Private Guns & the Military

[reste]

A few recent postings talked about right of the military to require active soldiers to reveal ownership of private guns.
I felt that the Constitution protected their private rights and the soldier could refuse to comply with this intrusive order.
It seems that at least one commander at Fort Campbell has been set right.

Militar demands details on soldiers'

 

[reste]

A few recent postings talked about right of the military to require active soldiers to reveal ownership of private guns.
I felt that the Constitution protected their private rights and the soldier could refuse to comply with this intrusive order.
It seems that at least one commander at Fort Campbell has been set right.

Militar demands details on soldiers'

 

[Chromedhearts]

That's not really new. When I was in the Army, in the 80's, the rules varied from post to post and with change of comands. On all post we were required to have all private arms, pistols and long guns, locked away in company arms rooms while on base, you could check them out any time you were off duty, no questions asked, you were expected to either be leaving the base or going to an approved on base range. At another base there was an order to register all private guns that were within 200 miles of the base. That one was generally ignored.

 

[deadin]

I just love the Internet. Where else can things get blown out of proportion so fast.
It is my understanding that the Army has been floundering trying to find a way to handle the rising suicide rate among Army personnel.
"Registration" of private owned weapons for those living off base is/was an attempt to try to do something it. Someone got the brilliant idea that one may be more susceptible to suicide if they own a gun. I think that person may need some remedial training.
(Having spent 20 years in the military, I could list a lot of instances of this type of "thinking".)

As for another thing referenced in the posted article re the destruction of fired brass before it is released as surplus, This has been policy concerning any surplus being released to a foreign country for as long as I remember.
Apparently it hasn't been enforced recently. (and since when is the military responsible to provide civilians with brass? Or to be in competition with the companies that manufactures brass and ammunition.)
When I was stationed in Japan the Air Force had a surplus release point at Tachikawa AFB. Items that were declared surplus were put up for requisition to other government entities. The first week was AF only, then any Military followed by any US Government agency. Finally it was declared scrap, destroyed (sledge hammers were a favorite method) and sold to local dealers.
I was into amateur radio at the time and it hurt to see perfectly good but outmoded electronics (radios, test equipment, etc.) beat to pieces because my unit couldn't justify requisitioning it and nobody else wanted it.

 

[redsfan2]

When I was in the Marines ( '68 - '72 ) ... there was no problem with owning a gun as long as it was kept in the armory. Several of the guys did and would check them out to go shoot on the ranges ... that had to be cleared as well, but again wasn't a problem.

Not sure if I've related this here or not, but I wanted to buy a pistol to shoot with the guys. We went to the town of Quantico to check out the gun shop there. I asked to look at a 9mm auto, and the guy behind the counter said " You aren't going to like this ... but are you 21?". When I said no, he replied ... I'm sorry but you're not old enough to buy or even be allowed to handle a gun.

This took place after my tour of duty in Viet Nam.

 

[Gatofeo]

As a civilian, I lived on an Army post in post housing until recently.
I was required to register my firearms at the post Pass & ID office. This goes into a Department of Defense (DoD) computer.
Swords, bayonets and knifes with a blade length longer than X-inches (I can't recall the length) were also required to be registered.
These I stored in my post housing. Soldiers stored their firearms and ammunition in their dorm rooms. There was no central depository to store privately owned firearms.
After acquiring a new firearm, I had one week to register it or I was in violation.
The MPs at the gates asked everyone if they were bringing alcohol or weapons on post. If they lived on post, and the firearm was registered, it was not a problem.
Incidentally, when you register you get a printout of all the guns you've registered, so you can prove to the MP it's been listed.
Visitors take note!
If you lived off post, and tried to come on with a firearm, you were turned away -- even with someone on post sponsoring you.
Now, this may have been a regulation of this specific Army post, or it may be DoD-wide, I don't know.
If my firearm was registered, or not yet 7 days old, I never had a problem with the MPs. In fact, many were interested to see it and, if no cars were waiting behind me, we chatted guns for a bit.
Contrary to the public's perception, most MPs are not jack-booted thugs. In fact, I'd venture to say that there are fewer of those types than in civilian departments. The military doesn't tolerate troublemakers for long, especially if they abuse a civilian who may file a lawsuit.
When I moved offpost, I had Pass & ID erase my firearms from the DoD computer. I was assured this was done; I have no way of knowing.
I never once felt like a 2nd class citizen because I owned guns, when I lived on that Army post. Most folks just shrugged; some were interested and chatted me up.
I've felt more scrutinized living in cities than on that Army post.
I can't speak for other posts, as I've never lived on one, but my experience there as a gun owner was very good.

 

[sparkgap]

WEAPONS OF CHOICE
Military demands details on soldiers' private guns
Fort Campbell command reversed under pressure

----------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 21, 2009
12:15 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A military commander at Fort Campbell in Kentucky demanded his soldiers give him the registration numbers of any guns they own privately and then reveal where they are stored.

The order was stopped, according to base officials, when it was discovered the commander was not "acting within his authority."

The original order was issued on the letterhead of Charlie Company, 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment and said effective March 11, any soldier with a "privately owned weapon" was required to submit the information, along with any information about any concealed carry permit the soldier may have, and what state issued the permit.

(Story continues below)

Further, the rule warned, "If any soldier comes into possession of a Privately Owned Weapon following the effective date of this memorandum, he is required to inform the Chain of Command of the above information."

One soldier who objected to the demands circulated the memo, commenting that he lives off post.

"It just seems a little coincidental to me that within 90 days the most anti-firearm president in history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table in Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even if they are off post, and doesn't provide any reason or purpose as to why," the soldier said.

 

[Guest]

Dean;

Just for reference, the Army has for many, many years done things a might bit differently with their surplus items. 1st up any Active Duty Unit got first option. 2nd up any Reserve/NG Unit got send option. 3rd up was civilians and the stuff was sold at weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, semi-annual or Annual auctions depending upon just how much surplus they had "On Hand" at the Ft Lewis Logistics Center. The Log Center also used to maintain a "Store" for surplus items where you could simply walk in and purchase many items, generally, by the pound. These were items that they didn't have in large numbers.

It used to be put up for Auction, up to three times, and then anything left over was simply sold for scrap at so much a pound. A good example of this is all the empty ammo cans that have been sold at the WAC Gun Shows over the years. In the '70s I was an ART assigned to a Reserve Unit at Payne Field in Everett and I would bring down surplus stuff every week and take back 'different' stuff every week. I was also allowed to place bids on the stuff up for auction while I was there - on my own time - and my Boss had not problem with me toting the stuff I got at the Auctions back up to Everett as long as it didn't displace anything I was bringing back up for the Unit.

In the '60s I used to go out to the Auctions and purchase all sorts of things that I found useful or just wanted - as a civilian. Some of the things I purchased was military brass including everything from .38 Special to 155mm Artillery shells and dummy rounds of all shapes and sizes. I never saw any "Live" ammo being sold but I did see many "Life" pieces of radio and general navigation(aviation type) gear that was sold to the general public.

So, I know these Auctions have been going on for at least that long. From what I heard today the Auctions are being much better attended and the prices are going up.

I also know that the McChord AFB didn't have any such operation. At least, not during the time I was around the Auctions.

 

[deadin]

Mike,

I understand, but my point was that they didn't sell to foreigners unless it was rendered useless.
And that is basically what has been stated as current policy. The scrapping was supposed to be only for brass leaving the country, not all brass. (as assumed by some.)

 

[GatorFarmer]

The story sort of makes a mountain out of a molehill. Presumably the company CO was worried about some of his men blowing their brains out, or killing their spouses. That makes for paperwork and looks bad. He probably wanted to get a feel for who had a gun handy in order to prioritize which guys to pay more attention to if they started acting a little "off".

Most bases require people below a certain rank living in the barracks to store their guns in the arms room, where they'll get tinkered with, abused, etc by those in charge of such. Thus many people store guns with friends who live off base. It's also a hassle to sign guns out since many bases don't have someone working on the weekend or after hours to do such a task.

In family housing, or if one is an officer or above a certain rank, then the guns can be stored in one's abode but usually have to be registered on base.

Off base, eh, a lot of that is a gray area. Esp where spouses and dependents are concerned. For example, even if the DoD wanted to register or compile who had what, they'd have as much authority over me (an off base dependent) as Santa Claus for all intents and purposes when it came to gathering such data. Thus someone could say "That's not my gun, that belongs to my husband, wife, son, etc."

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

How times have changed. When I was on AD 1967-1971 if you lived in the barracks you were "supposed" to register your firearm with the MPs, you HAD to keep it in the Arms Room or Supply Room, that was enforced. If you lived in Post Housing or off post, you kept it at home and no one was the wiser. I had two brief spells of AD as an officer, kept my firearms in my quarters, I was a Ft. Benning for a weapons course, bought 2 pistols off other officers, the only paperwork involved was the green ones.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by deadin: Mike, I understand, but my point was that they didn't sell to foreigners unless it was rendered useless.
And that is basically what has been stated as current policy. The scrapping was supposed to be only for brass leaving the country, not all brass. (as assumed by some.)

Dean; The "original" I got of the proposed 'changes' was "ALL" was to be destroyed before sale. That Original isn't any longer posted. And, yes, I agree that you did/do need to register and prove 'citizenship' before being allowed to bid. My birth certificate was accepted as being proof to register.

 

[11B Lifer]

A young company commander who made a descision without consulting with JAG. Someone told him that it violated a regulation and it was stopped. Those troops have plenty of access to weapons if they want to do harm-99.9% have their head screwed on right and they soldier.
Weapons kept on post are supposed to be registered within 72 hours of being brought on the installation. Those who reside off post, retirees bringing theirs on post to shoot or hunt. etc don't need to worry about it.

 

[Herknav]

According to the article, they have to provide a "registration number." I have no problem with that part of it, since none of my firearms have any such number.

The rest is pretty disgusting though.

USARAK did not and does not allow AD Army to carry concealed, period.