http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/25/2-dead-in-shooting-at-us-naval-station-in-norfolk-officials-say/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/26/navy-searches-for-answers-in-base-shooting-that-left-civilian-suspect-sailor/

Another case of a navy guard disarmed and his weapon used in a shooting.

What's going on ?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/25/2-dead-in-shooting-at-us-naval-station-in-norfolk-officials-say/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/26/navy-searches-for-answers-in-base-shooting-that-left-civilian-suspect-sailor/

Another case of a navy guard disarmed and his weapon used in a shooting.

What's going on ?

And that's why they shouldn't allow handgun class wavers for the military. Obviously their training is not up to par.

And that's why they shouldn't allow handgun class wavers for the military. Obviously their training is not up to par.

I haven't seen anyone 'waived' through a class in my nearly 10 years in the Navy. However, I have seen a lot of people pass who maybe shouldn't or folks that took a significant amount of coaching to get the target.   It's not a difficult qual for the pistol to begin with.  One thing, however, is the qual does not cover weapon retention at all.

Most importantly, I will go ahead and lay a blanket statement that mostl weapon training conducted by the military is subpar, rushed, and done in a hurry.  Until you get to more specialized training - it basically all sucks IMO! If you disagree with this, feel free to let me know!

I haven't seen anyone 'waived' through a class in my nearly 10 years in the Navy. However, I have seen a lot of people pass who maybe shouldn't or folks that took a significant amount of coaching to get the target.   It's not a difficult qual for the pistol to begin with.  One thing, however, is the qual does not cover weapon retention at all.

Most importantly, I will go ahead and lay a blanket statement that mostl weapon training conducted by the military is subpar, rushed, and done in a hurry.  Until you get to more specialized training - it basically all sucks IMO! If you disagree with this, feel free to let me know!

Chris, I think he was referring to allowing military training certification in lieu of hunters ed/handgun safety course for purchases.

Chris, I think he was referring to allowing military training certification in lieu of hunters ed/handgun safety course for purchases.

Both provocative replies. 

Is military firearms training good enough to guard our bases ? ( 2 Navy sentries have firearms taken away by civilians in less than 12 months and they are used to kill people. )

Is military training good enough to get a waiver for a handgun permit in Hawaii ?
( In my opinion that's a heck of a lot better than Hunters Ed where you don't even need to have ever handled a firearm before. This applies to me when I took Hunters Ed back in '99.  )

Uuuuuhhhhhh..... Let's not talk about Hunters Ed.
Let's go with the first question   

.

Training is not the issue and if that is the "take away" from the story, then I'd have to disagree. IF it were about some random swabbie handed an M9 and told to keep watch...maybe. But in this story, the dead sailor was an MA2 and I have no doubt that he had training and certification that is on par (or exceeds) that of civilian LE.

So what it boils down to (when you strip away the MIL aspects), its about a cop who was killed by his own weapon. It happens and we ALL know this.

Training is not the issue and if that is the "take away" from the story, then I'd have to disagree. IF it were about some random swabbie handed an M9 and told to keep watch...maybe. But in this story, the dead sailor was an MA2 and I have no doubt that he had training and certification that is on par (or exceeds) that of civilian LE.

So what it boils down to (when you strip away the MIL aspects), its about a cop who was killed by his own weapon. It happens and we ALL know this.

Without knowing the situation it's hard to say, but weapon retention is and should be a requirement for standing an armed post.  it is currently not a training requirement for qualifying to be an armed watch stander. You have guns basically sitting there, in the open, with a person with little to no training on how to keep it out of the hands of other people.   Some places have little more than single retention holsters as well.  This is the exact reason police departments go with things like triple retention holsters and train for their gun being taken away. 

I'd be surprised if that MA2 has gone through too much more than just navy practical hand gun qualification.  Shore duty offices don't really do much at all because resources are devoted to training sea-based units.  If you are thinking that a rating designation of MA means you know how to use a gun, I would say that you are sorely mistaken.  I say this as a trainer and as a former sailor.   

There is going to be far more to blame here and problems to scope out, but I've been saying this was a problem for a while in the military.  Weapons officers and others just blow it off.  Meet the requirement - do nothing more than that.
Don't look too far to exceed civilian LE either - some only do annual qualifications.  I just got back from FLETC.  You can't fail their quals... I mean you could, but holy shit you gotta be dumb.  People never shooting a gun pass it on the first try with like 95% success rate.

I just want to add the problem gets worse when are letting people wear drop legs and other equipment that they are not really trained in using either.

So what it boils down to (when you strip away the MIL aspects), its about a cop who was killed by his own weapon. It happens and we ALL know this.

What you have said can be on point.  What are our solutions?  To me it is mindset, training, and equipment.

6-12 hours stuck on a gate will make you complacent. Add to that  minimum manning and posts that usually arent tactically thought out, well... Im not surprised. Base security is usually an afterthought of the base commander. A lot of talk about being vigilant blah blah blah. How about using some of the $ spent for lavish officer housing to get more billets for MAs or Dod police so a proper rotation can get going]? Imo theyre leaving these guys out to dry and setting them on a path to failure. Imo. Kudos to the quick thinker who ended this murders life.

As a qualified Topside Watch and Below Decks watch on Submarines I would like a few questions answered before I make judgment...Was this guy a topside watch or some sort of roving below decks type watch?  Was he assaulted on the brow or quarterdeck? Or further aboard after being admitted permission to come aboard? Did he personally know the assailant? Sounds to me like he was caught off guard not due to training but due to some other circumstances not yet revealed.  These questions need to be answered before we condemn training.

As a qualified Topside Watch and Below Decks watch on Submarines I would like a few questions answered before I make judgment...Was this guy a topside watch or some sort of roving below decks type watch?  Was he assaulted on the brow or quarterdeck? Or further aboard after being admitted permission to come aboard? Did he personally know the assailant? Sounds to me like he was caught off guard not due to training but due to some other circumstances not yet revealed.  These questions need to be answered before we condemn training.

This is one of the reasons I like the topside watch on the pier as you have more room to control your access area.  But, if we thought about it... I'm sure you know how much attention most TRP / POOD are paying to things going on.  I used to get 'talked' to for having my hand on and around the bail area on our retention holsters.
We just need a dose of 'step it up' on security posts.  Instead of being security, CO's and WEPS just look at us like we are freaking public relations.  Let's stroll around in dress whites while wearing a freaking M-16 and stuff.. yeah.. sounds great.   As other people have eluded, security is a dog and pony show.   We are not setting our young guys (and gals) up for success with the attitude we have towards it imo! 

Side note, glad to see another bubblehead .

v/r FT1 (SS).

According to one news article, it said a quarterdeck watch stander had their pistol taken from the civilian and then an MA2 came to the rescue in an attempt to help the dude that got his pistol snatched.
It is the media so maybe you folks are spot on lol. IRT security and training yea, it is not the best. I think it could be better, I hate drills but, when it comes to security it is necessary.

Does the Navy use a leash on their pistols? Did he maybe know the guy and hand him the gun as a "show 'n' tell"  When i'd carry the 240 or M-60 people would want to hold it and/or take pictures with it. If it was snapped it he should've been able to keep it under control. But who knows what the situation really was.

Does the Navy use a leash on their pistols? Did he maybe know the guy and hand him the gun as a "show 'n' tell"  When i'd carry the 240 or M-60 people would want to hold it and/or take pictures with it. If it was snapped it he should've been able to keep it under control. But who knows what the situation really was.

I think most do.  I'm not sure if base people would use it; we used it on the ship because, well, people had a habit of dropping guns in the water.... when standing topside.  (They would play with their shit, drop it, and it would go overboard lol).

more info on the shooting - Mark Mayo is the MP that was killed coming to rescue of the female MP who was disarmed, the assailant was also killed.


http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20140326_Navy_Sailor_died_at_Va_base_protecting_colleague.html?id=252535401

"The man then got into an altercation with a female petty officer and disarmed her, Navy officials said. Palomino said Mayo stepped over the disarmed officer and fired his weapon at the assailant. He was the installation's chief of the guard and came to help once he saw the civilian board the ship.

Multiple pistol rounds were fired between the gunman and Navy security forces responding to the scene, Palomino said. The Navy has said previously that the truck driver fired the shot that killed Mayo.

The base's commanding officer, Capt. Robert Clark, said Mayo's actions to protect the disarmed officer were extraordinary.

""He basically gave his life for hers," said Clark said during a news conference."

Does the Navy use a leash on their pistols? Did he maybe know the guy and hand him the gun as a "show 'n' tell"  When i'd carry the 240 or M-60 people would want to hold it and/or take pictures with it. If it was snapped it he should've been able to keep it under control. But who knows what the situation really was.

Good observation, they should have a lanyard attached to the M9, same goes with the military gate guards.  With that said, majority of the time it is rusted and not going to stop a strong individual from ripping it from the holster.

This is one of the reasons I like the topside watch on the pier as you have more room to control your access area.  But, if we thought about it... I'm sure you know how much attention most TRP / POOD are paying to things going on.  I used to get 'talked' to for having my hand on and around the bail area on our retention holsters.
We just need a dose of 'step it up' on security posts.  Instead of being security, CO's and WEPS just look at us like we are freaking public relations.  Let's stroll around in dress whites while wearing a freaking M-16 and stuff.. yeah.. sounds great.  As other people have eluded, security is a dog and pony show.   We are not setting our young guys (and gals) up for success with the attitude we have towards it imo! 

Side note, glad to see another bubblehead .

v/r FT1 (SS).

This differs from command to command.  If the climate for being "lazy" while standing a topside watch is tolerated by the superiors or senior enlisted, it is very easy to have the junior personnel just go through the motions to get their watch over with.  I used to run Z5O's on boats, and could tell which ones had been trained right.  IMO, most of the time the dog and pony show is not for the boats CO, some of it stems from tradition/RTP and other times for outside entities.

There will be changes coming down the line from this, hopefully for the better.  Either way the media spins this, I believe the MA2 actions were heroic.  Fair winds and following sea's MA2, we have the watch.


 

Without knowing the situation it's hard to say, but weapon retention is and should be a requirement for standing an armed post.  it is currently not a training requirement for qualifying to be an armed watch stander. You have guns basically sitting there, in the open, with a person with little to no training on how to keep it out of the hands of other people.   Some places have little more than single retention holsters as well.  This is the exact reason police departments go with things like triple retention holsters and train for their gun being taken away. 

I'd be surprised if that MA2 has gone through too much more than just navy practical hand gun qualification.  Shore duty offices don't really do much at all because resources are devoted to training sea-based units.  If you are thinking that a rating designation of MA means you know how to use a gun, I would say that you are sorely mistaken.  I say this as a trainer and as a former sailor.   

Without question, situations can vary and seeing as reports say a female PO was disarmed the point may be moot. But I still believe the deceased MA did have the required training and proficiency for his rating and position as COG.

This belief is not based solely on MA rating. It also takes into account that, about 8 years ago, standards for military police/security forces training across all branches were adjusted to closer match that of their civilian counterparts. And IIRC training for all military LE now requires demonstrated proficiency in pistol, shotgun, and rifle with a score of 80% to pass. Granted, it's a lot to squeeze into 7-8 weeks, but it's no different from any other MOS, specialty, or rating; some amount of hands on/on the job training is the norm. And I say all this as a 13 year LE professional (3 as a instructor) and soon to be retired soldier.

Then again, I'm not a squid but in recent years I've seen more and more boots with Gump level stupidity, so I'm open to any possibility. I'd just prefer not to question the qualifications of a dead service member and would be just fine with the hero story being spun.

There is going to be far more to blame here and problems to scope out, but I've been saying this was a problem for a while in the military.  Weapons officers and others just blow it off.  Meet the requirement - do nothing more than that.
Don't look too far to exceed civilian LE either - some MOST only do annual qualifications.  I just got back from FLETC.  You can't fail their quals... I mean you could, but holy shit you gotta be dumb.  People never shooting a gun pass it on the first try with like 95% success rate.

I just want to add the problem gets worse when are letting people wear drop legs and other equipment that they are not really trained in using either.

Clearly the incident in Norfolk is result of multiple failures.  I'm sure you'd agree that this is the kind of shit that should not be possible on a ship, that is stateside and docked in their home port.

I don't have a problem with civilian LE standards or their training. We can debate the minimum standards and requirements all day long, it won't change the fact that the job is peace officer, not gunfighter. Statistically, there is a lot of truth to the saying that most LEO's will never discharge their weapon in the line of duty. I'd think most who are entering the profession would love spending an entire career never having to...That is unless they're aspiring to be the next Wunder or McBride.

Not sure what you mean about FLETC...2 failed firearms training while I was in a basic course and neither was dumb. They just physically could not operate their agency's standard issue.

What you have said can be on point.  What are our solutions?  To me it is mindset, training, and equipment.

My point was off, but thanks. A strong self defense or combat mindset, ANY training, and good/reliable/familiar equipment are all good starts that are better than nothing. But as my former instructor once said: "When in a fight for your life, no amount of training is ever enough. I can train you and give you the tools. You can practice and run the drills. But none of it ever amounts to a guarantee of survival..." The younger me took it in as motivation. Now that I'm much older, I've become pretty jaded.  There is no definitive solution that can cover every situation.

Is military firearms training good enough to guard our bases ? ( 2 Navy sentries have firearms taken away by civilians in less than 12 months and they are used to kill people. )

Is military training good enough to get a waiver for a handgun permit in Hawaii ?
( In my opinion that's a heck of a lot better than Hunters Ed where you don't even need to have ever handled a firearm before. This applies to me when I took Hunters Ed back in '99.  )

IMO, yes and no. (this is just from my experience in the Navy, not to include other branches of military)
Here is why I say no.  I took it upon myself to read Hawaii laws that pertain to the usage, storage, transport, etc. of a weapon.  In most cases that I have seen the letter/waiver that is issued from the military command/unit is a canned letter that states that you understand the state laws and fufill the weapon qualification requirement.  They basically just ask you if you did review the state laws, so it is based on the individual to do that. 

Here is why I say yes.  As far as weapon qualifications goes, sea going commands have to meet a minimum requirement to keep watchstanders qualified to handle weapons.  From what I know, actual gun qual is annually, and then there is a dry fire trainer at 6 months (laser trainer).  On average, a sea going tour is 4 years and majority of the time your first tour is a sea going command. This does not include those that go to SRF(security reaction force), which there is a requirement to have a certain amount of them trained on a ship, where they do teach weapon retention, room clearing, unit movements, etc which is a two week course each for a basic and advanced class.   Now compare that to what a civilian is required to do to obtain a permit.  One handgun safety course, or hunters ed.


Is military firearms training good enough to guard our bases?  That IMO is subject to a case by case basis.  Training is just that, you receive the tools and information/training to succeed, but you only get what you put into it.  If the person does not take the training seriouisly, they are setting themselves and post up for failure. 

The only MOS's that get any kind of "retention" training is Law Enforcement (MP's, SP's) at a basic level.  Sure some of the more elite units do too but by and large the rank and file military personnel are only taught which end is the "pointy" one and the very basics of how to use it.  They will see it monthly for cleaning or for training exercises and qualify once or twice a year.  There is NO effort within any branch or sections of the Military, in general, that stress secure/ retention training be it static or simulated duress with the exception of Law Enforcement....and I cannot attest to the specifics nor the quality or detail of such training (wasn't my MOS).  Though I may be wrong as I got out after the Gulf War....there really isn't too much that I have seen and heard to change my generalized assesment especially with regards to handguns.  There MAY be more put into training with rifles but I don't know this for certain.

Basic Military Marksmanship Training is generally limited to basic functions, disassembly, cleaning and target engagement.  Granted, infantry and line units will have additional training on tactics and so on, but the majority of the rank and file are logistical element MOS's and as stated, do NOT generally get any additional training prior to being assigned sentry duty.