Soldiers are the guardians of the world, the vanguard of combat in wartime, and the people's soldiers in peacetime. They are responsible for carrying out peacetime combat readiness patrol tasks, earthquake relief and other tasks, and at the same time, they also have to take on important security work, standing on the posts of guards or sentinels at the site, guarding the safety of the people. Anmen, embassies, train stations and other places are all our sentinel brothers on duty.
Why is it necessary to "separate guns and bullets" when performing sentry duties?
On duty, we often see two soldiers and a gun, and the "separation of guns and bullets" is practiced. This may sound counterintuitive. Why do guns and bullets have to be separated?And why is it that only one gun, and not one per person, is configured to enhance firepower and deterrence?This is a question that has left many people puzzled.
The reasons behind the "Bai Baoshan case".
In fact, there are profound reasons for this practice, which is related to the "Bai Baoshan case," one of the "top ten criminal cases" since the founding of the People's Republic of China. Bai Baoshan is a person's name, and the case refers to a series of criminal cases he committed, not a separate one.
Bai Baoshan has an extraordinary psychological quality, ruthless, kills people without leaving a living mouth, and has been committing crimes in various places for ten years. In 1996, he knocked out a sentry and snatched a semi-automatic rifle from a soldier. In the ensuing encirclement battle, he killed five and wounded eight policemen, which was a heinous crime. Killed 17 people and wounded 15 others, he was known as the "Demon of the World".
Reflection and reform of the army.
The army learned a profound lesson from this case, and in order to avoid a recurrence of the tragedy, all soldiers who performed the sentry post were henceforth implemented a two-person system, and the "separation of guns and bullets" rule was enforced. One was armed with a gun and the other was carrying additional ammunition and police protective equipment.
The advantage of such a design is that even if the firearm is snatched by criminals, a firearm without bullets cannot pose a threat. It will not cause much harm if the criminals snatch it. Moreover, when a soldier encounters a lawbreaker while performing a mission, he can achieve the integration of guns and ammunition within more than ten seconds, and will not delay the arrest work. Therefore, the separation of guns and bullets is more suitable for national conditions and can better protect the safety of the people.
Cooperate and make smarter decisions.
In addition, if both soldiers are armed with guns and have enough ammunition, there may be some consequences for one soldier to act impulsively and pull the trigger in the event of an emergency. Therefore, the two are on duty, cooperate with each other, and make wiser choices in the face of unexpected situations, which is conducive to acting in unison.
Epilogue. 
The stipulation that soldiers should "separate guns and bullets" when performing sentry duties is not without purpose, but is a deliberate consideration after a painful lesson. This reform is not only for the sake of protecting the soldiers themselves, but also for maintaining social peace and tranquility. Only through such practical measures can we better fulfill the sacred mission of military personnel and safeguard the security of the country.
Military Responsibilities and Reform: Interpreting the "Separation of Guns and Bullets" Policy.
The article deeply analyzes the policy of "separating guns and bullets" when soldiers perform sentry duties, as well as the historical origin behind this policy. This thought-provoking provision is not a simple military clause, but stems from a bloody lesson, that is, the "Bai Baoshan case". This case has brought a painful lesson to the military and has also given birth to a series of institutional reforms.
The military is the guardian of the country, the warrior in wartime, the night watchman in peacetime. In the course of their mission, they face a wide variety of threats, including those from criminals. The "Bai Baoshan case" is a severe test of such threats, an incident involving multiple criminal cases. Bai Baoshan's cold-blooded cruelty is terrifying. His modus operandi and confrontational posture forced the military to rethink the execution of patrol missions.
The implementation of the policy of "separation of guns and bullets" is fundamentally aimed at preventing the recurrence of similar tragedies. This policy avoids a repeat of the tragedy and provides soldiers with a more effective means of defense. By storing guns and ammunition separately, even if the ordnance is accidentally taken away by the enemy, it does not become a real threat. This ingenious design provides more security for military personnel.
The question of "more firepower and stronger deterrence" mentioned in the article is actually a misunderstanding of the policy of "separation of guns and bullets". Although firearms are the sharp weapons of soldiers, if they are not used properly, they will only fall into the wrong hands and become a disaster. Therefore, on the premise of ensuring the safety of the soldiers themselves, the rationality of the policy has been demonstrated. This delicate balance is effective in defending against potential threats and ensuring that military personnel are adequately defended in the course of their missions.
It is worth mentioning that the "two-person system" design in the policy is to promote more intelligent decision-making on the basis of emphasizing cooperation and cooperation. Each soldier plays an integral role in the team, and working together can better respond to unexpected situations. Such a design can not only make full use of the strengths of the team, but also help to avoid the unintended consequences of individual actions.
In the final conclusion, the article mentions that the responsibility and reform of military personnel to perform guard duties is not only to protect themselves, but also to maintain social peace and tranquility. This makes people wonder how we, as ordinary citizens, should understand and respect these soldiers who have quietly contributed to our peaceful lives, as well as the institutions and policies behind them.
Overall, this article not only answers the ins and outs of the "separation of guns and bullets" policy, but also provokes deep thinking about the responsibility and reform of military personnel. Through the analysis of historical cases, we can better understand the rationality and necessity of this system. In this process, we should look at these seemingly simple regulations with a more rational and sober attitude, because they are actually carefully designed for the sake of our social tranquility and people's security.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!