It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Military demands details on soldiers' private guns

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Military demands details on soldiers' private guns


www.worldnetdaily.com

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.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Apparently "Don't ask don't tell" does not applie here. The military has no right to know if you have a privately owned firearm or not. This is Invasion of Privacy. Luckily this has been ordered to stoped but were will end. What if employers start demanding this information, what if businesses you work for start descrimination based on gun ownership.

www.worldnetdaily.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
He were only allowed issued weapons when I was in.... I remember that a guy had a .38 revolver sent from home and killed himself playing Russian Roulette at a combat base. he was the only person that I knew of that had a non issue firearm.... Knives were a different story, but only in a combat zone.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   

The order was stopped, according to base officials, when it was discovered the commander was not "acting within his authority."


From the link

THANK GOODNESS!!!!

Apparently someone there has some common sense...

Great Find and something we all have to be on the watch for..

Protect your rights people!!!!!

Semper



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Unfortunately I'm expecting more and more attempts on our rights and freedoms as the economic crisis worsens. How much will be too much? No one knows for sure. I would imagine that the speed of the collapse will force them to try things faster than they would like, which will throw sparks.......

The people in DC, I won't call them leaders, need to think about America and what it stands for before they make any more rash decisions that will turn us into just another failed republic. Sadly, I don't have much faith that they will.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
The article was definitely interesting. I also thought the article about the new policy of requiring the destruction of spent 5.56 and 7.62x51 brass very interesting as well.

I wonder how much the military makes each year selling the spent brass to industry. It is probably worth more as spent casings than as brass to be melted.

Back to the topic:

It is strange that a complete about face was made after a spotlight was placed upon the issue. I guess it is true that vermin like the dark and will tend to stay away from brightly lit places.



[edit on 21-3-2009 by xman_in_blackx]



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Unless the soldier lives on post housing, the command has no need to know anything in regards to Personally Owned Weapons (POWs). You are required by the provost marshal to register your weapons when living in post housing. If you live in the barracks, you are required to register your weapons and you must store your weapons in the unit's arms room. If you live offpost then nobody in the military needs to know about your weapons that you own. They have no right to ask for any information pertaining to your weapons or your concealed weapons permit. Seeings how I am in the military, I would have politely told my commander that it was none of there damn business. There are always officers that like to throw some rank around and think they are mister big s***. As long as the soldier knows his/her rights then they are within there rights to tell a commander to mind his own business.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by scoopkill

Military demands details on soldiers' private guns


www.worldnetdaily.com

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.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Somebody is obviously concerned for TOTUS' safety.

Not a one line post.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Very misleading title. This guy obviously has an issue and it was addressed. Good luck to those who think members of the military will just roll over and allow their personal lives to be ripped apart.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by scoopkill
 


Keep pushing us you bass turds - sooner or later millions and millions are going to push back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then what??

You know-----------------------------YOU KNOW!!



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
and...............There in the military there ass belongs to uncle sam. In this case, there is no case. 10 years ago when I was in we had to register our personal firearms..Non story



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
I am not surprised someone tried to do this. It is WRONG!! But I bet they will try to make it legal. You just wait and see. I am a vetran and the military owns your a** when you are serving.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:33 PM
link   
The only thing the commander did wrong was request this info from those who lived off post.

You live on post you have to provide the info. All weapons on Post must be accounted for.

I don't see the big deal here really. This isn't the first time a Commander thought that those who live off post has to abide by the rules of those who live on Post.

One of my Commanders wanted my squad leader to inspect my off post apartment along with the ones on post.

He over stepped his boundary and was quickly informed that they aren't allowed to do that.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by PammyK
 


Thats funny.

I still serve, active for 10 and reserve for the last month or two.

I went home everyday off post and the Army didn't own me there. They cant inspect my apartment, they cant wake me up by banging on my door and they can't have mock fire drills.

So no the Army didn't "own my a**".

Probably a brand new unit commander who misunderstood the lettering in that paticular SOP. If he wanted the info from those on Post, then he can get it. Just not the ones off Post.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by PammyK
 



I am a vetran and the military owns your a** when you are serving.


I don't know whether to laugh or scream.

But to save yourself further embarrassment please don't throw around your alleged veteran status like that again.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by hypervigilant
He were only allowed issued weapons when I was in.... I remember that a guy had a .38 revolver sent from home and killed himself playing Russian Roulette at a combat base. he was the only person that I knew of that had a non issue firearm.... Knives were a different story, but only in a combat zone.


Yeah, but aside from Operations, issued Firearms are kept in the Armory, or the Barracks if necessary. I have never heard of anyone carrying an Issued Sidearm/Rifle back to their private residence, at least not Stateside.

The only exception to the matter would relate to certain groups I have known individuals to be part of, and they were SpecOps, with a particular "Need" which exceeded Standard Regulations.

Private Firearms are not a problem if you are in the service, and I have NEVER heard anyone state otherwise. As a matter of fact, the LEO Specific Gun Shops extend their wide ranging discounts and privileges to MIL Personnel as well (Active, Reserve, Guard, and Retired). The Military Community is a HUGE consumer of Private Firearms Purchases.


I remember up in Alaska one of the Base Commanders actually forbid his Personnel from carrying Private Firearms while in Uniform, concealed or otherwise. I feel that this is just as ridiculous, but I guess I can understand the Base CO's concern in regards to the image it might present (In Alaska you are allowed Sidearm Carry without a License).



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 01:52 AM
link   
'


Military Demand's details on Soldiers Private Guns


That's what she said.


Sorry, I tried but I absolutely could not stop myself.


[edit on 22-3-2009 by space cadet]



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 


Can you imagine the outrage if someone took a picture of me walking out of a gunsmith shop downtown, carrying my hunting rifle while wearing my uniform.

I can picture it posted on ATS already with 20 pages of people saying this is the start of martial law.

Common sense does apply to that rule.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueOx
There are always officers that like to throw some rank around and think they are mister big s***. As long as the soldier knows his/her rights then they are within there rights to tell a commander to mind his own business.


Yeah talk about it, my Old Man had to deal with a real Alpha Hotel of an Admiral down in New Orleans once. The fool attempted to prevent his Unit from procuring necessary equipment, and he was a continuous thorn in the side of the entire Group. He even attempted to block another Admiral's request for help from Specialists serving under my Father's Command, but he was quickly overridden.

My Old Man basically lost his chance to make Rear Admiral, because he finally told the jerk in NO to go Stick It. At least he Retired with the huge admiration of his guys though, and that is what truly matters in the end.

This case right here is nothing more than the Base Commander either acting through an ignorance of the Policies, or he was Actually the type to over assert his authority. We will never know which is the case, unless someone who personally knows him speaks up (Or we can find a pattern of behavior).



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by scoopkill
 


Oh Thank god it didn't get very far. I'm with Semper on this one, and with many others who said the Military shouldn't be enquiring about your personal firearms.

I personally don't see it as any of their business.


- Carrot



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join