Most of us carry off base due to some of the areas that we live around. But why not on base? We handle weapons everyday for training and guard duty. So why can't we, the Soldiers in the Military protect ourselves and loved one on base? There would be alot less shootings, rapes and theft. We need to stand up for our rights not just off base but on base as well.
Concealed carry on Post/Base
- Thread starter chrs_0331
- Start date
- Status
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 855
- Points
- 1,010
I have a feeling that chrs_0331 is an American soldier who doesn't realise this is a Canadian site. He uses US phrases such as S1, part of his name "0331" is a USMC MOSID for machine gunner, and finally Canada does not use the phrase Concealed Carry, but rather Authority To Carry (ATC).
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,706
- Points
- 1,140
AmmoTech90 said:
I have a feeling he should be called something else...... :
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,706
- Points
- 1,140
I don't know about any of you, but I had to deal with a drunk soldier with a 12 guage years ago. Drunk soldiers & guns = trouble.NinerSix said:
- Reaction score
- 3,517
- Points
- 1,160
NinerSix said:
I personally don't see the need. Firearms in your house is one thing, I have no issue with that. The PMQs are not Kandahar, we don't need leg rigs with a Browning 9mm wherever we go.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Jim Seggie said:
Non starter. If you had an ATC for concealed carry you would not be allowed to drink and carry.
I have met some shit heads (in and out of uniform) that I would not trust with a sharp knife, nevermind a firearm (while unsupervised). Typically these people would not be going through the trouble of getting an ATC in the first place or would be screened out from getting it.
Considering how seriously the threat of an active shooter on a base seems to be taken, having a system in place to let some soldiers concealed carry makes sense to me.
Any abuse or misuse of any ATC/CCW would be severely punished, but I doubt it would happen often, if at all.
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 855
- Points
- 1,010
NinerSix said:
ATC may or may not be concealed. The majority of ATCs are for remote areas and the restricted weapon must be carried openly.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
AmmoTech90 said:
True, but for what we are talking here (ATC Lv 3/CCW) the idea is that it should be concealed.
And yes Chief, although I am a proponent of responsible individual being allowed CCW/ATC, I do not see it happening here in Canada, ever.
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
Honestly I felt safer living in the PMQs than I do living out on the economy! I don't even live in a bad area but I still worry more about my car getting smashed/broken into than I ever did on base.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,428
- Points
- 1,160
Canadian law allows for then issuance of a carry permit for the defense of life, sometimes called the ATC level III (Level I is wilderness carry and Level II is armoured car guards) CCW was fairly common in Canada till the 70’s and all banks were required to have a gun on the premises. Funny how people forget that. Apparently Alberta is still issuing ATC’s for Diamond and Bullion dealers. The CFO’s purposely attempt to block people from obtaining a ATC and refuse to document what exactly the requirements are, making it difficult to meet them. I am a proponent of ATC/CCW and was planning on getting my Utah CCW until they blocked non-residents. I have two daughters that’s enough reason for me.
Back on subject, considering the current threats both the US and Canadian military faces, I find it odd that more firearms and ammunition are not required on base. To be blunt it’s likely an attacker is less likely to meet armed resistance on a US army base than most of the surrounding civilian areas. The current thinking is the Base perimeter provides the protection along with gate guards and the MP as the first armed responders, not sure if they carry rifles in their vehicles and don’t expect that to be divulged either. Personally I think it’s inadequate. Each unit on base should be tasked with providing a armed guard duty, either at unit HQ, guard hut or wherever large groups of personal assemble (mess halls, etc). Weapon don’t necessarily need to be loaded, but the guard armed, issued sufficient ammo and equipped with combat gear, including radios that allow them to coordinate their response.
Comms would likely be handled by the BHQ and MP’s who would direct the response and reposition guards as required to any incident of identified threat. All of the above would require a switch in mind think and I think it would be easier to do it now will we are filled with combat veterans who have experienced an enemy that will exploit any weakness exposed. Changing the mind think of the Base staff and senior leaders would be the most difficult part of the exercise.
Back on subject, considering the current threats both the US and Canadian military faces, I find it odd that more firearms and ammunition are not required on base. To be blunt it’s likely an attacker is less likely to meet armed resistance on a US army base than most of the surrounding civilian areas. The current thinking is the Base perimeter provides the protection along with gate guards and the MP as the first armed responders, not sure if they carry rifles in their vehicles and don’t expect that to be divulged either. Personally I think it’s inadequate. Each unit on base should be tasked with providing a armed guard duty, either at unit HQ, guard hut or wherever large groups of personal assemble (mess halls, etc). Weapon don’t necessarily need to be loaded, but the guard armed, issued sufficient ammo and equipped with combat gear, including radios that allow them to coordinate their response.
Comms would likely be handled by the BHQ and MP’s who would direct the response and reposition guards as required to any incident of identified threat. All of the above would require a switch in mind think and I think it would be easier to do it now will we are filled with combat veterans who have experienced an enemy that will exploit any weakness exposed. Changing the mind think of the Base staff and senior leaders would be the most difficult part of the exercise.
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 672
- Points
- 1,160
Colin P said:
Back in the 80's and 90's when I still did a lot of handgun/rifle shooting the rumour mill was there were about five or so people in Canada still allowed concealed carry usually because they had been threatened by criminal groups (mafia, OMGs). How true the rumour is, I have no idea.
Whole heartily agree with you. Our bases are woefully undefended and one of these days we may end up paying for it. And if I remember correctly, one of the targets of the "Toronto 18" was a military base in southern Ontario, so its not as far fetched as some people think.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,428
- Points
- 1,160
One of the FOI's in Ontario a few years ago mentioned 13 permits in Ontario, most likely Judges, crown prosecutors. My wife was offered a Crown prosecutors job in Malaysia, it comes with an automatic permit to carry. for good reason, if they can't bribe you they will try to kill you there.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
PuckChaser said:
I have seen those leg holsters in Kandahar; and after seeing and hearing about some of the most outstanding weapons handling that goes on there, it is my personal opinion that everyone will be safer if anyone who is carrying the metal paperweight called the Browning, should just leave them locked in their respective CQ's.
That being said, just because we are soldiers, does not automatically mean we are safe with firearms.
- Status
