Posted on 04/04/2014 2:49:08 PM PDT by raptor22
The admin does not trust soldiers with guns.
b/c in 1993 bill clinton disarmed them.
Fear of Black soldiers in insubordinate revolt.
It would appear NO administration since Reagan has trusted the soldiers;and even then the guards of the Marine barracks in Lebanon were unarmed.The Bushes are NWO ;remember Bush 43 said Clinton is his brother. The manipulators have been thwarting the will of the people for a couple decades. It will never stop but might be abated if enough of those manipulators no longer were capable of action.
Politicians ,in or out of uniform,fear the common man if he be armed. And rightly,for career politicians’ goals are seldom aligned with the needs or wants of free,educated people.
I hate to inject some reality into this gripefest but there are practical reasons for why the weapons are locked up when not actually in use.
First and foremost is accountability. I hate to burst bubbles, but the armed forces do have a small percentage of persons of less than sterling character that will not hesitate to grab up a weapon (or any other easily convertable item) however briefly it may be left unattended. Since the majority of personal weapons are automatic (okay, burst fire) rifles (M16, M4, SCAR, etc.) they are highly pilferable and eagerly looked for because they are so easily converted into cash.
As an battalion S-4 (infantry battalion, air control squadron, and CSS unit), for me twice-a-day weapons counts were a fact of life whether we were in the field or back in garrison. Nobody secured and liberty was not sounded until all weapons were accounted for, period.
A lost/missing weapon (or other accountable piece of pilferable ordnance) stopped EVERYTHING the unit was doing until it was found or we gave up and declared it missing (by formal message addressed to just about everybody in the world, I might add). You did not want to be the person who had a weapon go missing through inattentiveness. Really bad reflection on your basic leadership skills. Consequently, all the officers and Staff NCOs were keen to account for weapons when out of the armory and eager to get them securely stored back in the armory when not needed.
The only time you could relax a little bit was when, except for the duty stander weapons, they were all locked up in their company armories/squadbay rifle racks (I’m dating myself here). Even then, you had to pay attention for misbehavior on the part of the armorers and the junior watchstanders. I could tell you stories...but I won’t.
That was the background reality during my time in the Marine Corps (1967-1990) and I am absolutlely certain that it is still the dominant background reality today.
44 years ago when I was stationed on my first military base there were few firearms carried in the course of the day. If you were permanent party soldier you could have a pistol or long gun in base housing, and the same is true today. You didn’t carry personal weapons in uniform but you get use them off duty to hunt and for protection in your residence or in the wild.
The only firearms carried were paymasters and the like and the occasional armorer issuing weapons for training.
Perhaps there is more registering of who has what weapon on a base now, but since there is less payment in cash at monthly pay tables, the side armed soldier was rare then and rare now. Weapons are a tool not jewelry. When there is no work for the tool, you don’t draw it or carry it in the workplace as a matter of course on a fairly secure military base. Planes and special gear get a certain amount of guard duty type protecting, then and now. MPs and other forces of a similar nature are armed.
The civilian and fort police are mainly guarding gates since 9/11. The military police are who roam the posts, and they are armed.
Military forts have never been an open carry area in the last three generations that I am aware of. If you work in a large factory you don’t carry on a work floor except the occasional guy who in a deep concealment fellow and who knows the count on that?
Obviously they are not...
Clinton did it
Thank you very much. That serves to further the point that it was indeed Klintoon and his fellow Klansman Kolleague, Bobby "Sheets" Byrd who were behind the confiscation of guns from the military.
GUN CONTROL PING
I see you’re arguing for gun control on bases while you’re injecting reality to the ignorant masses.
You set up two sets of laws, those for civilians and those for soldiers. If you whine that you didn’t do it, I’ll tell you that you support it and aren’t actively working to change it.
Did your gun control stop Major Hasan?
These events have been happening since the Revolution. If you don’t want to change and give the same self-defense rights to soldiers as civilians have, then you’re complicit in the murders.
You would say the same damn thing about Obama. You’re arguments are the same as those that the Left use.
Did those policies work to prevent the two mass murders at Fort Hood?
Securing ammo for weapons in an armory has been going on since before WWII, especially for what is considered ‘Garrison soldiers’.
This clip from a famous war film shows exactly what was policy at the time and still carries on now.
From Here to Eternity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnVZRgiOw-o
Current Army regulation of privately owned weapons and ammo:
AR 190-11
http://www.benningmwr.com/documents/crd/MCoE%20Reg%20190-11%20%2827%20AUG%2012%29.pdf
I wasn’t arguing for or against anything. I was stating the background reality that any proposed “solution” has to work within. This reality has been in effect since before the beginning of the republic. Government weapons have been, are now, and will be kept locked up when not actually in use.
Nowhere in my post did I say anything about the service members 2nd Amendment rights to own and bear arms.
I will tell you that service members DO NOT enjoy exactly the same rights as private citizens do because they accept many restrictions on their behavior as a condition of their service and that service is voluntary. Being limited as to how they exercise their ownership of personal firearms is one of those restrictions. Don’t like the restrictions? Fine, don’t serve.
Whether or not this restriction will change going forward, I don’t know. I do know that, whatever solution is ultimately crafted, it will have to be compatible with the maintenance of good order and discipline in the armed forces. Personally, I don’t think that allowing every servicemember to carry a loaded personal firearm at all times - that is what you are arguing for, isn’t it? - is in the possible set of solutions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.