- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by suethem
- Jan 25, 2004, 12:54 AMScary stuff,
There was a shooting recently at LAX and an El AL security person took the shooter out if I remember correctly.
Funny that our gov will let private companies arm their security personnel in our airports, but won't give our own national guard any bullets!
What if that event happened in front of the national guard?
What could they do?- just be a good witness?
Or would that be a duck and cover scenario?
Makes you wonder if those anti aircraft sites around certain cities were actually operational?!
There was a shooting recently at LAX and an El AL security person took the shooter out if I remember correctly.
Funny that our gov will let private companies arm their security personnel in our airports, but won't give our own national guard any bullets!
What if that event happened in front of the national guard?
What could they do?- just be a good witness?
Or would that be a duck and cover scenario?
Makes you wonder if those anti aircraft sites around certain cities were actually operational?!
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 22, 2004, 04:45 AMsuethem,
When I was stationed with the U.S. Army in Europe in the mid-1980s my unit was called on to provide soldiers for guard duty during a time of heightened security concerns. We were issued no ammunition. Armed with unloaded M-16 rifles, our duty was to check the ID of persons entering a military facility. To disguise the fact that we were unarmed, we were required to keep an empty magazine in the chamber. In the event of terrorist attack, we were to telephone the military police for help.
The reason for this is that the officers in charge didn't trust their soldiers with live ammunition: they were more concerned about the potential career consequences of an accidental discharge than the fact that by making their soldiers appear to be armed, when they weren't, they were needlessly placing our lives in additional danger, because any terrorist contemplating an attack might decide that he/she needed to kill the guards first. I asked my unit commander whether, since we were not trusted with ammunition, we might at least be issued bayonets while on guard duty. He considered this request, but the answer from higher was, "no."
In my opinion, if soldiers are not to be trusted with loaded weapons in a public milieu, then it is wrong to order them to masquerade as armed guards.
When I was stationed with the U.S. Army in Europe in the mid-1980s my unit was called on to provide soldiers for guard duty during a time of heightened security concerns. We were issued no ammunition. Armed with unloaded M-16 rifles, our duty was to check the ID of persons entering a military facility. To disguise the fact that we were unarmed, we were required to keep an empty magazine in the chamber. In the event of terrorist attack, we were to telephone the military police for help.
The reason for this is that the officers in charge didn't trust their soldiers with live ammunition: they were more concerned about the potential career consequences of an accidental discharge than the fact that by making their soldiers appear to be armed, when they weren't, they were needlessly placing our lives in additional danger, because any terrorist contemplating an attack might decide that he/she needed to kill the guards first. I asked my unit commander whether, since we were not trusted with ammunition, we might at least be issued bayonets while on guard duty. He considered this request, but the answer from higher was, "no."
In my opinion, if soldiers are not to be trusted with loaded weapons in a public milieu, then it is wrong to order them to masquerade as armed guards.
Posted by suethem
- Jan 22, 2004, 02:33 AMI have heard from multiple national guard personnel and active duty folks that while stationed in airports and around national landmarks (just after 9/11 and recently), that the M-4 that they carried was actually empty of ammunition.
And I don't mean that just the magazine in the weapon was empty- they had NO rounds at all.
I was completely surprised to hear this.
Seems like if we are going to have security for this country that it should be more than just an illusion.
What good does it do us to have them on site if they can't act without submitting a form for bullets?
It's a shame to train these people so well and then not trust them to do the right thing.
We deserve better and so do they!
And I don't mean that just the magazine in the weapon was empty- they had NO rounds at all.
I was completely surprised to hear this.
Seems like if we are going to have security for this country that it should be more than just an illusion.
What good does it do us to have them on site if they can't act without submitting a form for bullets?
It's a shame to train these people so well and then not trust them to do the right thing.
We deserve better and so do they!