Counting on a pro-gun organization for help? Don't count on it if you're military.

[TAB]

I didn't say you would be I just said you could be...

I don't know how things work in the navy, but in the USCG violating orders and lieing too your CO about it is pretty high up on the things you do not want to do. I know if anyone under me pulled that crap I would do every thing in my power to make sure they got "the book thrown at them"

 

[wideym]

One sure way of getting a reaction would be to have a member of Congress make an official inquery.

Any member will do, not just one from the Posts state. Units have 24 hours to reply to such requests to the satisfaction of the Congressman. In other word they can't just send a copy of the policy, they must back up the policy with regs, incident reports, local laws, ect..or drop the policy, or modify/clairify it.

They don't call it a Congressinal bullet for nothing.

 

[Autolycus]

Tag for later.

 

[airforceteacher]

ugh you just admited to several courtmarhelable offenses that will get you in trouble big time... not the smartest thing to do.

Ummm, committing the acts was not the smartest thing to do. Admitting them on a public forum was just icing on the cake.

You violated your integrity. You lied. Unless you did this with the express purpose of civil disobedience (meaning you intend to get caught in the lie in order to challenge the order's lawfulness), you have abandoned your integrity, the first and most important character trait of anyone in the armed forces.

Way to go.

 

[jrfoxx]

you have abandoned your integrity, the first and most important character trait of anyone in the armed forces.

Way to go.

So, before we go off telling someone in the U.S. military the have "bandoned their integrity", are going to tell me that since joining the military you have not uttered a single lie to ANYONE, or broken ANY law or civil code (speeding), or ANYTHING? becasue those would be just as much not having perfect integrity also as the 1 lie he told (and as far as you know, that is the one and only time he did anything even close to that ever since joining).

Before we malign a soildier integrity, I'd be REALLLY careful I had a 100% perfect, spotless life first, or I would have NO room to be judging.And before someone says that a tiny lie to the a a grocery clerk, or speeding, is "not as bad" as lying to his command, it doesnt matter. ANYTHING you do that you know is not 100% correct, honest,legal, and moral, is lacking in integrity.The degree matters not, as lacking is lacking.

Just something to think about before we go acusing others of "abandoning thier integrity", which to those in the military is a VERY serious slam on them, IMHO. I sure hope you have lived a 100% perfect, spotless life while in the military, you would be showing a lack of HONOR, which is no better that waht you are accusing.I'd be careful with words like that.You know as well as I do that they are taken WAY more seriously by militray members than it likely would be by most others, and it is a serious accusation.

 

[bdickens]

Allow me to play devil's advocate here.

Are we sure we aren't jumping the gun here and flying off the handle too soon? Has anyone considered the possibility that there is nothing nefarious going on here and the Brigade Commander is doing this with the soldier's best interests in mind?

When I was stationed at Ft. Bragg, there was a big uproar because we in the 1st COSCOM were directed to go periodically inspect our soldier's off-post living quarters. Soldiers had a fit. NCOs had a fit. Someone filed an IG complaint. The whole purpose was to ensure that soldiers were not being taken advantage of by being put in substandard housing by unscrupulous landlords, but few bothered to request clarification. The inspections were to ensure that soldiers weren't living in firetraps, the ceiling wasn't caving in, appliances worked, they had hot water and electricity, that sort of thing. We were NOT to see that their socks were laid out dress-right-dress. Turns out that policy was instituted because someone discovered that there were soldiers living in Third-World conditions right there in Fayetteville, NC.

I also remember soldiers off-post being encouraged to have their belongings inventoried and records kept in the Orderly Room. Soldiers in the Barracks were required to have the inventory done. The reason for that was to assist in any investigation if the soldier was ever burglarized.

Maybe it would be better to request clarification of this policy first before going off half-cocked.

 

[Treo]

When I joined the Army ( waaaaay back in the dark ages) I did so with the understanding that there was going to be a certain community standard of what was & wasn't acceptable, when I got halfway through my career the Army arbitrarily changed the standard. I went home at the end of that enlistment.

The very first thing I did in the Army was take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Against all enemies. If the Army becomes the enemy of the Constitution than I have a duty to stand up to the Army. I am not obligated to obey an unconstitutional order, including an unconstitutional order to turn in my weapon to the arms room. And when you think about it only the law abiding solidiers are going to obey the order.

The scariest thing I ever did in the Army was to refuse a direct order to prepare to put down a riot in Tillicum ( Off post Ft. Lewis). Long story short I told my Plt. Sgt. that I wouldn't bear arms (in this case a billy club) against U.S. citizens.

Unfortunately someone will have to be the test case, someone will have refuse the order to turn in their weapon. Then the legality of the order can be tested

 

[RoadkingLarry]

I've never felt I had a moral obligation to follow an immoral law or regulation. I'm appalled at those that condemn a man for refusing to blindly follow an immoral command.

While I was in the Navy what LEGAL possessions I maintained at my off base (non-military housing) residence was absolutely no business of my commanding officer. Were I in a similar position as these soldiers and were I living in a off base non-military residence I would respectfully refuse to comply and let the chips fall where they will.

 

[dogmush]

I would respectfully refuse to comply and let the chips fall where they will.

...And had the soilder earlier in the thread done that, I would applaud him. Instead he chose to lie to his command. He did comprimise his integrity, and if he was one of my soilders, I'd push the CO for an Ar. 15. He needs to review the 7 Army values.

As far as IZI's original issue, I agree it seems overboard. If I was in this situation, it would be easy as my wife would send a nicely written note to the command telling them to shove it, they couldn't have any info on her possesions. But that might not work for all.

I would definatlly ask why they wanted it, and what regs backed it. IG or Congress Critter would become involved. Looks like you're doing that.

Under UCMJ, they probably can require that you give them the information, (if not the serial # then at least a my roommate has such and such) but they'd be pretty hard pressed to leagally force you to turn in the weapons. There is still due process before they can take your property.

 

[brickeyee]

Now THERE's a BS statement if I ever heard one (theirs, not yours). Heller was not about a person who wanted to register a gun, it was about a guy who wanted to be allowed to keep a gun in his home, and registration is part of the package that seems to go with "keep" in Washington, DC. I'm fairly certain Mr. Heller would have satisfied to be allowed to keep his handgun at home without registering it.

Heller did NOT challenge the DC registration rules.
While Scalia did NOT say the rules comply with the 2nd amendment, he could NOT rule against them since they were NOT challenged.

You only get what you ask for in a court ruling, and Heller asked that he be allowed to register his handgun.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I haven't read all the comments so if it's been mentioned already, my apologies, but there is something that needs to be taken into consideration: Article I Section 8, Clause 14, to wit:

The Congress shall have power; To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; ...​

This most likely needs to be brought up to Congress for resolution. Congress wrote the UCMJ, the Navy Bluejacket, and etc, or are at the very least responsible for what's in them. Join the military and you now live under an entirely different set of rules.

Woody

 

[Flyboy]

The more I think about this, the more it raises interesting questions in my mind. For example: what happens if a serviceman has a roommate who owns firearms prior to the institution of this policy? The brigade commander has no authority over the roommate, so what if the roommate refuses to provide the serial numbers for registration? Does the serviceman have to either move out or evict the roommate? What about the contract issues--can the brigade commander (for that matter, can anybody) incur legal liabilities on behalf of the serviceman? Would that be a valid reason to break a lease (I doubt it).

This has the potential to get really interesting in court, and the Army might not like the consequences.

In the meantime, for those of us civilian gun owners, I would humbly suggest that, due to certain Army policies, it is too dangerous to our liberties to rent property to servicemen, lest we find our arms registered. I hate to throw the soldiers in the middle, but it just doesn't seem prudent at this time to expose ourselves to the whims of the command structure.

 

[TAB]

Fly boy all the army has to do is say "national security" and they can pretty much do what they want.

Yeah I know, thats not the way its supose to be, but that is the way it is.

 

[tank mechanic]

****

 

[Rugerlvr]

The military is not a democracy.

 

[Treo]

If you care to question my integrity, than you need to question the countless other soldiers who did the same thing. Soldiers from platoon sergeants on down to the lowliest private.

The fact that every does something does not make it right (or wrong). If you were wrong you were wrong no matter what every one else did.

And I can say that because I did look my platoon sgt in the eye and tell him I wasn't going to follow his orders

 

[Poper]

Careful!

One sure way of getting a reaction would be to have a member of Congress make an official inquery.

I did this one time while in the AF about 1977. I had a semi-legal/regulatory issue that was taking far too long to resolve, (or so I believed) so I wrote my Congressman. WRONG!
They cannot discipline you for writing your Congressman, but it should be the absolute last resort after all else fails! JUMPING YOUR CHAIN OF COMMAND IS NOT ADVISABLE!!! If you want to stir up a hornet's nest and get some serious attention, this will do it!
This will put a flag on your record as a potential troublemaker, believe it or not. A Congressional inquiry without running it up the CoC first is a sure way to get attention you really do not want. If you are career minded, such a Congressional inquiry in your file could hurt promotional possibilities later on without you even knowing it. A willingness to jump the CoC will be permanently a part of your record and is NOT a plus mark!
Trust me on this one. Been there. Done that. It's not nearly as much fun as it sounds!

I think one would do well following CaesarI's protocol and advice.

JMTC!

Poper

 

[Zoogster]

Consequently, I require all Soldiers residing off-post to register with their units the make, model, type, caliber/gauge, and serial number of all privately-owned weapons present on their off-post property. Each company commander will maintain a consolidated list for the Soldiers assigned to his or her unit. Battalion commanders may choose to consolidate this information further.

Sounds like one of the first anti victories of Heller.

Previously it was widely believed, dating back to the founding fathers that requiring registration was in itself unconstitutional as it is a first step in enabling confiscation or infringment on ownership.

Well Heller did not directly say that was okay, but implied it by saying D.C. must allow Heller to register his firearm.


How that applies here is that previously things on base were always the legal concern of the military. They wanted to keep track of all weapons and could control weapons present on base in the way they chose.

Things off base however were not subject to military controls, only the soldier themselves. They had no authority or right to require anything for property off base.

Well the Heller ruling can now be interpreted to mean that requiring registration of property not even under military control or on military property is legal and not an abusive infringement.
Heller made registration appear normal.

 

[Gray Peterson]

What if one of the soldiers room mates refuses to hand over that information?

 

[IZinterrogator]

Then, as I said earlier, the Soldier could be held liable for his roommate's refusal through nonjudicial or judicial punishment. AKA, Article 15 or court-martial.

 

[Gray Peterson]

One reason I will never join the military.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

You give up certain inaliable rights as a soldier in the U.S. Army. Practically speaking your life goes under that commander 24 days a year 7 days a week. he is responsible if you commit suicide. His career and the suboordinate commanders below him can fall into jeopardy if the needs of the soldier are not being met after returning from the theater. With inadequate care in "cases" it is understanding in some cases. This is why I always told myself "this is the reason why they retire people in twenty". Remember that. You will always sacrifice. Take your guns and head them to family for storage. I have seen guns left over in arms rooms long after soldiers left the unit.

U.S.SFC_RET

 

[airforceteacher]

So, before we go off telling someone in the U.S. military the have "bandoned their integrity", are going to tell me that since joining the military you have not uttered a single lie to ANYONE, or broken ANY law or civil code (speeding), or ANYTHING? becasue those would be just as much not having perfect integrity also as the 1 lie he told (and as far as you know, that is the one and only time he did anything even close to that ever since joining).

Sorry I couldn't get back on this yet, THR is blocked at work - I can read it but not post. No, I have never signed a false statement to my commander. Satisfied? Have I broken the rules? Sure. Have I lied about it? Nope.

Keyboard commando? I actually have told a boss I wouldn't lie when asked before, so I have done what I speak of.

You're right when you say integrity is important to military members - it's supposed to be! If you will lie to your commander, then I have reason to believe you'll lie to me.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

Do you have the exact language of the requirement? I am trying to think of away around this for you.

You said earlier that you are responsible for other people's guns on your property so you cannot move your guns into a trust or an LLC. However, could you use a trust/LLC to rent the apartment from you landlord and then sublease everything but a lesser part of the apartment (i.e. guest bedroom where your guns are) to yourself? Think of it like renting a room from a little old lady and having access to the whole house except for her room and keeping the guns there.

It is kinda cutsie and I know nothing about military law, but it might make the appropriate statements correct.

Do any lawyers have any thoughts or opinions?

 

[Gray Peterson]

Ok, let me ask a question, and I'll see if I can get an educated answer.

You're a soldier, and you don't live in your own home. You're renting a room at someone's house. The owner of the house owns guns and has them in a safe that you do not have access to. This order comes down the pike. Your commander tells you that it doesn't matter, all privately held guns must be registered if they're located off base in your home/house. The landlord refuses, you tell him that you'll get court martialed, and says he doesn't care.

I know that the US military members have less freedoms than normal, but come on, this can't be correct.