Since the attack at the Chattanooga recruiting station by a fucking muslim I have been pondering if, or when, military personnel will become so disgusted with being targeted while disarmed that they begin defying their orders and carrying guns unlawfully. The penalty for doing so is a court-martial and loss of career, so there is a natural disinclination to make an example of oneself. But what if these attacks continue, will potential danger to life outweigh career considerations?
It could work out a couple of different ways, I think: one is by passive defiance, i.e., service members begin carrying concealed secretly, hoping both not to be caught and not to be put in a position of having to use the gun for defense of self and comrades, but accepting the consequences if they occur.
The other approach is active defiance, i.e., openly carrying sidearms and forcing military authorities to respond via arrest and court-martial. For this tactic to be effective it would have to wide-spread, which would bring charges of collusion and possibly even mutiny, but it has the advantage of forcing the military and civilian authorities to address the issue sooner.
What say you, readers?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Here in Anchorage, the commandant of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) not only enforces the Bush/Clinton/DoD directive to lock up military arms, he also commanded those who live off-base to bring in their personally-owned firearms and surrender them to the base armory, too.
Any bets on how many actually complied, here in this Constitutional-carry state?
I'm 'betting' there are any number that ARE carrying... nuff said...
Post a Comment