Defensive Carry banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

444 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
From John Farnam & Stephen P. Wenger:

**NOTE** CCJA will offer FREE training to any Military personnel that will be deploying and can not afford to train.

14 Jan 10

I just received a note from one of my students, an Army Officer, currently serving deep within enemy territory ("Indian Country," as we called it in Vietnam). Because he is enlightened, he is disgusted with the Army's attitude about personal readiness, as any enlightened person would be.

This note was written just before a recent attack where a number of CIA agents were murdered.

In paraphrase:

"Our Base is well inside hostile territory. All serious attacks here have been within a few hundred meters of us, including a successful attack on a UN 'Safe House.'

Everyone here is, however, completely unarmed! This is what they say to us, and I am quoting directly:

'... all personnel will have their weapons GREEN (we call it "Storage Mode ") at all times. All weapons will be cleared immediately upon entering the compound... at no time are weapons to be loaded, nor is any weapon to have a magazine inserted'

When attacked, we've been directed to run and hide in bunkers, but still not load our weapons!

I've tried, unsuccessfully, to get our allowable weapons status upgraded. I'm told, 'We'll have NDs, and that will generate too much paperwork,' another direct quotation! I've even confronted star-wearers, saying 'Why do we have soldiers in an overseas combat zone, including officers and staff NCOs, under arms, who are apparently so poorly discipline and trained that they can't be trusted with loaded small arms?'

With a sneer, the general replied, '... it's just too dangerous having people walking around with loaded guns.'

After years of continuous lethal contact with an implacable enemy, most reasonable people would think we would have long-since weeded out such emasculate fools, sheep, and attaboys.

No such luck. In fact, we've promoted them!

As for me, and a number of others, we've long ago decided to ignore stupid rules that endanger our lives, about which no one apparently cares, except us. My pistol is always in "Carry Mode" (called "Red" here), no matter where I am.

When stopped by someone who points out that I have a magazine inserted in my pistol. My response is as follows, depending upon the rank of the person who noticed:

(1) 'Go find something else do to, Sonny!'

(2) 'I've never been able to understand violence in any form. Have you? Actually Bud, that is not a magazine. It's a dust-cover. It renders the pistol completely useless. You should get one!"

(3) 'Sir, that regulation negates my ability to defend myself, which is my inalienable right, a right I claim, fearlessly and unapologetically. If you think you want to charge me, go for it!'

Most of the time, my pistols are concealed, and the issue never rears its ugly head.

Like so many other capable and dedicated officers and NCOs, I'm getting out, leaving in disgust!"

Comment: Although we've made some progress, particularly with the Marines, the foregoing nauseating catastrophe is still all too typical.

Cowards never triumph!

"I'd rather see a sermon than hear one, any day
I'd rather you walk with me than merely 'tell the way'
The eye is a better student, and more willing, than the ear
I find your council confusing, but your example is always clear!"



(It would appear that the commanders of our bases in combat zones are doing their best to replicate the conditions that allowed a terrorist to wreak havoc at Ft. Hood.)

16 Jan 10

Transportation "Security," from a friend in NV:

"I just took a Greyhound Bus from Las Vegas over to LA, to visit friends. I decided it would be easier, and less expensive, than driving.

I was armed with two pistols, assorted blades, and OC when I reported to the LV Bus Station.

When it came time to board, everyone went through the same door, and there was a 'security-person' there. He was a harried, insecure, confused, rent-a-cop in a tattered, grimy uniform. Passengers put a single bag (of their choice) on a table in front of him, and he hurriedly looked through it.

As I put my small tote-bag on the table, a woman walked right past me, in an obvious hurry to get a good seat. Rent-a-cop called for her to come back several times, but she ignored him. His response was to shrug his shoulders and return his attention to me. So, I grabbed my bag and walked past him too! He reacted by disregarding me and turning his attention to the next passenger!

My arsenal and I arrived safely in LA.

I have no doubt that I'm on my own!"

Comment: The predictable institutional response to "security concerns" is always to "tweak the lie." Institutions, private and public, do not promote security. They promote the illusion of security. The welfare of individuals is ever the last thing considered. After all, they're insured! Promoting a delusional, presumptive fantasy is what insurance companies, and the government, demand, and an ever-improved myth is what they, and we, get.

Among "security professionals," individual responsibility and preparedness are prohibited subjects, never to be so much as murmured, much less honestly and openly discussed!

Any doubts? Read the pitiable "Ft Hood Report," just released by the Pentagon!


(Going along to get along is a disease that affects police and military personnel as much as those in private security. Sometimes the biggest difference, aside from power, is just the rate of compensation and the retirement package. As with any other walk of life, there is a wide spectrum of professionalism or lack of it in the private-security industry and it is not always proportional to the rate of pay. I can imagine that it may actually be easier to stand on principle and risk the loss of a job if there is not an attractive pension attached to it. I see little to be gained and much to be lost by treating a private security officer as John's student did.)

Tom Perroni
1 - 1 of 1 Posts