Defiance Through Compliance: The Deep State Hoodwink on Gun Free Military Bases
In
2015, in an exclusive interview on Ammoland, Candidate (now President) Donald
Trump promised he would mandate that soldiers remain armed and alert at our
military bases. From AmmoLand, Candidate Trump:
“They
are going to be ready to defend themselves against terrorists. Our brave
soldiers shouldn't be in danger due to policy created by civilian leadership.
political correctitude has no place during this debate.”
That
policy was reiterated in 2018. President Trump said he would review the policy
of keeping service members disarmed on our military bases and recruiting
centers.
Despite
this promise, highly trained and motivated aviators were killed by a terrorist
at Naval air base (NAS) Pensacola, Florida, on 6 December 2019. Several were
wounded. All were unarmed by DOD and Naval policy. While NAS Pensacola features
a security team, they were ineffective in stopping the terrorist at the base:
He
says this group is comprised of active-duty sailors and individuals from the
department of Naval citizens. He says these are the sole armed personnel on the
bottom, all other firearms are banned.
As
reported in Fox News, the trainer pilots say the victims the gunman preyed on
were defenseless. People within the Pensacola community believe if more people
were armed, the shooter wouldn’t be ready to kill three Navy sailors.
It
is unclear if any base security members were among the primary responders.
There
is a deep, long-standing prejudice against allowing active-duty members to be
armed outside of extremely limited circumstances within the us Military. i
think it originates from the endemic Progressive philosophy that has spread
through much of the American political elite over the last 100 years.
The
military has been wonted to indoctrinate service members for social engineering
since a minimum of WWII. Progressivism, as a philosophy, is anti-Second
Amendment in its DNA. Within the elite, military people are expected to
disdain, look down upon, and discourage the carry of weapons.
Candidate
Trump may have underestimated the political correctitude within the military
brass. President Trump was never a bureaucrat. In Bureaucracies, there's an
extended known and practiced method of preventing superiors from implementing
policies you afflict. it's defiance by compliance.
I
believe this happened to frustrate President Trump’s desire to prevent our
military base and recruitment centers from being gun free, defenseless victim
zones.
On
November 18 of 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence issued the newest iteration of DoD Directive 5210.56, ARMING and
therefore the USE OF FORCE, approved by Robert O. Work, the Deputy Secretary of
Defense. Robert O. Work may be a retired Marine Colonel who joined the Obama
administration in 2009, as a part of the transition team. He left the Trump
administration in 2017.
The
iteration of DoD Directive 5210.56 put into effect in November of 2016, appears
to be a response to the demand that service members, a minimum of those that
already had concealed carry permits, be allowed to be armed on government
installations, so on defend themselves et al. This appears to be the type of
policy candidate Trump was calling for.
Now,
FD Associates will be a good company that can help you with your ITAR compliance, the team has more than 100 years of combined experience. So if you
have problem with arms regulations and registrations, they can help you.

Comments
Post a Comment