I think the National Guard should get veterans benefits!

They do

There are no exclusions of branches or component to receiving benefits. There are a few exclusions based on time in service, discharge type, and criminal history.

It's my understanding that many, but not all, folks who serve in the National Guard are considered "veterans" for purposes of benefits.

It seems that in order to qualify, you have to retire from the Guard with 20 years of service, or have served a minimum of 180 days in full time "active" status (like on a deployment) during your time with the Guard.

But if you get out before you hit 20, and were never activated for the required 180+ days, you won't get full veterans benefits.

quote:

Originally posted by 1flynDO:
They do

LOL, hard to 100% end a thread with two words but that does it.

A little google search would have prevented this whole waste of space lol.

Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

wee bit of a thread drift lol. But my first thought was if a bunch of bad guys showed up with a bunch of loaded magazines it would go very badly!!!

As far as the veteran status. I know thats not the case. A current co-worker was having issues with a CO. He he got out and then realized that he didnt qaulify as he hadnt been deployed long enough. He screwed himself pretty good. Especially since his was a full time national gaurd job!!

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

I'm ex Army myself and have some insight.

When 9/11 happened, they deployed the Guard to Airports and they brought their M16s. I have a friend who's a NG Captain and we had lunch one day and I told him I knew the magazines in his men's rifles weren't loaded because of my experiences while in the Army.

He said, in all seriousness, not to tell anybody.

Basically the military doesn't trust its members with live ammo unless they're on a firing range or in a war zone.

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

When my unit landed in Mogadishu, we drove in a convoy from the Airport to the other side of the city, with an empty mag inserted in our rifles. We didn't get ammo until we got to our final Base. Literally bussed through hostile territory in the middle of a civil war, in open top 5 Ton Trucks, with no ammo.

The Marine Gate Guards in Beirut, did not have ammunition in their rifles when the Truck bomb drove into the barracks where their friends and brothers were.

Mike Pence, just days before the inauguration had the Nasty Girls disarmed before he walked through to greet them. Don't believe me? Look at the pictures.

Long history of disarming the troops for political theater.

quote:

Nasty Girls

?

celticwolf wrote:

quote:

The Marine Gate Guards in Beirut, did not have ammunition in their rifles when the Truck bomb drove into the barracks where their friends and brothers were.

I served in several embassy posts (not marine guard) and back then Marine Guard could not fire his weapon unless OK'd by the Ambassador. Wonder if orders have changed.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

Nasty Girls

?

(N)ational (G)uard.

I spent twelve years on active duty in the Navy and ten years in the Army National Guard. I had to spend a minimum of ten years in the National Guard/Reserves to qualify for military retirement.

I retired in 1985, but didn't receive retired pay and military healthcare (Tricare) until I turned sixty in 2006. I also receive VA pay and medical for 60% disability due to Agent Orange exposure in Viet Nam.

I was on that gig for about 6 months.

We had loaded mags inserted in M-16 A2’s. No round in the chamber, Weapon on safe. (Condition Amber).

Lock plate installed (status que for SAD/NGRF: allows safe or semi only (no 3rnd burst).

I don’t recall exactly how many rnds or mags we had. I want to say 2x 15 or 25

I recon weapon and ammo details varied according to the state, location and OIC.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

I'm ex Army myself and have some insight.

When 9/11 happened, they deployed the Guard to Airports and they brought their M16s. I have a friend who's a NG Captain and we had lunch one day and I told him I knew the magazines in his men's rifles weren't loaded because of my experiences while in the Army.

He said, in all seriousness, not to tell anybody.

Basically the military doesn't trust its members with live ammo unless they're on a firing range or in a war zone.

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

I can't vouch for what training our troops receive these days, but when I was in the army (a looooong time ago) we were trained on how to use our rifles to fight without ammunition. Amazing what a rifle butt to the head will do to quiet folks down.

quote:

Originally posted by REdwin89:
celticwolf wrote:

quote:

The Marine Gate Guards in Beirut, did not have ammunition in their rifles when the Truck bomb drove into the barracks where their friends and brothers were.

I served in several embassy posts (not marine guard) and back then Marine Guard could not fire his weapon unless OK'd by the Ambassador. Wonder if orders have changed.

The Marine Corps changed after Beirut. General A.M. Grey signed the order right after he became Commandant that ALL Marines standing guard will have a weapon with live ammo.


I've been in at out of a few Embassies as well, 1991-1995. Unless things have changed, Marines ROE were in defense of life. If the Embassy came under attack, the ROE was dictated by Ambassador, DCM, then RSO.

So basically if there's a angry mob outside the gates, tossing rocks and bottles, Devil Dogs aren't busting caps. The angry mob storms the gates, there's some tear gas getting chucked around. The angry mob starts throwing grenades, bullets, Molotov cocktails at the Embassy, things escalate, and the Ambassador dictates things. Angry mob breaches the "Hard Line"... Bodies are hitting the floor. There's no way we're going through another Tehran for 444 days. (But under the current administration, who knows. )

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
Why did they make all those guys tote rifles if they weren't allowed to have ammunition?

It's all about the ILLUSION of security. Not actual security itself.

They want the big, mean Rottweiler, German Shepherd, Pit Bull that snarls and barks at everything, but no teeth. Because hurting people is bad.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly!

Remember the Kent State incident with the students/protesters vs National Guard troops who had live ammo that was fired into the crowd. ............................................ drill sgt.

I have had a full combat load of ammo while operating inside the U.S. on 2 different occasions in 2 different capacities (1 time active duty, the other National Guard.)

The first was on the S. border in support of Border Patrol and the 2nd time was during Katrina.

So, yes soldiers can have live ammo while doing domestic missions, it all depends on who is in charge.

I have also been guarding sensitive installations in the ME against terrorists with a single mag of ammo in a ziplock baggie in my vest. Make sense of that! (It was at least pre 9/11...but the base also got blowed up a year after I left...)