General Jacoby -- here we go again?

[ChestyP]

Recall the brouhaha late last year over MG Charles Jacoby's policy prohibiting soldiers assigned to U.S. Army Alaska from carrying concealed OFF-DUTY, OFF-POST?

Jacoby has just been reassigned to command Fort Lewis, WA. WA is a state with a strong and long history of shall-issue concealed carry (since 1961). It should be interesting.

I'm not going to address on-post policies. The commander has full authority to implement any regulations he or she feels neccessary to control on-base activities. I may not agree with (some of) them, but I don't question his authority.

IMNSHO, based on 28 years USMC active duty, the commander's off-duty/off-post authority is limited to prohibiting those things that are prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the service. Legitimate exercise of a fundamental right is not and cannot be prejudicial. Jacoby's Army Alaska policy equates licensed law abiding soldier gun owners with gang bangers (many of whom are in the Army of One, according to some news articles).


Announcement quoted below:



New Fort Lewis commander named

FORT LEWIS — The top Army general in Alaska, a paratrooper with combat experience in Afghanistan and Grenada, has been named to become the next commander at Fort Lewis, the Army announced Friday.

Maj. Gen. Charles H. Jacoby, Jr., 52, is a Michigan native and West Point graduate who for two years has led the Army’s buildup in the 49th state and managed the flow of thousands of troops from posts there to Iraq and back again.

President Bush nominated the commander of U.S. Army Alaska on Friday for a third star and assignment as commanding general at Fort Lewis and I Corps, the Army announced.

If the Senate confirms the appointment, Jacoby will become the 62nd commanding general in the local post’s 90-year history. He will succeed Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik, who has been assigned to take over leadership of the Multi-National Transition Security Command in Iraq.

A change of command ceremony has been scheduled for April 29.

 

[Thain]

Sadly, Gen. Jacoby is not alone in his attitude that only the police and military should have firearms. He is, afaik, the only one who thinks that soldiers shouldn't have them either.

I wonder if such a decree would apply to civilians living on base; Or to McChord Air Force Base and Camp Murray (Washington National Guard).

That would be grand. Some dumb punk pulls a crime inside Ft. Lewis, and an off-dutyAir Force enlisted man and an Army Wife both pull out their concealed M1911's and rescue the poor Army soldier that wass being mugged.

 

[ChestyP]

I'm not aware

of civilians residing aboard military installations. But any post/base commander can certainly control access to firearms by ANYONE on the base, civilian or military.

McChord makes its own rules. Most military installations require registration of guns kept aboard the base, and may impose further storage restrictions (e.g. no guns in the barracks or BOQs, must be kept in armory; although most bases allow registered firearms in on-base housing).

I don't know who controls Camp Murray. Does Lewis retain overall control, or is the the Adjutant General of the state of Washington? I'm sure Camp Murray was carved out of greater Ft Lewis at some time in the past, but who actually has title to it today I don't know.

 

[Thain]

According to Wikipedia, there are some 3,400 familes living on/in Fty. Lewis.

(Yeah, yeah, I know... Wiki...)

 

[GRIZ22]

That would probably be 3400 military families.

P.S. The spouses of people in the military are civilians but subject to post regulation.

 

[Essex County]

If a Soldier can't be allowed to abide with

State laws, how can he be trusted in battle? I have far too much respect for the American G.I. to abide with such nonsense. Essex

 

[Thain]

Right, military families... That I had made that clear... Oh well. Obvioussly, they have to follow certain regulations and restrictions, but is/was General Jacoby's decree agianst lawful concealed carry an order to the troops, or a base regulation/statute?

If its an order, then the men under his command are bound to follow it, but by definition, civilians would not. Just apoint that remains unclear to me...

 

[James T Thomas]

history repeating itself?

I had pulled guard duty for some fuel storage tanks somewhere inside Ft.Lewis, with an M14 and bayonet only! 1967. No ammunition. It was at night, and there was only one other soldier on guard with me. The storage tanks must have been pilfered at one time or another for us to be posted there.

At that time Ft. Lewis was an "open" facility; meaning that the roads in and out were open to civilian traffic, and anyone could go through, any time.
We were guarding at night, and amoung those on duty, were discussion of just what we could do if confronted by someone who actually did have ammunition. Absolutely no lighting there either.

I thought at the time that it was shameful to have soldiers with their lives at risk, guarding, and unarmed as it was.

I'm now wondering if this may go on again under new command at good old Ft.Lewis?

Not quite the same issue as the Second Amendment rights.

However, any command that puts it's political or career interest above the rights and welfare of it's subordinates probably will also institute policies that will inforce the same kind of violation also.

Wasn't Gen. Walter short responsible for locking away ammunition and weapons to keep them out of the hands of soldiers who might use them,
in Pearl Harbour on December 7, 1941?

Not quite the same, or is it?

 

[armedandsafe]

We stood guard on the fence surrounding Etain AFB armed with entrenching tools and fierce looks while the Algerians were rioting and threatening to overrun the base. Our weapons were in Verdun and our ammo was stored another 20 klicks from there. Our highest ranking officer (test pilot) was a 1st Lt and it took a Major or higher to remove more than one rifle at a time from the armory. Some things never change. :banghead:

Pops

 

[Old Dog]

I also noted in passing that Jacoby had been selected for the Ft. Lewis command -- and remembered that he was the twit responsible for giving the order to all the active duty folks in his Alaskan command prohibiting them from off-duty carry, no matter that it was fully legal under Alaska law.

I shoot regularly at Range 15 at Ft. Lewis. Excellent range, and quite inexpensive. The signage there notes that all active duty personnel must have their firearms registered with the PMO. Doesn't say anything about us retirees (yet). Hmm.

 

[Langenator]

Camp Murray belongs to the state of Washington, not Uncle Sam. And while McChord AFB is currently a separate installation, belonging to the USAF, after the most recent BRAC round, Ft Lewis and McChord AFB are scheduled to merge into a joint base. I'm not sure who will have the overall command authority, but I believe the CG at McChord is a 2-star, whilst I Corps/Ft Lewis is 3, which would put the Lewis CG in charge.

The only problems in the Ft Lewis area involving soldiers and guns recently were some Rangers who held up a bank with AKMs they brought back from somewhere classified. And interestingly, the Rangers (along with 1st SFG), while they are based on Ft Lewis, do not fall under the command authority of the I Corps CG.

So who knows what will happen.

 

[Run&Shoot]

The best story I read in the newspapers was several years ago about a Sargent in the Special Forces who lived in Tacoma. It was in one of the drug infested parts of town (South Hill?).

Apparently he had been giving the neighborhood drug dealers a hard time, not cowering like most homeowners. They finally decided to eliminate him. unfortunately for the drug trade in Tacoma they launched their attack while he was having a BBQ with some SF friends.

Druggies start shooting at him and friends in their backyard from their own houses. SF Sargent party gets behind cover and he calls some more friends to come help out. Meanwhile he engages druggies with his 1911 .45. At least one other SF friend shows up with another pistol.

When it was all over no one was killed. Druggies fired hundreds of rounds, some even managed to hit his house. He was able to hold his ground and protect family and friends with something like 11 shots. Can't remember the exact details, but from the articles my impression was that they were way more terrified of his 11 shots then he was of their couple of hundred.

Interesting observations
I was dismayed that a senior NCO in the Special forces had to live in such a crappy part of Tacoma to support his family. Can't we pay our military personnel better, especially the senior enlisted?

I was impressed with his training and fire discipline. Incredibly restrained and yet totally effective in warding off several attackers until the police arrived to sort it out.

I like his friends. They came running to the sound of guns. Two of them armed more than equaled several druggies firing wildly in great volume.

Kind of obvious how this would have played out if all army personnel were restricted to not be able to possess firearms even in private residences off base from Ft Lewis.

 

[Jim K]

"Ven der Army takes over, ve vill show you how to run tings! Ve vill control everyting! Sieg heil!"

Jim

 

[DWARREN123]

Just because he's a U.S. Army General doesn't mean he can't also be a butt head!