Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Posted: 12/19/2009 5:28:36 AM EDT
Yeah, this will stop any further shootings on post

KWTX, Local news

FORT HOOD (December 18, 2009)-Fort Hood is ramping up its gun-registration policy in the wake of last month's deadly mass shooting.

Soldiers and their families living on the Army post and anyone staying there temporarily must register any personal weapon that's kept there.

Now, the policy also applies to soldiers living off post and civilian hunters if they plan to use a gun at Fort Hood.

Those who enter the post must tell guards if they have a weapon with them.

Post officials say they will increase enforcement and inspection, and those who don't comply face penalties.

Officials say the changes were made after the Nov. 5 shooting on the post that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. An Army psychiatrist who lived off post, Maj. Nidal Hasan, has been charged in the case.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)



Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:31:48 AM EDT



Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:


Yeah, this will stop any further shootings on post




KWTX, Local news




FORT HOOD (December 18, 2009)-Fort Hood is ramping up its gun-registration policy in the wake of last month's deadly mass shooting.



Soldiers and their families living on the Army post and anyone staying there temporarily must register any personal weapon that's kept there.



Now, the policy also applies to soldiers living off post and civilian hunters if they plan to use a gun at Fort Hood.



Those who enter the post must tell guards if they have a weapon with them.



Post officials say they will increase enforcement and inspection, and those who don't comply face penalties.



Officials say the changes were made after the Nov. 5 shooting on the post that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. An Army psychiatrist who lived off post, Maj. Nidal Hasan, has been charged in the case.



(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)








The only difference is now the policy applies to the guys off post.



 
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:33:04 AM EDT
i knew this was coming time to talk to legal again... to confirm wether or not this is actually a legal order
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:35:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:
Yeah, this will stop any further shootings on post

KWTX, Local news

FORT HOOD (December 18, 2009)-Fort Hood is ramping up its gun-registration policy in the wake of last month's deadly mass shooting.

Soldiers and their families living on the Army post and anyone staying there temporarily must register any personal weapon that's kept there.

Now, the policy also applies to soldiers living off post and civilian hunters if they plan to use a gun at Fort Hood.

Those who enter the post must tell guards if they have a weapon with them.

Post officials say they will increase enforcement and inspection, and those who don't comply face penalties.

Officials say the changes were made after the Nov. 5 shooting on the post that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. An Army psychiatrist who lived off post, Maj. Nidal Hasan, has been charged in the case.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)





I don't think that is a knee-jerk reaction. On most if not all military bases, you have to register your firearms if you live in base housing. It seems to vary from base to base. On some you have to have them stored in the armory and aren't allowed to have them in your home.  It's been that way for years and years.

The only thing that looks strange is that it applies to soldiers living off post. I've never heard of off base military members having to register their weapons.

Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:38:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2009 5:38:14 AM EDT by abpt1]
Well its only a matter of time till there are metal detectors at all base entrances ...........
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:41:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:
Yeah, this will stop any further shootings on post

KWTX, Local news

FORT HOOD (December 18, 2009)-Fort Hood is ramping up its gun-registration policy in the wake of last month's deadly mass shooting.

Soldiers and their families living on the Army post and anyone staying there temporarily must register any personal weapon that's kept there.

Now, the policy also applies to soldiers living off post and civilian hunters if they plan to use a gun at Fort Hood.

Those who enter the post must tell guards if they have a weapon with them.

Post officials say they will increase enforcement and inspection, and those who don't comply face penalties.

Officials say the changes were made after the Nov. 5 shooting on the post that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. An Army psychiatrist who lived off post, Maj. Nidal Hasan, has been charged in the case.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)




The only difference is now the policy applies to the guys off post.
 





If they only had this regulation in place before, the the murderer would never have been able to get on post with the gun since he would have had to tell the MP's.  

Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:41:50 AM EDT
Isn't it odd that the same people that defend our constitution have the most restricted rights?

Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:43:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By abpt1:
Well its only a matter of time till there are metal detectors at all base entrances ...........


Not sure if serious...
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:43:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:43:36 AM EDT
unfortunatly we sign away all our rights when we sign up to defend everyone elses
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:45:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2009 5:53:54 AM EDT by orangelo]


and those who don't comply face penalties.




OH NOES!!!!



Who came up with that policy? Sounds just like the democrat dipshit, who directly after 9-11, said we didn't need armed pilots or air marshals on planes. We just needed signs posted on the cabin doors that said anyone who hijacked a plane would face charges. Yeah, those suicidal homicidal islamic terrorist scum are scared to death of facing charges.



I'm sure those suicidal homicidal islamic terrorist scum who will willingly kill themselves to slaughter as many infidels as possible will be deterred by the threat of 'penalties'.



Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:46:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Garand_Shooter:
Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:
Yeah, this will stop any further shootings on post

KWTX, Local news

FORT HOOD (December 18, 2009)-Fort Hood is ramping up its gun-registration policy in the wake of last month's deadly mass shooting.

Soldiers and their families living on the Army post and anyone staying there temporarily must register any personal weapon that's kept there.

Now, the policy also applies to soldiers living off post and civilian hunters if they plan to use a gun at Fort Hood.

Those who enter the post must tell guards if they have a weapon with them.

Post officials say they will increase enforcement and inspection, and those who don't comply face penalties.

Officials say the changes were made after the Nov. 5 shooting on the post that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. An Army psychiatrist who lived off post, Maj. Nidal Hasan, has been charged in the case.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)




The only difference is now the policy applies to the guys off post.
 

Hood has already backed off the off post requirement because troops raised hell about it.



Even their stated reason makes zero sense.

The current policy is fine - if s gun will come on post, it has to be pre-registered.  This was, if one is discovered in a search, you know right away whether the person has been open about it, or not.

What that has to do with guns that will never come on post is beyond me.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:54:42 AM EDT
This is not new but is typical military thinking. Years ago when I was stationed at Kadena Air Base , Okinawa, a SRNCO drove a military pick up off a loading dock. He blamed the accident on medication he was taking. Leadership decided the way to fix this was for everyone in the unit to provide the squadron with a list of all medications they were taking. I refused on the grounds that this was privileged medical information that was none of their fucking business.
I caught hell until base legal got wind of what was going on and the whole subject was dropped and swept under the carpet rather abruptly.

Military leadership in my opinion is reactive instead of proactive for the most part.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 5:57:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By abpt1:
Well its only a matter of time till there are metal detectors at all base entrances ...........


Not sure if serious...


not ...................





sir could you please remove your stars
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:00:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:
This is not new but is typical military thinking. Years ago when I was stationed at Kadena Air Base , Okinawa, a SRNCO drove a military pick up off a loading dock. He blamed the accident on medication he was taking. Leadership decided the way to fix this was for everyone in the unit to provide the squadron with a list of all medications they were taking. I refused on the grounds that this was privileged medical information that was none of their fucking business.
I caught hell until base legal got wind of what was going on and the whole subject was dropped and swept under the carpet rather abruptly.

Military leadership in my opinion is reactive instead of proactive for the most part.

This......most military leaders are worst than the politicians on the hill cause they're always looking to make rank no matter what kind of stupid bullshit they can think up...
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:00:56 AM EDT
Sounds like current policy at most bases, anyway.  Any guns on post must be registered with the provost marshal.  Requiring off-post residents to register is unenforceable.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:01:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:04:54 AM EDT
Lemmie get this straight...a person displaying obvious sympathy for the enemy is a go, "unregistered" weapon on a military base is a no-go.









Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:05:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2009 6:09:13 AM EDT by Texkaw]
In any case, due to the nature of the UCMJ, military personnel do not have the same rights as civilians while on active duty. They do not have the right to be tried by a jury of their peers, for example.

Not saying I agree with the new policy, just that the Military can do what it wants as long as it complies with UCMJ with individuals on active duty. It is what it is.

People should be aware of that fact before signing any enlistment documents or contracts.

Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:08:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2009 6:08:28 AM EDT by Texkaw]
Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
Lemmie get this straight...a person displaying obvious sympathy for the enemy is a go, "unregistered" weapon on a military base is a no-go.





I think you have a pretty good understanding. Welcome to the "new and improved" politically correct US Military.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:08:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By sms5183:
New Fort Hood POW Policy Letter



Yup......no change to policy at all.  Everyone that lives on post must register, barracks rats have to keep them in the arms rooms.  It's been that way since at least 1979.




mm
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:13:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
Lemmie get this straight...a person displaying obvious sympathy for the enemy is a go, "unregistered" weapon on a military base is a no-go.





The gate guard that day would have no clue about Hasan's past statements.

In the off chance they had found the gun in his car, they would have likely let him on through, if no registration was required.

I think requiring registration for of post guns is asinine - but not seeing the law enforcement benefit to registering those coming on post is a bit odd.  Why force the guard to make a judgment call on the spot - or overreact, when a simple check of a database could show you are legit?
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 6:38:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Texkaw:
In any case, due to the nature of the UCMJ, military personnel do not have the same rights as civilians while on active duty. They do not have the right to be tried by a jury of their peers, for example.

Not saying I agree with the new policy, just that the Military can do what it wants as long as it complies with UCMJ with individuals on active duty. It is what it is.

People should be aware of that fact before signing any enlistment documents or contracts.



Nothing in this post is accurate.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 7:00:04 AM EDT



Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:



Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Lemmie get this straight...a person displaying obvious sympathy for the enemy is a go, "unregistered" weapon on a military base is a no-go.












The gate guard that day would have no clue about Hasan's past statements.



In the off chance they had found the gun in his car, they would have likely let him on through, if no registration was required.



I think requiring registration for of post guns is asinine - but not seeing the law enforcement benefit to registering those coming on post is a bit odd.  Why force the guard to make a judgment call on the spot - or overreact, when a simple check of a database could show you are legit?
I still don't see one. Registered or not, the mere ownership of a gun (registered or not) should NOT set up red flags.

<shrug>
 
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 7:01:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2009 7:02:54 AM EDT by JustaGunNut]
How many more of these threads are we going to be forced to endure?

The policy isn't new. It resembles policies that pretty much every US military installation enforces as is, and has for quite a long time.
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 7:05:40 AM EDT



Originally Posted By Texas_Rick:


Isn't it odd that the same people that defend our constitution have the most restricted rights?





No. The military exists to enforce the will of politicians.  What did you think it was for?



 
Link Posted: 12/19/2009 7:10:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By JustaGunNut:
How many more of these threads are we going to be forced to endure?

The policy isn't new. It resembles policies that pretty much every US military installation enforces as is, and has for quite a long time.


You are correct this policy is basically the same as before. However a few weeks ago an OPORD came out at Fort Hood that said all Soldiers who owned POW had to register them.  Period.  That would include Soldiers who live or maintain their weapons off post.  The OPORD directed the SJA to draft a policy letter implementing the OPORD.  When the policy letter came out though, it was basically the same.  So there have been rumblings it would be different.

Link Posted: 12/19/2009 3:31:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
Lemmie get this straight...a person displaying obvious sympathy for the enemy is a go, "unregistered" weapon on a military base is a no-go.





The gate guard that day would have no clue about Hasan's past statements.

In the off chance they had found the gun in his car, they would have likely let him on through, if no registration was required.

I think requiring registration for of post guns is asinine - but not seeing the law enforcement benefit to registering those coming on post is a bit odd.  Why force the guard to make a judgment call on the spot - or overreact, when a simple check of a database could show you are legit?
I still don't see one. Registered or not, the mere ownership of a gun (registered or not) should NOT set up red flags.
<shrug>



 


Why bother having random vehicle searches, if anyone is allowed to carry weapons on post with no prior coordination?  Registration is a great tool to allow guards not only to not unduly harass those of us who bring guns on post, but also to know when someone might be up to no good (unregistered gun).  This is different from the moron who think registration would prevent killings - what I am saying is really no different than how CCWs let cops know they are dealing with "one of the good guys" instead of a completely unknown quantity.
Top Top