PDA

View Full Version : Military demands details on soldiers' private guns



Geezah
03-23-2009, 01:09 PM
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.

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.

Base spokeswoman Cathy Gramling told WND the letter apparently was a mistake. She said the base requires anyone bringing a privately owned weapon onto the installation to register it.

"As a response to a number of negligent discharges of privately owned weapons, the command decided to explore how to implement a training program for soldiers with privately owned weapons. Their goal is to identify soldiers with firearms and provide additional safety training to them, much like our motorcycle and driver safety classes," she said.

"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but not all who purchase their own weapons are properly trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers possess weapons will allow the command to identify the soldiers who may require additional training on them," she said.

Gramling said the memo was "from a subordinate unit commander who, at the time, believed he was acting within his authority." She said requiring the information was halted when it was discovered the commander was not within his authority.

The process has been suspended pending a full review, she said.

"This is not an effort to infringe on soldiers' rights to own firearms," Gramling told WND.

Mistake or not, the commander's order comes on the heels of a Department of Defense policy that limited the supply of ammunition available to the private gun owners by requiring destruction of fired military cartridge brass.

That policy already had been implemented and had taken a bite out of the nation's stressed ammunition supply before it was reversed this week.

Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs representative with the Defense Logistics Agency, explained in an e-mail to the office of Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., that the Department of Defense had placed small arms cartridge cases on its list of sensitive munitions items as part of an overall effort to ensure national security is not jeopardized in the sale of any Defense property.

"Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency has determined the cartridge cases could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale," Cunningham wrote.

Link (http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92395)


..................

Laconian
03-23-2009, 01:42 PM
I don't think this was an anti-gun issue, but of a Company Commander overstepping his bounds. Personally owned weapons stored in the arms room had to be registered (i.e. the owner's name and the make, model and serial # of the weapon) recorded and kept on file. These never went outside the company as I remember. But it also only applied to weapons on post, not weapons off-post.

brainplay
03-23-2009, 04:37 PM
"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but not all who purchase their own weapons are properly trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers possess weapons will allow the command to identify the soldiers who may require additional training on them," she said.

That quote made me giggle.

Registering private weapons on base? Of course. But don't use this lame excuse.

dacanadianbomb
03-23-2009, 05:04 PM
"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but not all who purchase their own weapons are properly trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers possess weapons will allow the command to identify the soldiers who may require additional training on them," she said. "

What ? Say again? facepalm.

LineDoggie
03-23-2009, 05:25 PM
]"Our soldiers train and operate in combat with M-4 carbines and various other military weapons, but not all who purchase their own weapons are properly trained to handle them. Determining which soldiers possess weapons will allow the command to identify the soldiers who may require additional training on them," [/I]she said. "

What ? Say again? facepalm.Let me Translate


SPC. Snuffy and his lower ranking apprentices to the E4 Mafia(FES -Filthy Enlisted Swine) are not to be trusted with Privately Owned Firearms outside of for Military duties.

Because as we all know the Army will now hold training sessions on how to properly Use & Mantain that Marlin .444 or the Nickle Plated Lorcin .380 :roll:


AR190-13 covers storage while living in post in Barracks, which is highly controlled. On Post Housing , Off Post Army Community Housing (Like at Drum) rules likely Vary according to State and Commanders guidance.

Off Post Private Housing is a Sticky one which has enforcement issues.
4th ID tried this in the mid 1990's without much success once JAG got involved.

LineDoggie
03-23-2009, 05:32 PM
That quote made me giggle.

Registering private weapons on base? Of course. But don't use this lame excuse.
C'mon now, Army uses Excuses like this all the time

BDU/DCU/ACU Sleeves are not to be rolled up due to Skin Cancer concerns (I guess Marines, Airman, & Sailors have impervious skin cells)

Soldiers Preferred Velcro to Sew on Insignia



It's the Chicken**** factor

Hot Lips
03-23-2009, 06:25 PM
That quote made me giggle.

Registering private weapons on base? Of course. But don't use this lame excuse.

actually this was the excuse...


the letter apparently was a mistake. She said the base requires anyone bringing a privately owned weapon onto the installation to register it.

"As a response to a number of negligent discharges of privately owned weapons, the command decided to explore how to implement a training program for soldiers with privately owned weapons.

That's simple enough for them to backup.

I agree with Laconians assessment (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4006782&postcount=2).

wildcat
03-23-2009, 06:30 PM
For weapons on post I believe most post require POW to be registered, just like your POV, as for private off post housing regardless of any reg the army may want to make, they will not have authority.

Kit
03-23-2009, 06:44 PM
The commander might be afraid for his men to get in trouble if they're caught with an illegal firearm. He's looking out for his men, which is a good thing. It's his duty as an officer. Then again, if a soldier knows he has an illegal firearm, he's not going to tell anybody.

Good intentions, still stupid.

loganinkosovo
03-24-2009, 01:04 AM
I don't think this was an anti-gun issue, but of a Company Commander overstepping his bounds. Personally owned weapons stored in the arms room had to be registered (i.e. the owner's name and the make, model and serial # of the weapon) recorded and kept on file. These never went outside the company as I remember. But it also only applied to weapons on post, not weapons off-post.


Yep. It's always good to keep an eye on your collection if it's in the Arms room. The Armorer came up missing an m-16 bayonet and tried to use mine to CYA. We also found out he was checking our stuff out and going to the range with it.

Needless to say he didn't last too long after that even if he was the CO's pet.

:)