jonmyrlebailey

There will be no "next time": I was an enlisted soldier in the US Army from 1988-1995. I volunteered for an early out when it was offered and heavy restriction of personal firearms possession by rank-and-file personnel was the major influence. I still got an honorable discharge and full VA benies. The military treats personal firearms possession as a PRIVILEGE (often !@#$%^&*ociated w/ rank) and not a fundamental right of enlisted men. Yes, I knew some YOUNG army sergeants (younger than I: I was a Spec4) who freely carried their personal pieces on base (with the unit commander's say-so)!! I am not complaining, but warning most future young "would-be" volunteers to think twice before signing the dotted line and raising your right hand. Most young people have no concept of what they are signing up for when they join the service. Volunteering for military service is making a SUPREME SACRIFICE: is it worth it?? I am very adamant about my gun rights as an American. Hitler came to power through disarmament of the German citizenry. I INSIST on IMMEDIATE firearms availability for lawful sport shooting, hunting, collecting and self-protection from people who UNLAWFULLY threaten life, limb, liberty or property of individuals and /or their loved ones. I am a GOA member (Larry Pratt is the Executive Director) and proud of it.

!@#$%^&*, we give diplomatic immunity for certain foreign individuals to carry guns in our country; let's demand of foreign nations which US troops occupy the same for American military personnel. And why are gun laws so restrictive on American citizens (civilians) to boot?

Some of you have sorely missed the point: 1. this is not a complaint against the military 2. this is only ADVICE for those considering joining (it is not lies, but firsthand knowledge) 3. I am not telling anybody not to join, that is your own business this thread was only meant to offer "a few words to the wise", the decision to seek enlistment is purely between you and the military If I had my way, every US soldier, sailor, marine, airman and coast guard personnel would be permitted to keep personal weapons at will at all times under these strict conditions: 1. no convictions of any crime violent in nature (probably should not be in military if this is the case) 2. not medically/psychiatrically deemed as a danger to him/herself or others (should not be kept in service anyway) 3. the possession of such weapons does not physically interfere w/ military duty or mission as the wearing of mission-oriented protective equipment 4. weapon may never be displayed in a threatening manner or otherwise used with intent of deadly force except as to protect oneself against an immediate unlawful threat to one's life, limb, liberty or property 5. if weapon is to be carried on post or at place of duty, it must be always concealed 6. if weapon is to be stored on post, it must be stored locked in a personal safe (at one's quarters when weapon owner is not present), locked in a personal automobile or at the unit's armory or, otherwise always kept within an arm's reach of its lawful owner Moreover, If I had my way, federal regulations and international treaties would exist (superceding existing US federal, state, local firearms laws and the firearms laws of the nations in which US troops occupy) to permit US servicemen/women to carry personal guns (firearms) at will and concealed anywhere in the jurisdiction of the US and foreign nations occupied by US forces

Absolutely: individual FREE thinking is a super NO-NO in the service!!! Soldiers, esp. at the lower ranks, are not even regarded as 1st-class US citizens, but PROPERTY of Uncle Sam. Many convicted felons in US federal pens have more rights than the average rank-and-file American GI.

Do you know anybody who is considering military service? Well, here are some caveats about going into the service voluntarilly: 1. you relinquish all your rights under the Bill of Rights when you sign up for service under this "dictatorship" 2. military recruiters are renowned liars who will promise you "the Brooklin Bridge deed' for signing up 3. the US military is super ANTI-GUN (much. much more than the civilian sector): if you value your gun rights, you might want to think twice about volunteering for that crap 4. you give up much when you sign up, to say the very least: if you want college money, try grants, scholarships and federal student aid first 5. enlisting into the service is stipulated in the form of a legal contract with highly complex fine print: it is not printed in BOLD PRINT on a military enlistment contract that you relinquish virtually all your rights as an American citizen!!! This is something I know firsthand, because I was stupid enough to have been there and done it myself. I think this is something everybody should know before signing up. "For warned, is for armed". A Concerned Citizen

The bottom line about guns in the military: it is either a trust issue or an arrogant zealot issue Either military officers are cowards, or they fear their power or authority (or ego) would be compromised if they were to allow low-ranking troops more personal firearms freedom on bases or places of duty. The question is, how can officers be so sure that these otherwise-"untrustworthy" soldiers won't shoot them in the back w/ military weapons and issued ammo in the bush? In our society, how can we even trust young, inexperienced (rookie) rank-and-file police offers on the streets to handle duty guns safely, judiciously and prudently? Often, military logic is quite self-contradicting.

However, US military personnel of certain rank (often pay-grade E-5 and above) often have the privilege to carry personal weapons at will on military installations. The lowest ranking soldiers are not allowed to freely possess ANY weapons at will. One of the main reasons I volunteered for separation from the military (an early-out discharge) was because of the sheer LACK of rights military personnel (especially of the lowest-ranking enlisted pay-grades) as compared with ordinary citizens. I highly value the personal gun rights I was not afforded while in the service. I still think US military commanders are chicken-s__t for so highly restricting firearms possession by the lowest-ranking personnel. I still think the US military a highly ANTI-GUN establishment and such reason being that cowardly military br!@#$%^&* is afraid to trust the lowest-ranking personnel to bear any weapons freely at will at any time. I do not think our American military command authority was this chicken-s__t during earlier parts of our history as in the WW II era. If I were President, I would implement an Executive Order to US military top commands in the cabinet to allow ALL military personnel much more freedom in regards to possession of personal guns (including concealed personal weapons) for personal protection on or about their duty stations provided such personnel do not commit crimes, have no unlawful intent to commit crimes, don't handle such firearms in an unsafe or physically-unsecure manner, have no convictions of violent crimes, are not psychiatrically-diagnosed as being a danger to themselves or others or otherwise display such arms in an unjustifiably threatening manner. I would push Congress for more pro-gun legislation in the military regulations and in the civilian sector as well.

wrong thread wrong thread

!@#$%^&*o, folks I am newbie at this site A little about me to get to know me. I am pro-gun and pro 2nd Amendment 100%, baby!! I belong to Gun Owners of America and believe in their side of the gun rights issue 100%. I am an American Veteran and the US Armed Services, I feel, were a tad bit anti-gun for my personal tastes when I was in from 1988-1995. The US military (I was specifically in the Army) generally does not allow enlisted personnel of low rank (below the Corps of Noncommission Officers level) to maintain private firearms at their barracks or on-installation housing unit or in their private cars on-post. This was my experience in the service. Unit commanders tell soldiers that they must submit personnel arms to unit armories until such time they would remove them from the installation altogether. In other words, many military personnel are not allowed to maintain personal weapons on installations (or in certain US-occupied foreign countries) without approval of local unit commanders, registration of such guns with local post law-enforcment agencies, as the MP station, and most often have to relinquish such arms to unit commands until they check such arms out to leave the duty station for good or to go hunting or target shooting at the range. Such guns are of no service to on-post personnel for personal security if the arms are under lock and key by commanders. The military has this policy and at!@#$%^&*ude probably because military br!@#$%^&* is too yellow to trust its troops to more freely possess personal weapons (and, also, military-issued weapons at any time at free will, which soldiers can not freely possess at all times for personal security either). It was not uncommon, however, for Army sergeants to carry firearms in private automobiles and/or at their living quarters on intstallations, and at their places of duty. The modern soldier (of lesser rank) in our military is not allowed to possess any weapon (gi-issued-or-otherwise) at any time of his own free will. He does not have the same level of personal firearms rights that even most US civilians have. How can our troops be trusted to protect our nation on the battlefield if they are not to be trusted with private firearms on military installations or on duty stations in foreign nations whereby their personal security is even more at risk? This is a serious problem, I personally feel, in our military. Was our military historically always this anti-gun or very highly restrictive on firearms possession by its low-ranking enlisted members?