Pentagon: Contractors in Iraq must be unarmed

[Hal]

The same policy was in effect is SE Asia 35 years ago.

civilian contractors

is the key.

We had a recruiter for civilain contracotors (welding) come to our high school in 1968 offering all sorts of money to anyone intersted in switching over to a trade school, then going over to Viet Nam to ply their new found trade. One of the first questions asked was what types of arms we'd be allowed to carry.

None - was the response. Protection was to be provided by the military.

The policy was largly ignored then as I'm sure it will be now.

I've know quite a few of the civilian contractors that put in time over there through the years. Every single one of them packed when they were there.

 

[Highland Ranger]

The problem here is this underlying current in this country - don't fight back leave it to the "professionals" .

Worked real well on 9/11 - everyone waited for the professionals figuring if they didn't fight back they'd be safe.

We'd better get back to encouraging personal accountability or we are doomed as a culture.

 

[HankB]

Even when you're armed to the teeth, it's STILL dangerous in Iraq. There is NO WAY that ANY civilian job would be worth my being over there unarmed.

The inmates really ARE running the asylum.

 

[RealGun]

What's really behind this

If the Pentagon saw civilian contractors as a problem, I can't think of a better way to invite them all to go home. The Pentagon did not have to ban contractors outright, did they? The irony is that when all those jobs were taken over by the Army, the personnel would definitely be armed. I think the real issue is accountability for shootings. If they imagine that unarmed Iraqis can fill the jobs, I wish them luck.

The Pentagon wants to do their best to be politically correct in the view of the Iraqis. They also do not want to be distracted by the need to retrieve civilian contractors taken as hostages. No, the message is clear that contracting personnel for dangerous areas is no longer a lucrative business. This was a broad invitation for all contractors to leave Iraq and for others to stop coming.

I still have an issue with the US sponsored interim Constitution for Iraq banning guns categorically. Iraqis have the right of self defense like anyone else, and who will return their guns when it is all over? When will it be over? Note that Iraqis are not cooperating. Would we? What I would ban during a period of martial law is aggressive public brandishing. Anyone openly carrying gun in hand is a potential target in my opinion.

 

[Desertdog]

Whom ever thought up this stupid idea, needs to spend 30 days driving fuel trucks in Iraq without firearms.
Bet they would change ther minds about this rule.

 

[FRIENDLY]

ARMED CONTRACTORS

Where are the people making this decision based? DAMMNED sure it is the continental US not anywhere near the shooting.warm and safe 9-5.00 hrs.IF you want to change this stupid decision put the bosses WITH family over there and see and hear the screaming

 

[seeker_two]

I still have an issue with the US sponsored interim Constitution for Iraq banning guns categorically. Iraqis have the right of self defense like anyone else, and who will return their guns when it is all over? When will it be over? Note that Iraqis are not cooperating. Would we?

In the April 2004 American Rifleman (page 61), the writer tells the story about how an Iraqi citizen was being carjacked by three scumbags. The Iraqi was trying to get the American soldiers to help, but then had to draw & fire his Colt .25ACP at the scumbags. The carjackers high-tailed it out of there....

...but the US soldiers confiscated the Iraqi's pistol before releasing him back into the same neighborhood. AFTER A F- -ING SELF-DEFENSE SHOOTING!!!

The most disturbing thing was that the author seemed OK w/ that action....

What other actions will our politicians, the NRA, & some soldiers be "OK" with?...

 

[Obiwan]

I wouldn't dream of stopping a good rant....

But...

" proposed a rule saying that civilian contractors who accompany the military in battle areas can't carry private firearms unless they received permission"

So...it doesn't say no weapons for contractors....

It says you need permission...IF... you are with the troops in battle areas.

So...Joe Blow from Kokomo needs permisssion to carry a loaded weapon rather than trusting his life to the troops with the big guns.

Don't get me wrong....if I was ambushed, I would prefer to shoot back just on principle...even with a sidearm...just to feel like I was doing SOMETHING...

But......

While I may not completely agree with this...I don't see the sky falling

 

[RealGun]

While I may not completely agree with this...I don't see the sky falling

I think we have been conditioned to see these things as inroads by a grander plan. "The sky is falling" often turns out to be an accurate projection. In any case, everything tends to get closely examined.

If you think about why the interim Iraqi Constitution says "no guns", period, and the fact that non-military people have guns, while the Constitution is intended to be enforced, you start to get the picture. Only armies and law enforcement should have guns. No justification based solely upon self defense will be recognized, because it obviously would create a case to allow Iraqis to have guns. The US Pentagon then is saying that there is no inherent right of self defense.