TYR Tactical

McChrystal: ‘Serious Action’ On Guns Needed

It is my understanding that General McChrystal was never shy about his feelings regarding private ownership of firearms during his time in the military, sharing them regularly with subordinates. Interestingly, on the very day his book. “My Share of the Task” is released he chooses to go on NBC and share his position regarding private ownership of military-style weapons. While he has often impressed me with his ability to organize various elements to accomplish difficult tasks, he is by no means a friend of the Second Amendment. I suppose it’s probably good that he made his feelings public. It will allow both supporters and detractors to view him from a somewhat different perspective.


58 Responses to “McChrystal: ‘Serious Action’ On Guns Needed”

  1. y0te says:

    Just another monarch of a general.

  2. brain says:

    Glad to see your true colors Stanley, won’t be wasting money on your book now.

  3. straps says:

    Reasons it’s easy for him to take this position:

    (1) He spent all but a couple years of his career leading troops who got better weapons training than 95% of the Army. And there’s NOTHING WRONG with a tactically competent, tactically viable Ranger, 18 Series or USASOC Enabler. What needs to be fixed is the weapons training outside that community, which even after a decade at war is still HORRENDOUS. Fix this and maybe–MAYBE fewer Guardsmen and Reservists (and Active Component) troops would feel the need to invest in personal 92FSs (almost useless for anything other than maintaining competency on a military weapon) and ARs.

    (2) He’s spent his entire career behind at least 1 guarded gate. And even when quartered off-post, he probably lived in areas dense enough to have professional law enforcement at his beck and call. Failing that, MPs were available (REALLY available when you’re on a first-name basis with the Provost Marshall). He has NO IDEA what security challenges are faced by people who live 75-100 miles from the posts he’s been assigned to.

    (3) As an officer, he bears a high degree of accountability for the conduct of personnel in his command. Personal firearms are a CRM challenge far easier to deal with than motorcycles.

    Even in his lane, he’s talking out of his ass. The .223/5.56 round was never about causing death.

    • SSD says:

      VERY GOOD points…

    • veteran says:

      Well put. He is obviously a political hack now.

    • FormerSFMedic says:

      Very good points! Stan makes it readily apparent why our weapons training needs an overhaul. If the guy running the show doesn’t know what he’s talking about then how could he have implemented good training curriculum? The answer is, he didn’t. I went through some of the most “advanced” training we had and yet I didn’t become what I would consider a competent shooter until I left the service. The public misconception is that trained Warfighters and trained LEO’s are the most competent shooters and knowledgeable beyond the understanding of any armed citizen. Unfortunately Stanley proves that this is not true.

      • Shakey says:

        Well put veteran, but all senior officers are political hacks. They are just more covert about it. Secondly, all generals are just like celebrities as they are so far from the real world as everything has been handed to them! Given the fact on how he left the Army shows he never real embodied the value system he was sworn to uphold.

  4. Bill says:

    Simply put, he can FOAD. Just like most of the higher (current and former) officer echelon, it’s all about politics and personal gain. He’s just trying to be important again and sell his sh$#%y book.

  5. Arrow 4 says:

    How do we convince the general public of the importance of the 2A when folks like Gen. Stan don’t get it? I am at a loss for words…I thought warriors knew better.

  6. Joe says:

    Not cool. Strange, while the USMC openly refers to their organization as “the gun club” you have an Army General with a bunch of tabs openly slapping the 2nd Amendment.

  7. B307 says:

    Out right disgusting, got fired and had to retire now is trying to win favor again for book sales and towing the party line.

  8. LG says:

    He just wants the leftist regime to think of him as the General they can be cool with. Notice the insinuation that not wanting to ban AR’s is immature. He swore and oath to the Constitution but he clearly thinks he is above all that silliness now. In my opinion, he is now ‘persona non grata.’

  9. LG says:

    Follow-up. Maybe he’s currying favor for a run for office as a democrat.

  10. mike says:

    The unregulated militia, all of us, is the direct competition to the regulated militia (the armed forces). Historically we were supposed to be the ones protecting our homeland and an army wasn’t to be raised. Perhaps he’s sensitive about the historical friction between an armed force and an armed population. If the Army ever had to act against the people of this nation it would make sense that the upper-ups would want the people to face their Army unarmed. Not that they care about the little people, mind you, but losing troops might make them look bad or something.

    Get a new plan, Stan. No one is going to eat that hogwash.

  11. Tremis says:

    I was looking forward to getting home today and downloading his book. He put this out just in time for me to avoid that nonsense.

    I’ll still read it at some point, his organizational skills and leadership are highly valued, but I think pirating it is a much better option. You want to steal from me, I’m ok with stealing from you.

  12. BradKAK308 says:

    He is all about being on top of the chain, you can’t challenge me. I am supreme.

  13. Jack says:

    Looks like we got a traitor.a domestic enemy.

    • Mark says:

      Exactly. The redcoats, NVA, and Krauts had a few all star generals, too.

      They were still the enemy.

      So is he.

  14. J.D says:

    Douche bag General says what?

  15. SGT Rock says:

    He needs a nice cup of STFU!

  16. Nate says:

    Stan, there was a time I would have followed you into hell wearing gasoline pants…..not so much these days. I am disappointed that you are not the man and leader that I used to think you were.

  17. All excellent points here – just another politician in uniform

    I honestly care more about my last healthy bowel movement than the opinion of some assclown 4 star

    Go do another Rolling Stone interview you toolbag

  18. FormerSFMedic says:

    Part of me is shocked, while part of me isn’t surprised in the least bit. McChrystal was a General and you don’t get there without playing politics. With that said, it appears Stanley is still playing the game. He took an oath to defend the Constitution and yet he talks of pissing all over it! I am just disgusted at his remarks.

    It’s no secret that most Military guys aren’t gun guys but Stan needs to do some serious research. I expected more from a General. At the very least, he could make an EDUCATED point. He sounds like a typical antigun advocate speaking in terms that are meant to scare the general public. The effects are devastating? Hardly Stan. How can someone so intelligent be so stupid?!?!

  19. USASOF says:

    [email protected]

    Fire away! I did, and yes I listed my name and rank!


  20. AntiCitizenOne says:

    The 2nd Amendment exists for men like him. He is the modern-day Benedict Arnold or General Cornwallis.

  21. droneboy says:

    Gee, let me think…oh yeah! FUCK HIM!!

  22. N703 says:

    He was a toolbag while over here, and I wouldn’t think anything has changed since he left.

    What a pretentious asshole. I wasn’t planning on buying his drivel anyway.

  23. Wow says:

    So you people want to keep ar-15 style weapons in your home? For what purpose?


    There’s a reason why militaries have phased out knives and bows – because a gun kills faster.

    Oh and the “protection” bs, you gun crazy lunatics don’t need to keep one with you all the time. Concealed weapons are more crazy than the bunch of you rednecks.

    • Chris from Texas says:

      My neck is red, I carry concealed and keep AR-15 style weapons in my house (several in fact). Crazy maybe but definitely protected. I also drive a pickup a truck (that’s lifted) and cling to my religion! And oh my bullets travel in packs number greater than 10!

      But in all seriousness the constitution was written by our forefathers and they had enough foresight to put provision in place to protect the american people from Tyranny. That tyranny takes many forms and is not limited in it’s form.

      The number 1 goal of any tyrant to disarm it’s population. The goal of the 2nd amendment is to ensure the population has a sufficient means to prevent the goverment from infringing upon the other 9 rights guranteed under the said bill of rights.

      With out this protection this country would be no different than Stalin Era Russia, Fidel Castro’s Cuba or Current North Korea. With out this protection what prevents the goverment from taking from the poor and giving to the rich? Or mass killings?

      If this right is taken away or severly infringed upon what or forefathers and all of our countries veterans have fought for would have ment nothing because this country will cease to exist.

      • Major_Northeast_City says:

        Alex Jones: “1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms”.
        This sick mentality/philosophy is unfortunately not limited to so called “rednecks (or anyone else) that drive a pickup truck” and live in rural Texas, the south, mid west, north west or elsewhere in America.
        “Stalin Era Russia, Fidel Castro’s Cuba or Current North Korea”….. wake up to reality, the U.S.A. will never be any of those three… even if you are no longer allowed to have your “bullets travel in packs number greater than 10!” … or drums greater than 100.
        I personally have no need to carry a firearm into a department store, theater, Mall, restaurant, bank, on public transportation or keep one in my bedroom as I am not delusional nor paranoid.

    • TXGuns says:

      Well, considering that the General stated that the effects of a .223 on a human body (assumedly from those evil black rifles) are “devastating,” he really should do some research and see what the effects of a .30-06 from a harmless bolt hunting rifle would be on a human body…

      • Juan says:

        We own military style rifles for fun or defense. Not every gun owner is a nutcase and neither is every antigun advocate. Banning rifles on looks and banning 10+ magazines will not solve anything. The only outcome will be the punishment of law abiding citizens. People who break the law and use guns in crimes will continue to do so no matter what. Prohibition doesn’t work well in this country. Nearly all of the mass shootings in the past have taken place in gun free zones. When was the last time there was a mass shooting at a gun show or any place where there are lots of people with guns? Criminals go after the defenseless and weak because it’s easy.

        I carry a pistol concealed because there are people out on our streets who would do harm to myself or loved ones if given the chance.

    • straps says:

      Wow please see my post above. Two and a half decades of Active and Reserve service with multiple deployments under multiple Commanders in Chief. People (members of the US military AND local nationals in the countries I’ve deployed to) are alive today because of the training that my personally-owned weapons allowed me to receive–and pass on. The training I received in my unit? USELESS AND OBSOLETE. The US Army Pistol Manual has a cup&saucer grip on a semi-auto pistol for chrissakes. I’m a representative of just ONE segment of the population justified in access to “evil assault weapons.” There are others.

      The argument isn’t as simple as “guns are the problem” vs. “guns are the solution,” but the AWB that lapsed in 2004 has already proven the folly of unnecessarily intrusive gun control. Because of THAT, and concerns spurred by successive elections of a President closely aligned with gun grabbers, there are a LOT of guns out there owned by people responding to markets, not evaluating their needs. So what we need to do is stop with threats of stupid policy (thusly making the supply of hardware–and ammunition more predictable) and get “casual” gun owners trained to a level that makes them understand the consequences of the active role they just took in the application of our Constitutional rights.

      • TXGuns says:

        I think you are very correct with your second paragraph. Too many gun owners currently think that owning a gun and never seeking any training makes them an expert. Many of these same owners are more than happy to sell out the black rifle crowd so long as it doesn’t affect their particular firearms, whether pistol, bolt gun, etc.

        Owning a gun doesn’t make you a responsible steward of the 2nd amendment any more than owning a car makes you Tony Stewart.

  24. Mitchell says:

    Wow! A lot of animosity and a lot of assumptions

  25. Ramz says:

    Not really surprising coming from an USMA graduate. Not stereotyping but damn near every one I served with were unapologetic socialists and became even worse after they separated. Anyone remember Wes Clark?

    • Steve says:

      Actually, you ARE stereotyping.

    • straps says:

      That’s the Paternalism that risk-averse command climates cultivate.

      Not the institution conferred your degree.

    • JES says:

      With all respect to the military- the military IS a socialist organization. They give you/us housing, “free” medical, “free” college money, subsidized food/commissary, “guaranteed” support after retirement. It also has a nice hierarchical organization in which anyone who outranks you gets bowed and scraped to. Small wonder the tin hats want to make the entire country into that- WITH, of course, folks like Stan at the top, because he’s smart and a good organizational leader and all. Of course. What he’s missing is that our country ISN’T the military. Freedoms aside (and those constitutional rights ARE quite limited for folks in the military- privately owned weapons in the barracks, anyone?), there’s no way they could PAY for extending the military support system to the public… Short of printing more money… Of course most soldiers actually EARN their pay/benefits. That also wouldn’t work for a goodly part of the civilian populace.

    • majrod says:

      I’m a grad and not a socialist. You are stereotyping. I could list some outsanding grads that would differ with your perceptions. How about sticking to the issues and not a pedigree?

  26. Badjujuu says:

    Damn it. He might be sleeping with my wife, cause he sure as hell sounds like her.

  27. John Denny says:

    He’s certainly no George Washington.

  28. Paul says:

    Fuck you Stan.

  29. james says:

    He has shown he clearly does not understand that which he swore to defend and even more sad is that he does not understand firearms. In many areas you are not allowed to hunt dear with .223 becuase it may not kill the animal humanely? scary ? Hope he was not counting on books sales to supliment his retirement… or shows his mug at the show next week!

  30. james says:

    Sadly if you restrict this type of weapon’s ownership by private cititzens then you limit the mark to which arms manufactures can sell too. If there is no real market then why develope and or refine your product… this is how we ended up with the M9 as a side arm… gee that was a great choice!

    These idoits whom we have elected should focus on being able to enforce and prosicute the laws on the books then they can work on civilian training. Maybe sopend some time looking at the mental health issue… cause anyone who rolls into an school and opens fire on childern is sane?

  31. Reverend says:

    He’s not alone. Mostly political animals in the military tow the anti-gun line to appease those in elected office.

    Sad, all these folks have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, but none have ever read the thing.

    My heart breaks for what my country is going to do to it’s serva…er… citizens.

  32. Matt says:

    This traitor should be stripped of his rank and awards. Such a blatant violation of his oath.

  33. Steve says:

    Very disappointed in his statement, at the very least he could have shined on hte entire subject and kept his face with the troops. Well, I did like his video on TED and was going to get his book, but not now.

  34. Richard W. says:

    does general mcchrystal own a gun?

  35. majrod says:

    Not surprised.

    I was “disturbed” with the Tillman affair.

    I was concerned when Obama “selected” him to command (Obama’s selectee judgement plain sucks).

    I became suspicious with the ridiculous ROE.

    He was relieved because he was dumb enough to think a Rolling Stone reporter would give the military an honest break. Stupid unless someone has a warped understanding of Rolling Stone.

    Now he’s pushing a book where he’s walks on eggs an any issue critical of the administration and defaults to a “patriotic theme” in his answers.

    If it walks, talks, looks like a duck…

    Effing A, another political general setting himself up for a political career (see Wes Clark)

    Former officer & West Point grad

  36. MarkG says:

    General thank you for your service to our country… Now kindly fuck off

  37. EliFrankenear says:

    having spent the better part of the last year or so reading as much as possible about the Founding Fathers, I am now more dismayed than ever…

    These losers in positions of leadership are rats compared to the great men who swore life, property and scared honor to give us the greatest country ever seen.

  38. Ash says:

    What pisses me off is that I have carried both M16/M4’s for duty and in no way would I say a civvie “styled” rifle should be confused with what is issued and maintained. I own several rifles and have two young kids. My rifles have either had the firing pins pulled or (AR style) the uppers and lowers are split and stored separately. Ammo always has it’s own lockers and yes I have mags ready to go but I wouldn’t think for a second to reach for those in the event of a home invasion.

    For that I have a standard pump action shotgun with a trigger lock.

    Media can’t cry out about the power of what is issued when most deer rifles can drop a person just as easily, from a greater distance. The only limitation is simi-auto fire.

    With all the other issues we have on the table the last thing this president and congress needs to wade into is anything to do with guns.

  39. Hoko says:

    This General was the responsible Leader of US Premium SF Units, and he lead his Men on the strangest Places on Earth while most of you slept peacefully in your bed. I´m an absulute advodacte for Personal Defense Weapons in Form of Pistols and Revolvers, but there is no need for you Airsoft wanabees to posses Weapons who are designed to Kill People in Masses. Nobody usually have his Assault Rifle ready in a School to prevent an AMOK.
    Show a little more respect, and join the Police or the Armed Forces if you like to protect other People. If you like to protect yourself, buy at Pistol for Outside, and a Shootgun for you Home, thats enough.