Drizzt
February 13, 2003, 11:59 PM
AG’s Regs Effect Troop Readiness
(From the Gun Owners' Action League website)
Below are excerpts of a letter written to me from a Naval Reservist.
Dear Jim,
My situation is that I'm a physician in the Naval Reserve. The navy provides medical support to the marines and when I was mobilized for Operation Desert Storm I served with the marines in Saudi Arabia. We carried side arms whenever we went off base, which was once or twice a week. The navy gave me one trip to the range to practice before being shipped out. Given the scope of the mobilization, I do not blame the navy for that, but I feel very lucky that I never had to use the pistol in earnest.
My reserve center has notified me to be prepared for mobilization. The area that I feel needs most work to bring up to par is my skill in using a hand gun. I wanted to purchase a 9 mm Beretta because that is the standard service pistol and discovered that it is impossible to do so in Massachusetts. I contacted Speaker Finneran's office and an aide referred me to the Senate Committee on Public Safety. Aides in both offices assured me that it was not the intent of any of their legislation to prevent a reservist from getting necessary training. They referred me to Attorney General Reilly's office. I spoke with someone who identified herself as "Lisa". I do not know if she is an AAG. However, she said she would look into it and get back to me the next day. I have not yet heard from her.
As an officer, the navy expects me to know what to do to prepare myself for my job when I am mobilized. When I think about the likely places for the marines to be deployed -- Pakistan, Afghanistan -- I know I need to become more proficient with a handgun. What I don't understand is why my own state is preventing me.
Sincerely,
Frank Greco
Currently legislators have been made aware of Mr. Greco’s situation and most have responded by questioning why our nation would issue a side arm that our Attorney General would define as unsafe. We’ve been asking the same question for quite a while now, but perhaps these legislators will get better answers than we did. They might also want to have their checkbooks handy if they expect answers from the AG.
http://www.goal.org/Breaking/AGgreco.htm
(From the Gun Owners' Action League website)
Below are excerpts of a letter written to me from a Naval Reservist.
Dear Jim,
My situation is that I'm a physician in the Naval Reserve. The navy provides medical support to the marines and when I was mobilized for Operation Desert Storm I served with the marines in Saudi Arabia. We carried side arms whenever we went off base, which was once or twice a week. The navy gave me one trip to the range to practice before being shipped out. Given the scope of the mobilization, I do not blame the navy for that, but I feel very lucky that I never had to use the pistol in earnest.
My reserve center has notified me to be prepared for mobilization. The area that I feel needs most work to bring up to par is my skill in using a hand gun. I wanted to purchase a 9 mm Beretta because that is the standard service pistol and discovered that it is impossible to do so in Massachusetts. I contacted Speaker Finneran's office and an aide referred me to the Senate Committee on Public Safety. Aides in both offices assured me that it was not the intent of any of their legislation to prevent a reservist from getting necessary training. They referred me to Attorney General Reilly's office. I spoke with someone who identified herself as "Lisa". I do not know if she is an AAG. However, she said she would look into it and get back to me the next day. I have not yet heard from her.
As an officer, the navy expects me to know what to do to prepare myself for my job when I am mobilized. When I think about the likely places for the marines to be deployed -- Pakistan, Afghanistan -- I know I need to become more proficient with a handgun. What I don't understand is why my own state is preventing me.
Sincerely,
Frank Greco
Currently legislators have been made aware of Mr. Greco’s situation and most have responded by questioning why our nation would issue a side arm that our Attorney General would define as unsafe. We’ve been asking the same question for quite a while now, but perhaps these legislators will get better answers than we did. They might also want to have their checkbooks handy if they expect answers from the AG.
http://www.goal.org/Breaking/AGgreco.htm