Is this really beneficial?

[WestKentucky]

I will preface this by saying I don't personally know the individuals in the photos, BUT this is literally 1/4 mile from my front door. I won't go into too much of a rant on how silly it is to deny military personnel the authority to be armed...considering that's kinda most of them job....but I do wonder with the current grassroots movement that has swept the nation, are these people doing any good? Are they benefiting their cause? Or are they just being news fodder as redneck with gun as the media seems to be portraying many of these groups. The couple in the link certainly make me wonder. http://www.wkdzradio.com/Armed-Civilians-At-Recruiting-Center/21778516

 

[guyfromohio]

There are two scenarios that end well for these guys: 1) nothing happens 2) something happens and they live out their heroic fantasy saving somebody from a terrorist attack. Unfortunately, there are many, many more bad possibilities....ND on site, menacing charge when the Muslim woman walks to the subway and Captain America assumes she's wearing a bomb vest under the garb, worse...he shoots her, my bearded Jewish cousin (who I wouldn't sit next to on a plane) shows up to help with his AR and suddenly he's mistaken for a bad guy, or maybe there is an atta k and they simply lose the fight. Just a bad idea all around. Good intentions...hearts in the right place, but a self-defense argument is hard when one is looking for the fight.

 

[hso]

The only way this is of benefit is if one of these volunteer guards actually stops an attack (which is more than unlikely to occur) before one of them injures someone or has a confrontation before they stay home.

A negligent discharge by one of the volunteer guards has already occurred in Ohio. Luckily no one was seriously injured or our cause would have been completely undermined.

 

[WestKentucky]

The thing that struck me more than anything about this particular story is the way in which arms are displayed. The guy in this story would be more a liability than a benefit in the longshot that another attacker went after them. Scoped lever action hanging from the neck is just about the worst manner of arms carrying I can imagine for standing watch. The masses who are not familiar with proper arms handling may not even realize that this guy is doing it wrong. The gal at least has a proper holster and is wearing the weapon properly. Maybe the military folks being "guarded" should be giving pointers on gun safety.

 

[USAF_Vet]

It may just be me, but if you choose to do this, wouldn't it be beneficial to at least look professional?

Scruffy beard because you haven't bothered to shave doesn't really give that look. Wearing a USMC T-shirt (him) or an Army t-shirt (her) is acceptable, so that's not really an issue. But neither of their overall appearances screams professionalism. It s closer to dirtbag trying to prove a point.

Personally, I don't see how self appointed civilian guards is going to be much of a deterrent to a future attack, if there is one. The Chattanooga recruiting center, shots were fired from inside a vehicle. I doubt if a vehicle pulls up for a drive by, this guy is getting that lever action .22 into play. She has a better chance drawing her Hi Point, but they will probably both end up as victims of an attack, not saviors. Not knocking their chosen weapons too badly (use what you have has always been a mantra around here), but dude needs to at least attempt to carry it properly.

 

[DeepSouth]

Doesn't make sense to me, I guess everyone wants 15 minutes of fame in this age.
Besides if your sincere about protecting them, how long do you plan to do this? Until they pass new legislation? That'll be months, if ever, don't these people have jobs?

Whatever, I guess their free to do it. I just think it's, not helpful.... To put a it high road.

 

[Ash]

It's clear the Army doesn't want them and views them as a security threat. What will happen is that these guards will be around for a short while and then move on.