is also seeking volunteers (any rate) who hold the 0812 NEC and can perform the function of armorers for the same time periods above.
To volunteer, send an email to LCDR Steve XXXXXX (CNRFC N33) at steven.XXXXX@navy.mil, indicating whether you are volunteering for 45 days of ADT commencing 17 Aug, or 1 year of ADSW commencing 1 Oct, or both. Due date is 31 July. LCDR XXXX's phone number is XXX-XXX-XXXX if you have questions.
We need volunteers!


Reach me via PM if anyone is interested in the name / number.

 

[insanebikerboy]

There is a vocal crowd that says "arm everyone" or that everyone in the military should automatically be allowed to carry on base. I don't necessarily think that's the right answer for a multitude of reasons. First, let's be honest, we know those couple of people that shouldn't be in the same room as a firearm let alone be allowed to carry.

I actually think that problem would resolve itself by making carrying on base optional but not required while allowing it. Then, the folks that want to carry would and those that don't, wouldn't. It's the same inherent selectivness that happens with CCW licenses.

 

[Flash]

I actually think that problem would resolve itself by making carrying on base optional but not required while allowing it. Then, the folks that want to carry would and those that don't, wouldn't. It's the same inherent selectivness that happens with CCW licenses.

How would those folks get the okay to carry and who would train and equip them though?

 

[wink]

@Flash @Gatordev I'm trying to run down the source email or link for you on this:

Master-at-Arms (MA) VOLUNTEERS NEEDED IMMEDIATELY!

Huh. Great minds think alike.

 

[nittany03]

I actually think that problem would resolve itself by making carrying on base optional but not required while allowing it. Then, the folks that want to carry would and those that don't, wouldn't. It's the same inherent selectivness that happens with CCW licenses.

Unfortunately, in many states, military affiliation also allows many of those same people who shouldn't be in the same room with a firearm to get CCW licenses, because military == guns to some legislators. Yes, I know I'm committing gun owner heresy by saying that. Oh well.

I'm not averse to the idea, and I do think the military is oddly constipated about firearms in general. But I think a qual course of some sort is in order, and not the joke I went through to carry an M11 in the jet.

 

[Gatordev]

We need volunteers!


Reach me via PM if anyone is interested in the name / number.

Interesting. And it's always amazing how funding gets tight for the next FY, until someone needs additional funding for a legit reason.

 

[insanebikerboy]

How would those folks get the okay to carry and who would train and equip them though?

Who says the military needs to equip them? I would fully expect there to be some sort of training required but the equipping part would be the onus of the person wanting to carry. The military sets the standard on what kind/type of gun (i.e., DAO, etc) but doesn't provide the weapon.

To me, the training is the easy part. There are a ton of contractors that can train guys to be not only familiar but very proficient with shooting and carrying a pistol in a day. Would it cost money? Sure, but when compared to the cost of other contracts, it would be pretty cheap.

 

[Flash]

Who says the military needs to equip them? I would fully expect there to be some sort of training required but the equipping part would be the onus of the person wanting to carry. The military sets the standard on what kind/type of gun (i.e., DAO, etc) but doesn't provide the weapon.

The weapons would still have to probably be inspected and certified if you are going to do it right though, that would be a big burden on whoever would have to do it.

To me, the training is the easy part. There are a ton of contractors that can train guys to be not only familiar but very proficient with shooting and carrying a pistol in a day. Would it cost money? Sure, but when compared to the cost of other contracts, it would be pretty cheap.

I think a single day is a bit short, and probably couldn't cover the rules, responsibilities and scenarios needed.

And I think you vastly underestimate the cost, it would be a huge expense considering the large amount of folks who would want to do it. Then consider the folks in Chattanooga or a myriad of other locations that are not near a fleet concentration area or other military base with the appropriate facilities, they would likely have to go TDY to get trained which adds even more cost and time. Then the instructors themselves, who would select train and certify them? And that is just a few of the issues, there are myriad more.

 

[Recovering LSO]

Just so we're clear on this matter, there are two camps here. One side that thinks arming recruiters is a bad idea because it's hard. The other side thinks this is a bad idea because it won't work as intended.

Hard is never a good excuse for not doing something when the stakes are high - as they are here in this case. Not doing something because it won't work and will simply serve as a gross distractor while at the same time giving a false sense of security - well, that might be reason enough to think it through a lot more than most folks are now willing to do.

I think you can see examples of both arguments in this thread.... ahem....^

 

[Pags]

Most security training is more extensive then just learning how to point a gun. As a parallel, Ship's Self Defense Force (SSDF) training was a heavy tax on the unit and came with a lot of training and certification requirements.

I agree with RLSO though that hard is authorized. From the email that RLSO shared I also imagine that the plan that's being worked is increased MA presence at NOSCs. It'll start with the short term solution from the email with reservists and will eventually be supplanted by FTS or some flavor of full time security support.

 

[Gatordev]

Just so we're clear on this matter, there are two camps here. One side that thinks arming recruiters is a bad idea because it's hard. The other side thinks this is a bad idea because it won't work as intended.

Hard is never a good excuse for not doing something when the stakes are high - as they are here in this case. Not doing something because it won't work and will simply serve as a gross distractor while at the same time giving a false sense of security - well, that might be reason enough to think it through a lot more than most folks are now willing to do.

I think you can see examples of both arguments in this thread.... ahem....^

I'd argue that a few of us here are in a third camp... One that says it could be a good idea, but it will be hard so we need to make sure we don't do it in a half-assed way. Augmenting forces with Reserve MAs (hey, that's what SELRES are for, anyway) seems like a decent start.