Army General bans OFF BASE concealed carry in Alaska

[Lennyjoe]

How can an Army Generals orders be valid OFF-BASE and OFF-DUTY?

Like the other guy said, we are on duty 24/7 as far as regulations are concerned.

Figures, just as I was going to call my functional to see if I can get one last PCS to Alaska to finish out my career. :banghead:

 

[Werewolf]

According to the UCMJ one does not have to obey an unlawful order. However, it usually takes a court martial to determine whether an order was lawful or not.

In this case the best course is probably as others have mentioned to get a congress critter involved. Though I imagine a New York state soldier stationed in Alaska might have a difficult time getting Hillary or Chuckie to make a fuss.

 

[GruntII]

Too bad the general dosen't have a publish email.A couple million emails telling him what a Charlie Sierra Puss in Boots he is would be nice.

 

[Spiphel Rike]

That's a bit of an overstep, but I couldn't really tell you, since i'm not in the US military. How exactly does that order/command relate to duty though? Or don't your orders have to relate to duty?

 

[dm1333]

NRA

Who wants to be known as the first general to get blacklisted by the NRA? I still think there is more to this than we know. I'd like to know the backround and if in fact it was reviewed by JAG. It wouldn't be the first time a flag type did something they were not supposed too.

Don
(very thankful to be in the CG, too!)

 

[jd25q]

According to the UCMJ one does not have to obey an unlawful order.

Yes, but again it is not an unlawful order. If you follow the General's order not to carry he is not causing you to break any law. If he ordered you to rob a bank, now that's a different story.

Putting the military issue aside for a moment we may argue that it is an unconstitutional order. It is not however a criminal act for one to violate the constitutional rights of another, with the exception being law enforcement officers acting under color of law (18 USC 242).

If this weren't the military perhaps an individual could sue on the basis his rights were infringed.

What strikes me as peculiar is where the memo states (paraphrasing) that having armed soldiers about puts the command in danger.

 

[F4GIB]

Call the NRA. THEY can ensure that this Major General retires in that rank.

 

[AF_INT1N0]

I'm not sure whether or not he is overstepping his bounds. But I would think he is.
Not that it really matters.. Your not supposed to wear earings on or off base either. But folks do all the time, carrying a firearm is a safety issue in Alaska, I seriously doubt that this rule will be followed.

This will hopefully get slapped down by someone, I also sincerely hope this is a career damaging move for Jacoby.
This is a textbook example of poor leadership. And it saddens me that someone that disrespects his people like that can make general.

holes like this are the same type that don't issue ammo to patrolling troops in New Orleans(because of the liability) and then don't say anything when the troops get mugged for their M-16s.

Unsat General....Unsat.:banghead:

-- SSgt AF_INT1N0

 

[Standing Wolf]

The military is defending freedom, right? Is that the story? Am I missing something here?

 

[dm1333]

Ordering people to wear seatbelts at all times, legal. Ordering people to wear helmets on motorcycles, legal. Ordering people to not engage in an activity such as CCW? Questionable. There are reasons for issuing lots of orders that are more restrictive than state and local laws. I'm wondering if somebody got mad at work and whipped out their gun, or got into a fight on base and had a CCW and this was a knee jerk reaction to that.

 

[mountainclmbr]

Being a FREE person this is difficult for me to comprehend. I have dealt with people like this in the civilian world and have made it a point to legally crush them. Totalitarians live in a very dangerous and fragile existance. My philosophy is to throw gasoline and matches at tyrants.

 

[Langenator]

Interesting thing is the majority of the USARAK troops-the 172d Bde (Stryker) is deployed to Iraq right now.

Also, USARAK is a subordinate command to Alaskan Command, headed by a USAF three star. Now, if that LTG decides that the MG is being a dumbass, he can tell him to back off.

Joint command generals generally leave the various component CGs to run their own kingdoms, though.

And I don't think this could be the same guy who may have tried any silly stuff at Ft Hood. The Ft Hood commander, IIRC, is also the III Corps commander, and thus a 3 star.

 

[stevelyn]

Some of the Army's dumbarse policies was my main reason for getting out. One of my problems was registering my privately owned off-post guns on post. I had the misfortune of being assigned to Ft. Wainrwright when MG Samuel Ebessen (the idiot that turned the Hurricane Hugo recovery in a major goat rope and was relieved of duty) was 6th ID commander.
It seems like the Alaska Command is the purgatory where the Pentagon sends all of it's jackass general officers to pay penance.

At the time members of USAG FWW and the 6th ID were forbidden from traveling the Dalton Hwy (road to Prudhoe Bay) past a certain point. Don't know the reasons for it, but the good caribou hunting started at a point well past there and some of us routinely violated that order, memo or whatever the hell it was.

Of course I had made up my mind within a year of being here that I was getting out and staying so I couldn't have cared less as I'd already established my residency here by then. Even though I still had another three years until my ETS.

Bottom line was is that they couldn't enforce something they didn't know about. Obviously if something happened while we were up there and the command was notified of it they could take some sort of disciplinary action.

Military services the world over have had idiotic policies and commanders since the first group of cavemen banded together to raid their neighbors and that will never change. The American military services inspite of their professionalism and abilities aren't immune from it either.

 

[crazed_ss]

How can an Army Generals orders be valid OFF-BASE and OFF-DUTY?

Umm.. you dont know much about the military do you?
The order is perfectly valid.

 

[Devonai]

It is valid, and it is wrong.

I've only been in the big boy Army for a little over a year, and I've only spent four months on active duty, so I don't claim to be an expert, but if this order came down over my head my squad leader, platoon sergeant and platoon LT would never hear the end of it. I'd be as vocal as possible until somebody told me to shut up, and then I would hire a lawyer.

Maybe it's easier for me to say this because I'm a weekend warrior*, but I would stake my career on this issue.

*On July 4th I'll leave for Fort Dix for 75 days to train up for deployment to Iraq, so before too long this entire debate will become academic for me. I still care.

 

[ScottsGT]

Yet another reason I will discourage my children to join the military. My father was in the USAF for 30 years. Highly decorated, extensive career, made a few inventions the USAF uses, and one item that is sold at every truck stop and Wal-Mart in America. But can he even get the VA to half way help him out with his disability ratings? Hell no! They're waiting on him to die so they don't have to worry about it.

 

[Sistema1927]

How can an Army Generals orders be valid OFF-BASE and OFF-DUTY?

Getting a bad sunburn during the weekend can be cause for an Article 15. When you are in the armed forces, you are no longer subject to the same rules as civilians. The UCMJ is pretty draconian.

As much as I don't like this order, I can't see anything "unlawful" about it. Many of my "rights" were abridged during my time in uniform, but it was understood to be part of the package when I raised my right hand and swore to "obey the orders of the officers appointed over me".

 

[Thin Black Line]

Too bad the general dosen't have a publish email

He does and could change it in less than an hour. Mass emails, like
demonstration marches, are essentially useless changing anything but
they make people feel good for a while.

So if the brass sends down a policy prohibiting me from reading the NIV Bible, that's a lawful order?

That could certainly be challenged just like last year's policy telling
ALL MILITARY CHAPLAINS not to say "Jesus" in a prayer.

(Hello, President Bush, we're still waiting on that Executive Order requested
by over 75 of our elected Congressional representatives back in Dec 05 in
order to protect our Chaplains. Hello? Bush....Bush...hello? I hear the
sound of silence.....)

There's no such thing as "off duty" in the military.

Actually, there is "off duty" for AR and NG. When I de-mob'd I was able
to do a lot of things again that I could not before....well, if I chose to
under man's so-called law, but I'm trying to be a morally upright Christian

 

[crazed_ss]

I've only been in the big boy Army for a little over a year, and I've only spent four months on active duty, so I don't claim to be an expert, but if this order came down over my head my squad leader, platoon sergeant and platoon LT would never hear the end of it. I'd be as vocal as possible until somebody told me to shut up, and then I would hire a lawyer.

If the Army is anything like the Marines, your Sergeants and Lt. will probably say something like "Welcome to the Army, you signed the contract.. no **** about it"

A military lawyer couldnt/wouldnt help you either as the order isnt unlawful.

By joining the Army, you've basically given up many of your freedoms for the greater good of the rest of the country. If the Army is anything like the Marines, there are regulations on things like how you're allowed to dress when wearing normal civilian attire.

If a general can tell you that you're not allowed to wear tank tops and sandals to the grocery store, then he can also tell you that your not allowed to stuff a gun in your waistband when you go to the grocery store.

It's the military, not burger king.. you cant have always have it your way.

 

[ball3006]

When I was in Thailand during the Vietnam...

war, there was a posted order that said anyone catching the clap 7 times would get an Article 15. We had a guy catch it 9 times. He got his shots off base. Guy just couldn't handle Thai beer. That general at Ft Hood tried to forbid any soldier from keeping firearms in his residence off base. That died a quiet death real quick....chris3

 

[crazed_ss]

haha.. that makes sense actually.

A lot of people dont realize that the military sometimes sees troops as "assets".. like a tank or artillery piece. If a Soldier or Marine is out there getting STD's or otherwise endangering his body, then the military is concerned as they stand to lose a very important and expensive piece of equipment, The G.I.

 

[Gillster]

Yeah, the Army's funny about it's assests. My brother in law is a Blackhawk pilot ramping up for a trip to the desert. He was given a 72 hour weekend pass but I had to go get him because they are under a general order not to drive a car? Now his car is home but he was not even allowed a rental, no driving period. I asked why, he said soldiers die in car accidents. Go figure.

 

[spartacus2002]

The order is not lawful. For it to be lawful, there has to be a nexus between a valid military purpose and the private conduct the order regulates. Simply bleating "safety! safety!" like a sheep does not cut it, especially under circumstances where Alaska state law allows concealed carry.

 

[Sergeant Bob]

Constitutional rights and military? Two mutually exclusive terms.

It's like my old Flight Chief used to tell me. "Sgt Bob, we're here to defend a Democracy, not to have one."

 

[Langenator]

I'm sure there is a "valid military purpose" to this whole thing. Most likely, Private Snuffy was carrying a concealed pistol and did something stupid, probably involving alcohol, that either got himself hurt or thrown in the pokey.

Both of which make him non-deployable, thus greatly inhibiting his ability to do his assigned job.

So, in a typical fit of over-reaction, the CG says no concealed weapons.