Military and Off-Base Private Firearms

[Shadow 7D]

Yeah, but those memos tend to die when someone lawyers up and questions them, JAG hates to get sued, so they tend to give the general a little lesson in civics (still can be a pain) and fun memos appear like

-a POW stored in the arms room may be drawn only with the expressed permission of the CO or a person CO designates, (1SG)-

That pretty much end up like you said, as for Alaska, you are still allowed to possess, use and carry a firearm, just not concealed, which anyone who can leagally own a gun in Alaska can do. The prohibition is on a specific action, not on the gun

 

[psyopspec]

Open carry? With ALL of the zillions of holsters, materials, types of handguns, etc?

I'm about to walk to meeting. On my way there, I'll see shoulder holsters (many of which are worn in very ridiculous fashion), drop-leg and belt level SERPAs, drop-leg and belt level Safariland holsters, flap holsters, other duty holsters. All these will be worn on issue nylong belts, leather duty belts, issue pistol belts, 5.11 belts, etc. Catch the drift?

I have a shoulder rig, but I only use it underneath a jacket. Technically I am then CCing in uniform. Really, regardless of weather you're in Afghanistan or Bragg or Bliss or Camp Ripley, MN, it's only as big a deal as you make of it.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Well don't come to Alaska, because on the order of General Jacoby that is an illegal act, but otherwise have fun and rock on, stay safe and you must be a pilot, they always did get away with that when I was in. Funny was when they tried to get it out after forgetting it inside their body armor, for the time I know about, the troop presented Mr. (CW2) Smith with door gunner qualification (OH-58) for his M-9.

 

[miket]

I fully accept that fact. Of course, not doing anything stupid with my firearms, or otherwise attracting attention from law enforcement, in the first place was why it took so long to find out.

Again, you were LUCKY. You didn't have to be doing anything "stupid". You could have been popped had you been pulled over for a simple traffic stop if you were transporting handguns for some reason. An off duty officer could have followed you after shooting at the range. You could have been "spot checked" AT the range. ALL would have been BIG trouble for you without that NJ license. In CT, you have to have your pistol permit to even take guns to the range. Unloaded, no ammo...doesn't matter. I know someone who was "spot checked" when an off duty cop went down the line checking permits. He's in jail now for 6 Class D felonies. He had 3 handguns. 3 felonies for illegal possession of a handgun and 3 felonies for illegal transportation of a handgun without a permit. Nice, eh? If it was similar in NJ, then, you were LUCKY.

 

[miket]

-a POW stored in the arms room may be drawn only with the expressed permission of the CO or a person CO designates, (1SG)-

Has a situation ever occurred when it came time for a service member to PCS and permission wasn't given for them to retrieve their firearms?

 

[luigi]

Has a situation ever occurred when it came time for a service member to PCS and permission wasn't given for them to retrieve their firearms?

I can't cite one but I'm sure it's happened

 

[chuckusaret]

I was never hassled by the military because of my privately owned weapons, but all were kept off post or stored at the Rod and Gun Club. I spent 24years in the military and was stationed in CONUS and overseas locations and I maintained a large private weapons collection. While overseas many were bought at the local Rod and Gun Clubs with the blessing of the military. The military also shipped those weapons to the states on my return. When transfered within the states the movers contracted by the military shipped my weapons with required prior military approval. When I retired from the military the military moved 3 very large crates of weapons from Texas to Florida without question. I will admit there was extra paperwork required and a very good joint inventory was taken by the transportation inspector and myself prior to them being boxed. Hey, one of those weapons, a NIB Belgium made Browning B25 12 ga shotgun , purchased at the Rod and Gun Club in Hanau Germany for $800.00 was just recently appraised at $10K to $12K.

 

[psyopspec]

Shadow,

Not a pilot, nor are most of the people where I'm at. Just far enough away from the flagpole that the Sergeants Major have bigger things to consider than how someone wears his or her gun, so long as it's safe. Things have also changed in the handful of years I've been in. When OIF 1 kicked off, non-issue gear was still taboo in some units. As a Private, I brought my own sling to the fight so that if I was carrying my M16 and needed to do something with both hands it would rest across my body. My NCOIC ordered me to take it off solely on the basis that it wasn't an issue item. This meant that if I needed to do something with both hands, it was time to put the weapon down, sling it over my shoulder, or sling it across my back. The kind of mentality that says "inspection ready" should take precedence over "combat ready" is something I've been against all my years in the military, and one of the reasons I became an officer. If a troop comes to me, and he has basic competency with arms, and wants to try a new technique or piece of equipment, I'll ask him to show me. If it tests well, is safe, and it helps that individual shoot, move, or communicate more effectively, I'm all for it.

For the record, just so I'm not making myself sound like something I'm not, I spend a lot of my time behind a desk, though I get out with my guys as often as I can just for sanity's sake. However, I do have the honor and privelege of leading some very high speed men and women who put it on the line on a daily basis. Prior to leading them here I was responsible for their training. I approach both with an incredibly serious mind, but also an open one. While there will always be something to bitch about, and much of it will be legitimate, I must say that certain parts of the Army have become more receptive to this thinking in recent years; the thinking that if something doesn't work in combat (equipment or technique), it's not worth practicing in training, and that if something does work but there's more effective ways to accomplish the same end, let's do it that way. The sling issue I had above is not something most units will gripe about now. In fact, while I had an M16 with an M203 grenade launcher in OIF 1, I now have an M-4 next to me with a light, a "gangster grip," an AimPoint that I could swap out for an ACOG if I so wanted, and a sling that I thought would be best for the work I do. Such a setup would have caused a lot of the more straight-laced NCOs and Officers to lay eggs not even 10 years ago.

 

[mljdeckard]

Look in the mirror at your @$$. It has "property of the U.S. government" tattooed on the right cheek. ALL of your rights are exercised at the convenience and with the permission of your command. Where they choose to draw the line is an ever-changing process. This is why, when I'm active duty, I choose to live off-post, not in military housing. They own me, but they do NOT own my wife.

I don't think that there will be much change, if any, as a result of this shooting. There are already laws in place. They can already search you at the gate. It won't be any more practical to frisk everyone at the gate now than it was two weeks ago. If anything, it just goes to further show that insane laws won't stop insane people from doing insane things.

I just spent a year at the Presidio of Monterey. My car was searched regularly. The first time, I didn't know what to expect. I had a shotshell rattling around. They didn't like it, I told them to keep it. (They missed the box of Wolf AK ammo I had back there, I guess they didn't know what it looked like.) I got searched and questioned once because there was a gun publication on the back seat. NEVER ONCE was I frisked. There was absolutely nothing stopping me, or anyone else from doing what this guy did last week. This incident proves (yet again) that no (practical) level of security will stop a really determined killer from getting through.

 

[psyopspec]

I just spent a year at the Presidio of Monterey. My car was searched regularly. The first time, I didn't know what to expect. I had a shotshell rattling around. They didn't like it, I told them to keep it. (They missed the box of Wolf AK ammo I had back there, I guess they didn't know what it looked like.)

The reason that if I ever go to Mexico again, I won't be driving my car over the border.

Didn't intend to get so far off-topic in my previous posts, but Deckard is right that this will likely lead to no change. If it does, expect a lot of folks to not re-up and a lot potential recruits to seek their livelihood elsewhere.

 

[miket]

They missed the box of Wolf AK ammo I had back there, I guess they didn't know what it looked like.

And what exactly does a box of Wolf AK ammo look like? None of my Wolf ammo has "AK" on it. What AKs did you even legally have in CA?

My SKS and an AR upper fire 7.62x39, too.

 

[mljdeckard]

It looked like.......a box of Wolf 7.62x39. It is smaller than what they expect a box of ammo to look like, not being packed in styrofoam. You might think this is mocking their knowledge as cops, but this is difficult to assert because they LOOKED RIGHT AT IT and missed it.

I didn't take my AK or SKS to CA. I left them home.

 

[lynxpilot]

Seems ironic that any military commander would EVER restrict private, off-base ownership or carry of legal firearms. Same people that operate the buttons that launch a lot bigger boom than any private arm might have. Had I owned or desired to own personal weapons during my 20-year career in the Navy, and while I lived off-base (virtually all of my career), I would have paid no attention to such silly rules. They would be unconstitutional, and although I may start in the pokie if I were 'discovered', I certainly would not finish there.

 

[mljdeckard]

It's always silly. I was discharged just before my 21st birthday from my first stretch, I had been the assistant armorer in the HHC of an armor battalion. Unaccompanied access to several hundred weapons, not to mention the night vision, encryption devices, etc. I wanted to buy a handgun from a friend of mine and take it home with me from Germany. I wasn't allowed to because I wasn't 21. (I wound up picking it up from him in L.A. over New Years, but anyway,)

The worst part is, for every ridiculous rule in the military, there is a reason behind it. There are a thousand perfectly responsible E-3s, married, living off-post, were responsible enough to own guns BEFORE they entered the military, perfectly capable to have them now. But there's always THAT GUY. You know who I'm talking about. The one guy who lies awake at night (usually after a six-pack of Bud light) thinking of new ways to mess it up for everyone else. the one who looks at a foolproof system and decides he will be the fool talented enough to destroy it. They'll think of something. Shooting raccoons in their yard, threatening their young old lady, deciding to join the local gang. I have supervised soldiers who not only shouldn't have guns off-post, they shouldn't own cars, TVs, sharp objects, computers, motorcycles, bungee cords, or pets either.

 

[Mags]

Simply put it is an unlawful order, smart NCOs and Officers should know how to handle such an unlawful order.

 

[Ieyasu]

Sad...

Interesting article from June of this year:
"Memo from Commander Causes Uproar Among Gun-Owning Soldiers" at
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=5465

An excerpt:

The report Tyler referenced was a declassified Department of Homeland Security report released on April 7, warning that “disgruntled military veterans” returning from Iraq and Afghanistan might be radicalized into terrorism by right-wing extremists [emphasis mine].

We have some really warped people at Homeland "Security."

 

[ifwhowhat]

none of this talk is worth a dime... They are all opinions unless someone can cite official documents, i.e. the Constitution, amendments, court cases, federal and state laws and statutes. Can someone please do so! And explain! Otherwise, none of these statements have any substance. These are all great positions, but I can't trust any of them unless there is something official supporting them.

Can anyone find a founded source that says a Commanding General can/cannot dictate that private weapons information (make, model, location) must be submitted to one's chain of command?

Exactly what civil rights do military members have?

(please don't simply make a statement....cite your voice of authority)
Thanks!

 

[bdickens]

You read the article referenced just above your post, ifwhowhat?

 

[ifwhowhat]

bdickens, I appreciate your reply! I still don't have a solid understanding.

I read the article, but this is the only reference i found to a governing law:

"Tyler said she did not know whether the company commander who issued the illegal order had been reprimanded or disciplined, nor did she say what steps were being taken to address safety concerns."

It says the company commander did issue an illegal order, but my question is: on what grounds? I looked up the 2nd Amendment, but it's not conclusive enough. Is there a court case or federal statute that expounds on the 2nd Amendment declaring that the commander's actions were illegal?

There's where I'm lost.

Any takers?