Military Personnel Ordered To Comply With Illegal Private Firearms Registration

Status
Not open for further replies.

parabolate

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
21
See original article & leaked memo here:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92395

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

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.

Learn here why it's your right – and duty – to be armed.

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.
 
I do not feel anyone should any longer subject themselves to military service to this country. The military, all branches, fails to recognize that the peope who serve them have rights. At the same time soldiers who have fought in battle are no longer allowed to bring back weapons as souveniers of their experiences and service, Saddam's personal sidearm was given by ranking Army officers to Prez Bush. Soldiers are not allowed to have personal firearms for protection in battle zones, etc. The brave men who served in WWI, WWII, Korea, and RVN, were all able to bring home weapons, etc, as war booty. As a matter of fact, every Army from every war in history prior to our recent "politically correct" era did so. It just makes me sick to see our fighting men treated like second class citizens, in more ways than the gun issues. If they drated me in this new military, I'd be spending my time in confinement. America's fighting man deserves better.
 
Not much more restrictive than normal military regulations concerning privately owned firearms if you live on post in the barracks.

And less restrictive than some deals -- up here in Alaska, US Army AK prohibits any personnel from carrying concealed on or off post.
 
I do not feel anyone should any longer subject themselves to military service to this country...etc, etc.

Americans don't "subject themselves" to military service. They voluntarily accept low pay, hard conditions, the possibility of injury and death, and temporary limits on their personal freedom in order to protect our freedom as a nation. They're not in it for what you call "war booty."

If they dra[f]ted me in this new military, I'd be spending my time in confinement.

They already know that. That's why they don't want to draft you.

Tinpig
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top