• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Pentagon to adopt uniform rules on guns

varminter22

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
927
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
imported post

Pentagon will adopt a broad policy governing how privately owned guns can be carried or stored at military installations. The new policy is expected to mirror restrictions already in place at some military installations that, for example, require guns brought onto a base to be registered with military police.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gaRi3Qlr815nU39uCz14NmW_r9XAD9F3ODMO0

I wouldn't expect great things from this, but it will be interesting to see the new policy.
 

Nevada carrier

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
1,293
Location
The Epicenter of Freedom
imported post

When I was stationed at Ft. Bliss, Soldiers billeted in barracks where required to store their firearms in the arms room, usually located in the basement of the building and they could only be removed upon authorization from the Commander.

For Soldiers billeted in family housing on post they where required to store their weapons at the Ft. Bliss Rod and Gun Club. They where required to present authorization from their CO to remove them from the premises, but could use them at their range facilities at will.

I believe my CO asked that all Soldiers store their firearms at the RGC because he didn't want to bother signing a dozen memorandums a week for people who just wanted to got target shooting.
 

Felid`Maximus

Activist Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,714
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
imported post

Interesting, but unfortunately the article makes it look like they are just going to pass another pointless rule increasing restrictions on how a person can store a gun on base which will have zero impact on the ability of people who ignore such rules to fire at will at the unarmed soldiers.
 

MilitaryMike

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
106
Location
Creech AFB. NV
imported post

Felid`Maximus wrote:
Interesting, but unfortunately the article makes it look like they are just going to pass another pointless rule increasing restrictions on how a person can store a gun on base which will have zero impact on the ability of people who ignore such rules to fire at will at the unarmed soldiers.
Bingo! Imagine how the Ft. Hood incident would have gone if we were allowed to CCW or open carry..
 

Judge.410

New member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
77
Location
, ,
imported post

Not sure how it got to this point. I remember my Dad (career Air Force) having and carrying an M1 Carbine from the house on Base to the motor poole and to the hangers at random times....this was in the late 50's and stateside....he wasn't an A.P.( back then called Air Police).....a Master Sarg. and a mechanic.....the carbine was in the hall closet or in his bedroom. Not sure whythis has changed. Even when I was in the Coast Guard (early 70's) our duty section was armed with .45's . Ft. Hood should never have gone that far....or any of the others for that matter. Carry everyday in Reno
 
Top