LadyGreenEyes wrote:
On the surface, it looks good, doesn't it? I don't buy it for a moment, and will list one reason why not. I am a veteran, married to a career soldier (over 17 years active, = reserve time). For guns owned by soldiers, the rule has always been that you do not have to register them on post unless taking them on post (including living there). Soldiers living off post have had no requirement to register their weapons. However, very early last year, for the first time ever, units all over the place (not just this post) were telling soldiers that ALL had to register their guns, even if they lived off post, and never carried the guns onto post. What changed? Obama took office. Well, my reaction, when my husband mentioned this, was simple. I told him he could tell his unit all the guns were mine, and my opinion on their demand was, "****you. Not exactly ladylike, I know, but I have little tolerance for people with no respect for the Constitution and our rights.
Ma'am, I don't know what post you live on, but Fort Bragg's gun policy hasn't changed since 2004. It does not require the registering of firearms with the provost martial unless the firearm will be stored on post for more than seven days. Bragg soldiers who live on or off post and wish to purchase a firearm must receive a memo from their commander allowing them to do so which is the only restriction on soldiers who live off post. If your post is different that's due to your post commander's policy, not Army policy. Army policy has always been that weapon policies are determined by individual post commanders.
Also, I can think of another event that has happened recently which would bring more restrictive gun control on posts, Maj Hasan, Fort Hood, thirteen dead, ring any bells? Not that I agree with it, but it's far more likely the change in your post's policy has to do with an actual mass shooting on an Army post by an Army officer than it does the election of Obama.
As to the OP, I've commented on this before, and I agree it seems the dems are finally realizing gun control is a losing battle. The Brady Bunch could only get some 35,000 signatures for it's opposition against open carry in Starbucks, and we all know, democrats and republicans alike, the NRA could fart 35,000 signatures to oppose. Any representative who reads the comments on the Huffington Post articles will see the control advocates getting their butts kicked from pro-2A folk on the right and left. I don't care if the politicians believe in the 2A or not, just as long as they're afraid of doing anything other than supporting it.
