Active shooter at NAS Pensacola

[Griz882]

As a proud(ish) Louisianan, I can tell you that while that dude would not be passing a PFT, I’d bet money he can do some impressive work with that .22. He’s probably shot a lot of nutria off that there airboat.

I served alongside some ”Gator Guard” guys. They were good troops and really enjoyed playing up the swamp-people-Ragin’ Cajun thing.

 

[Hotdogs]

Yes, deterrence is a factor... also very difficult to quantify reliably, so again, throw that into the ORM equation for leadership and I don't think that will prove to be persuasive.

Your point about culture change also suffers from an assumption error. The argument isn't that we couldn't make that change. It's that in the ORM calculus, it's not a change that leadership sees as necessary in the face of required resources and clear increase in risk of doing so.

This is an emotional topic - mostly because it just happened and because of where it happened. When viewed objectively though, the individual risk of being the victim of an active shooter event is so statistically small. Cold comfort to the victim's families, but policy based on emotion, rather than solid analysis of the risks is a bad way to do business.

It’s not emotional. It’s not a resource drain. It’s not about recent events. We’re discussing it only in light of the last couple weeks. However, trust me my service has discussed the Navy’s lack of basic military acumen for the better part of the last couple decades - if not longer. Marines have been doing this for over half a decade now. Cultural change is difficult, but I would argue that it’s not change. It’s going back to what your predecessors were comfortable with on a daily basis in the face of potential conflict during previous eras.

There is a difference between unnecessary risk and mitigating risk. If you’re concerned about work place violence then maybe you should recruit different people. Given the sample size of the other services carrying weapons on a daily basis, I doubt that is an overarching issue - at all. Removing that logic, now you are implying is that zero risk is the goal of your style of leadership.

Amazingly, we’ll trust our sailors and Marines with multimillion dollar aviation assets and lives but can’t let them handle a weapon on duty. I’m talking Staff NCOs and Officers here, not the run of the mill Seaman or PFC. That’s demographic we’re talking about that will be standing the required duty.

 

[Brett327]

Marines have been doing this for over half a decade now.

Carrying concealed (or openly) on base? That's what we're talking about, not watchstanders. I've granted that may be a viable COA here.

If you’re concerned about work place violence then maybe you should recruit different people.

Pray tell, how do you intend on screening for this? This is not a serious answer. Our force is a cross-section of society. Some of those people may not handle conflict appropriately.

Amazingly, we’ll trust our sailors and Marines with multimillion dollar aviation assets and lives but can’t let them handle a weapon on duty.

And lots of times they fuck it away. For 99% of Sailors, we don't trust them to apply deadly force. They're mostly technicians.

Making Sailors more like Marines is not the answer here... and it's not going to happen, so what's the point?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

I think a lot of people here are talking about arming watch standers, not everyone.

 

[UInavy]

I’m talking Staff NCOs and Officers here, not the run of the mill Seaman or PFC. That’s demographic we’re talking about that will be standing the required duty.

I think a lot of people here are talking about arming watch standers, not everyone.

I think I may have mis-interpreted a good chunk of the rub, then. That’s why these discussions should be done over beers, not the internet.

 

[Hotdogs]

Carrying concealed (or openly) on base? That's what we're talking about, not watchstanders. I've granted that may be a viable COA here.


Pray tell, how do you intend on screening for this? This is not a serious answer. Our force is a cross-section of society. Some of those people may not handle conflict appropriately.

And lots of times they fuck it away. For 99% of Sailors, we don't trust them to apply deadly force. They're mostly technicians.

Making Sailors more like Marines is not the answer here... and it's not going to happen, so what's the point?

I don’t care personally about carrying concealed on base if that’s your issue. As far as Marines being armed on base for duty standers - I’ve seen it in action for the last decade or so. The Corps has trusted junior Marines to apply escalation of force in garrison and combat for a long time and have done well at it. Not perfect by any means, but enough to apply a reasonable amount of trust that a E-6 or above (Navy or Marine) could do the same standing duty.

If most sailors had the weapons discpline of the average Marine, I would submit that would be a good thing for the Navy.

 

[Brett327]

I don’t care personally about carrying concealed on base if that’s your issue. As far as Marines being armed on base for duty standers - I’ve seen it in action for the last decade or so. The Corps has trusted junior Marines to apply escalation of force in garrison and combat for a long time and have done well at it. Not perfect by any means, but enough to apply a reasonable amount of trust that a E-6 or above (Navy or Marine) could do the same standing duty.

If most sailors had the weapons discpline of the average Marine, I would submit that would be a good thing for the Navy.

You're not listening to what I'm saying. Happy Hanukkah.

 

[Hotdogs]

You're not listening to what I'm saying. Happy Hanukkah.

I’m offended.

 

[Gatordev]

The whole crux of the last few pages has been about arming watchstanders, specifically Navy ones. What I don't understand is that we already do this on other parts of the base. SWOs do this on their ships and pierside (as has been discussed), but aviation commands also arm some of the aviation personnel at the front gate when they stand ASF every morning. Those are the same people that would otherwise be standing ASDO at the squadron. So why can't we arm them at the squadron but we can arm them at the front gate?

It's embarrassing that the Navy aviation community says it's too hard when literally every other Line community in the Navy makes this work on a daily basis.

 

[Brett327]

The whole crux of the last few pages has been about arming watchstanders, specifically Navy ones. What I don't understand is that we already do this on other parts of the base. SWOs do this on their ships and pierside (as has been discussed), but aviation commands also arm some of the aviation personnel at the front gate when they stand ASF every morning. Those are the same people that would otherwise be standing ASDO at the squadron. So why can't we arm them at the squadron but we can arm them at the front gate?

It's embarrassing that the Navy aviation community says it's too hard when literally every other Line community in the Navy makes this work on a daily basis.

This may be regional, but ASF hasn’t been a thing in Whidbey in 20 years. Squadrons May have an MA assigned, who works for the base while you’re home.

Ships have to have organic security while away from home port, so that makes much more sense than a squadron, who relies on base security while at home, and the ship they’re embarked on while deployed. it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Frankly, if we’re going to spend money and effort training more people to do MA work, I’d just as soon make that investment in actual MAs who are force protection professionals, not by giving my AT3 a crash course in how to handle an M11.

 

[Hotdogs]

Frankly, if we’re going to spend money and effort training more people to do MA work, I’d just as soon make that investment in actual MAs who are force protection professionals, not by giving my AT3 a crash course in how to handle an M11.

Come on man...lol... This isn’t some 5 sided wind tunnel acquisitions project. It’s basic military training.

 

[Brett327]

Come on man...lol... This isn’t some 5 sided wind tunnel acquisitions project. It’s basic military training.

More hand waving. Every kind of training takes time and money. The Marines already have programs and infrastructure in place; the Navy doesn't. You're not thinking clearly on this.

 

[Gatordev]

This may be regional, but ASF hasn’t been a thing in Whidbey in 20 years.

Perhaps, but it's a thing at bases in both Region SE and Region SW.

The Marines already have programs and infrastructure in place; the Navy doesn't.

But they do. The surface community and the sub community already have a training program. Yes, the base range might have to stay open past lunchtime, but there are resources.

There may be other options that end up being as effective. Things such as adding additional layers of entry at squadrons that don't already have that, for example. But that's not cheap either, and at a lot of places, it's also not easy and there's not much real estate to establish those layers. But to say we shouldn't look at arming the watch because there's no blueprint to do such a thing is disingenuous.

 

[xj220]

But even extra layers of security don’t stop an insider threat unless you have metal detectors and armed security at each ECP. I think most of the recent incidents where people who already had access and not randos off the street.

 

[Brett327]

Perhaps, but it's a thing at bases in both Region SE and Region SW.




But they do. The surface community and the sub community already have a training program. Yes, the base range might have to stay open past lunchtime, but there are resources.

There may be other options that end up being as effective. Things such as adding additional layers of entry at squadrons that don't already have that, for example. But that's not cheap either, and at a lot of places, it's also not easy and there's not much real estate to establish those layers. But to say we shouldn't look at arming the watch because there's no blueprint to do such a thing is disingenuous.

As I've said, I'm not fundamentally opposed to arming watchstanders, but we can't pretend we can just flip a switch and make it all happen next week. We're talking about training thousands of extra people in each Navy region. I'm also not convinced that it's the best solution.