Switch to Desktop Site
 
 

Pentagon a quiet force in gun-control debate. What does it want?

The Pentagon has already successfully taken on the NRA over a pro-gun congressional measure that it didn't like. Now some retired officials are speaking out in the gun-control debate.

Image

Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal, seen here at his retirement ceremony in Washington in 2010, has questioned the need for civilians to have military-style assault rifles.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP/File

About these ads

Even as President Obama announced sweeping gun-control initiatives Wednesday, one little-discussed contingent has been quietly influencing the debate behind the scenes: current and former US military commanders.

US military officials have already been successful in reversing one initiative backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) on Capitol Hill, which they worried could have a dangerous impact on US troops. Now, some prominent retired military officials are backing the administration's calls for "responsible gun ownership," including limits on military-style assault weapons.

Given their background, active and retired US military often have significant credibility in the gun-rights debate – both in Congress and among the general public.

“I do think retired military officers have a bit more weight than, no offense, the stereotypical ‘knee-jerk New England liberals' do,” says retired Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, a psychiatrist and former mental health adviser to the Army surgeon general. “We’ve got credibility, we’ve worn the uniform, we’ve carried weapons. I like to go to the range and shoot – we’re not anti-weapon, per se.”

Earlier this month, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who served as the commander of US forces in Afghanistan and before that as head of the elite Joint Special Operations Command, which oversees US Navy SEAL and Delta Force missions, said that there is no reason for most Americans to have military-grade weapons.

“I spent a career carrying typically either a M16, and later a M4 carbine,” he told MSNBC. “And a M4 carbine fires a .223 caliber round – which is 5.56 millimeters – at about 3,000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed to do that. That’s what our soldiers ought to carry.”

He added, “I personally don't think there's any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America. I believe that we've got to take a serious look – I understand everybody's desire to have whatever they want – but we have to protect our children and our police and we have to protect our population. And I think we have to take a very mature look at that."

Next

Page:   1   |   2


Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.

Share

Loading...