BYOG is the new military policy?
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2026
135 points (99.3% liked)
News
37047 readers
2182 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
To be clear. This isn't "let everyone" kind of thing. He's not that stupid. He knows some troops would literally just go kill their commanders.
This is about arming and approving those loyal to the cause of white supremacy and his Christian end times insanity. Those are who will be holding freely at all times.
We WILL see additional violence from this. But it will be labeled as patriotic defense against a rogue troop.
Don't expect the people that should be shot to get shot. They're arming their loyal grunts.
He knows some troops would literally just go and kill their commanders.
I'm not sure this works how you think it works. Military members aren't prohibited from owning guns, they just have to store them and check them out to go shoot. There's been plenty of shootings on military bases with personal firearms because unless you fully search every car coming in, you won't stop someone from bringing one in.
If idiots are carrying around off duty it's more likely to cause a drunken bar shooting than a fragging incident.
Also also the memo literally says it'll let everyone "request" to carry, implying some level of commander is the one to approve it.
But if the commanders are sycophants, then only certain requests to carry are approved.
It could easily engender a situation where the commander plays favorites to create power imbalances and danger for whoever happens to be in the out group. We’ve also recently learned that Hegseth has meddled a lot with military promotions, targeting specific groups for career suppression.
So, you think allowing everyone to have a gun at all times and no longer searching wouldn't increase the likelihood of someone being able to go postal? But, that wasn't even the point of my comment. It was literally an example of what the order was NOT going to result in.
Did you not read my comment or something? Or reply to the wrong one? My comment literally pointed out that this is still approval based. That was the entire point of my comment.
And then I made the prediction that this is to build SS style grunts loyal to the cause and ensure they are the ones armed at all times.
I never said anything about stopping personal ownership either. I'm not sure where you hallucinated that part either...
In a video posted to X, Hegseth said he is signing a memo that will direct base commanders to allow requests for troops to carry privately owned firearms “with the presumption that it is necessary for personal protection.”
He said any denial of a service member’s request must be explained in detail and in writing.
My interpretation is that they will be allowed to open carry personal weapons anywhere on base. Any denial of any member's request will likely be appealable and a higher authority at the DoD will ensure that the "right people" get to open carry.
I could not find the actual memo.
I can only hope that every base commander sees this threat for what it is and is making appropriate preparations.
These midterms are going to be wild.
Sure a couple will and they'll leave...sticking us with a full on "yes men" style military just in time for them to carry out Trump's coup V2
Doesn't he live on one? Not really the smartest idea.
No no, let's see where this goes
I, for one, think this is an excellent idea.
So do Rubio, Noem, Bondi, and Stephen Miller. Tulsi Gabbard and the White House budget director are looking into moving as well.
In any sane administration, people would rightfully be losing it over this. It's not normal.
The memo says they are allowed to request permission not that all are allowed.
I'll give you one guess as to how one gets approval. It won't be by proving one's loyalty to their Country.
They're also staking out marine and army graduations with ICE get their families
Remind me —didn’t a soldier shoot up his own base a while back? Did he use a service weapon for that?
My friend's got a shirt with his face on it. "In loving memory, Christopher Dorner. BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE"
[Edit] I've been corrected, Dorner was a different guy so this comment is mostly irrelevant
No, Chris Dorner was the LA city cop that went on a spree. Then his racist co-workers tried to burn him alive in a cabin near Big Bear Lake.
that was the one where the genius l.a. cops full on open fired on a pickup truck that was the wrong make/model/color and contained like 2 asian women right??
Yep, sure is.
Oohhh yeah you're right, my bad. He's wearing a military shirt in the picture and I mixed them up
Don't know who made the original so I don't want to link to a random store but this is the same shirt:
Ha, I still love it.
You can already do this on installations, but you have to talk to the provost marshalls office and get approval through your chain of command. Unless theyre wringing for another Major Hassan…
That's exactly what came to mind. I remember when that happened vividly. I had just got to my first duty station and remember frantically calling my AIT buddies sent to Hood. No doubt this will happen again.
Ah yes, that’s who I was thinking of
Explicitely? Why the fuck would he do that. Rhetorical q of course. It simply makes no sense, except signaling to voters.
Hegseth said he is signing a memo that will direct base commanders to allow requests for troops to carry privately owned firearms “with the presumption that it is necessary for personal protection.”
He said any denial of a service member’s request must be explained in detail and in writing.
Cheesus. Administrators on all US army bases are groaning and facepalming.
You have to get through armed guards to get onto a base. Why would soldiers need to be armed for personal protection?
To protect themselves from the other armed off-duty soldiers, of course
Any resulting violence will justify the need for more guns!
I hear we aren't take taking sexual assault accusations seriously any more, but I doubt the reasoning is to allow women to defend themselves when they try to rape them. That would be very off-brand for this administration.
There's no way this could go wrong, right Drunk Pete?
Doesn't he live on a base because he feared for his life off the base?
Wise, Pete, very wise. Im sure nothing will go wrong with that.
This will be a fun experiment, will overall shooting deaths and injuries go up or down? Is this a thing on polymarket, because the people deserve to make money on soldier's deaths