Bush, Walker, Trump criticise gun ban in recruiting offices

[Berkshire]

Note: I'm trying to be humorous.

Luckily for him, Jon Stewart was a lot better at it, but his humor was still thoroughly dishonest.

I hesitated to debate you about this, but since you keep bringing it up, most Americans (excl far right) believe Jon Stewart to be much more credible than almost all other media folks. I'm sure you and other right wingers disagree, but your numbers are declining. That's why the Dems won the White House and will keep winning. I believe Fox News to be thoroughly dishonest and I'm sure you disagree with that. It's clear that America is still polarized, so let's just see who has more on their side.

[Publicus]

 

Note: I'm trying to be humorous.

Luckily for him, Jon Stewart was a lot better at it, but his humor was still thoroughly dishonest.

 

Almost all of the political wit and genius are on the political left so it's easy to see why the reactionary right are sour and dour about this recent and richly new development in the political culture.

The right wants more guns everywhere for everyone at all times and the flying rightwing have no criticisms of the loony bird leadership of the National Rifle Association.

The right doesn't get it because the reactionary right never will get it.

[lifeincnx]

I have a better idea. Eliminate all of the recruiting offices and re-institute the draft with no exemptions (even for Senator's sons). I have a feeling we'd see an avalanche of peace-niks morph into being before our very eyes.

[Berkshire]

Note: I'm trying to be humorous.

Luckily for him, Jon Stewart was a lot better at it, but his humor was still thoroughly dishonest.

There are so many examples that I can bring up where Jon Stewart is right-on-the-money about a wide range of issues. But since we're talking Trump, can you tell me how he's dishonest in this case:

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/jon-stewart-triumphs-with-takedown-of-donald-trump-on-the-daily-show-20150722-gihsij.html

[chuckd]

Now that Trump has been beaten to death, how about getting back on the topic of arming our recruiters?

There have been two recent developments that haven't gotten news since the conversation here is centered around Trump and Stewart.

One is that several states have ordered their flags to be flown at half-mast in honor of the murdered recruiters. Five days after the shooting President Obama has decided that might be a good idea as well. US flags will be flown at half-mast for a five day period in their honor.

The other breaking news is that Obama has not ordered the military to carry weapons in their own defense but he has instead ordered military recruiters not to wear their uniforms in the performance of their recruiting duties.

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces and grow facial hair to cover the Marine hair cuts?

[Scott]

....Meanwhile, back at the topic.....

I think you can open a topic in a different section of the forum to discuss comedians.

[Publicus]

Now that Trump has been beaten to death, how about getting back on the topic of arming our recruiters?

There have been two recent developments that haven't gotten news since the conversation here is centered around Trump and Stewart.

One is that several states have ordered their flags to be flown at half-mast in honor of the murdered recruiters. Five days after the shooting President Obama has decided that might be a good idea as well. US flags will be flown at half-mast for a five day period in their honor.

The other breaking news is that Obama has not ordered the military to carry weapons in their own defense but he has instead ordered military recruiters not to wear their uniforms in the performance of their recruiting duties.

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces and grow facial hair to cover the Marine hair cuts?

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces

And here I'd thought we had been getting away from talking abut The Bloviator.

Department of Defense policy for the past 50 years is for a certain percentage of military personnel on duty in the Washington metro area to wear civilian clothing while on duty instead of their military uniforms, to include ordinary business suits or casual civilian clothing, while on duty. So having active duty serving military personnel on duty wear civilian clothes while on duty is old hat in the US military.

DoD orders a certain number of officers, non-coms, enlisted personnel, while on duty in metro Washington DC assignments to wear civilian clothes so the city and its environs might not look like a giant military base or facility. With the Pentagon there plus with all the military based in and around Washington DC, it could otherwise begin to look like World War II is still going on. No president wants or approves of such a misimpression.

Active duty military personnel on and during duty being ordered to wear civilian attire while on duty is also routine in other US civilian metro locales that are heavily populated by military installations, or in civilian metro areas that might host a large number of military personnel at one large base, such as the Norfolk Naval Station in Virginia.

Active US military personnel on duty wearing civilian clothes (while on duty ) has been true for many decades so it is not only nothing new or radical, it is old hat that may apply well to recruiting offices given the new terrorist reality at home.

I approve of it applying to active duty recruiters on duty in civilian locales as especially wise and prudent in the present context and circumstances.

[chuckd]

Now that Trump has been beaten to death, how about getting back on the topic of arming our recruiters?

There have been two recent developments that haven't gotten news since the conversation here is centered around Trump and Stewart.

One is that several states have ordered their flags to be flown at half-mast in honor of the murdered recruiters. Five days after the shooting President Obama has decided that might be a good idea as well. US flags will be flown at half-mast for a five day period in their honor.

The other breaking news is that Obama has not ordered the military to carry weapons in their own defense but he has instead ordered military recruiters not to wear their uniforms in the performance of their recruiting duties.

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces and grow facial hair to cover the Marine hair cuts?

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces

And here I'd thought we had been getting away from talking abut The Bloviator.

Department of Defense policy for the past 50 years is for a certain percentage of military personnel in the Washington metro area to wear civilian clothing instead of their military uniforms, to include ordinary business suits while on duty. So having active duty serving military personnel wear civilian clothes is old hat in the US military.

DoD orders a certain number of officers, non-coms, enlisted personnel, in metro Washington DC assignments to wear civilian clothes so the city and its environs might not look like a giant military base or facility. With the Pentagon there plus with all the military based in and around Washington DC, it could otherwise begin to look like World War II is still going on. No president wants or approves of such a misimpression.

Active duty military personnel on and during duty being ordered to wear civilian attire is also routine in other US civilian metro locales that are heavily populated by military installations, or in civilian metro areas that might host a large number of military personnel at one large base, such as the Norfolk Naval Station in Virginia.

Active US military personnel on duty wearing civilian clothes (while on duty) has been true for many decades so it is not only nothing new or radical, it is old hat that may apply well to recruiting offices given the new terrorist reality at home.

I approve of it as both wise and prudent in the present context and circumstances.

When did Chattanooga move to the DC area?

What's wrong with simply issuing them firearms for their self protection?

Surely even you would consider them trained weapons experts.

[Publicus]

 

Now that Trump has been beaten to death, how about getting back on the topic of arming our recruiters?

There have been two recent developments that haven't gotten news since the conversation here is centered around Trump and Stewart.

One is that several states have ordered their flags to be flown at half-mast in honor of the murdered recruiters. Five days after the shooting President Obama has decided that might be a good idea as well. US flags will be flown at half-mast for a five day period in their honor.

The other breaking news is that Obama has not ordered the military to carry weapons in their own defense but he has instead ordered military recruiters not to wear their uniforms in the performance of their recruiting duties.

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces and grow facial hair to cover the Marine hair cuts?

Perhaps they should also be ordered to wear hair pieces

And here I'd thought we had been getting away from talking abut The Bloviator.

Department of Defense policy for the past 50 years is for a certain percentage of military personnel in the Washington metro area to wear civilian clothing instead of their military uniforms, to include ordinary business suits while on duty. So having active duty serving military personnel wear civilian clothes is old hat in the US military.

DoD orders a certain number of officers, non-coms, enlisted personnel, in metro Washington DC assignments to wear civilian clothes so the city and its environs might not look like a giant military base or facility. With the Pentagon there plus with all the military based in and around Washington DC, it could otherwise begin to look like World War II is still going on. No president wants or approves of such a misimpression.

Active duty military personnel on and during duty being ordered to wear civilian attire is also routine in other US civilian metro locales that are heavily populated by military installations, or in civilian metro areas that might host a large number of military personnel at one large base, such as the Norfolk Naval Station in Virginia.

Active US military personnel on duty wearing civilian clothes (while on duty) has been true for many decades so it is not only nothing new or radical, it is old hat that may apply well to recruiting offices given the new terrorist reality at home.

I approve of it as both wise and prudent in the present context and circumstances.

When did Chattanooga move to the DC area?

What's wrong with simply issuing them firearms for their self protection?

Surely even you would consider them trained weapons experts.

 

Guns guns and more guns to include in malls, central business districts of cities, near schools, churches, banks etc etc.

No sale.

DoD regs prohibit or sharply limit firearms possession or access on military installations except as carefully defined and controlled. This must apply even moreso to civilian locales where recruiters are.

The long standing DoD policy of a civilian clothes alternative, expanded to apply to recruiters, is nothing new or radical and it seems a fully viable response to the new terrorist threat to both US military domestically and to anyone else who may be associated with the recruiters, however temporary the association might be.

There could also be an armed sheriff's deputy in the recruiters' office or in the immediate vicinity of the recruiters' office.

Guns are not always the answer to everything everywhere at all times no matter what else can be realistically examined, proposed, implemented. The recruiters also wearing civilian clothes on duty is nothing new to the military and it is a viable approach to the new domestic terrorism challenge in these respects.