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.