When I served as a fire controlman in the US Navy, I was trained to operate advanced weapons systems with precision and accountability. Like every service member, I was trusted to carry arms in defense of this country and to make life-and-death decisions under pressure.
But like so many others who have worn the uniform, I’ve also experienced the contradiction that comes when you return home: the same military that entrusts you with weapons overseas often prohibits you from carrying a personal firearm on base to defend yourself and your family.
That’s why Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s recent memorandum, “Non-Official Personal Protection Arming on Department of War Property,” is such an important and long-overdue step forward. Signed this month, the policy allows service members to apply for permission to carry privately owned firearms on military installations, aligning with Section 526 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.
The policy recognizes something simple and true: Our constitutional rights don’t end when we step onto a military base.
The Second Amendment is not geographical. It doesn’t disappear at state lines, and it certainly doesn’t vanish at the main gate of a military installation. We are Americans, and the rights we swore to defend travel with us wherever we go.
For too long, military bases have effectively been treated as so-called “gun-free zones.” But the reality is that these zones are often anything but safe. We’ve seen repeatedly that areas where law-abiding individuals are disarmed become soft targets for dangerous criminals.
The evidence is not theoretical, it’s tragically real.
On Dec. 9, 2019, a terrorist attack at Naval Air Station Pensacola took the lives of three service members and wounded eight others. In August of last year, five soldiers were shot and injured at Fort Stewart, Georgia, by one of their fellow soldiers. And just weeks ago, on March 17, a shooting at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico left one person dead and another injured.
These are not far-flung combat zones. They are American military bases, places where service members live, work, and raise their families.
I think about the major installations across my state of North Carolina — Fort Bragg, Camp Lejeune, Cherry Point — and the thousands of troops and families who rely on the security of those bases. The idea of them being vulnerable because of outdated policies is deeply concerning.
The uncomfortable truth is that “gun-free zones” are danger zones. Criminals, terrorists, and unstable individuals are not deterred by signage or policy. They count on the fact that their targets will be unarmed and unable to respond in those critical first moments.
Meanwhile, the very people best equipped to respond — trained service members — are often left without the means to act. That’s a policy failure and a criminal abandonment of common sense.
Critics of Secretary Hegseth’s policy will argue that allowing privately owned firearms on base introduces new risks. But that argument ignores who we’re talking about. These are not untrained individuals. They are men and women who are rigorously trained in firearms safety and responsible use of force. They operate under strict discipline and a clear chain of command.
If we trust them to carry weapons “downrange” in combat zones or aboard naval vessels around the world, it’s inconsistent and hypocritical to deny them the ability to protect their loved ones here at home.
In a crisis, seconds matter. Military police and security forces cannot be everywhere at once. Allowing responsible service members to exercise their Second Amendment rights adds another layer of defense, one that could save lives when it matters most.
As veterans, we understand the weight of that responsibility. We’ve lived it.
Secretary Hegseth’s decision sends a clear message: The men and women of our armed forces are not just defenders of the Constitution abroad; they are entitled to its protections here at home.
It’s time our policies reflected that truth. Because our rights don’t stop at the gate, and neither do the threats we face.
