Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 12/17/2001 10:25:28 AM EDT
Quick question, Does anyone know what the standing rule is as for carrying a non-military issued sidearm. Does this vary from branch to branch or is the decision left up to the DOD/JCOS depending on the area of operations the solider is in? I have a friend that is an active duty Marine thought he would enjoy a Glock 30 for his birthday, and to keep it in his butt pack as a "just in case" weapon. Can't ask him would ruin the idea. I know that Special Forces guys don't have as many restrictions on them when it comes to this. I met an ex-seal at the range about five years ago. We started talking about his customized high-cap 45. He mentioned that he did get to carry it on active duty but it was a decision made by the team leader. Any info on this would be helpful.. JerrY ----------------------------------
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 10:29:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/17/2001 10:23:26 AM EDT by BURN]
as a general rule no you cant take personal weapons..but when I was in I had a 2inch 357 that would fit nicley in a modified concealed bag under my pro mask...it was never found on the serch when we flew and they went through out belongings for unauthorized equipment..... I dont condone this action and I probably wouldnt do it again but I did so oh well....
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 10:33:55 AM EDT
I have a buddy who is a Naval Aviator. When he is authorized to carry a pistol he is allowed to carry what ever he wants. A guy I work with just bought his son who is a Ranger an H&K USP Tactical. He's taking it over seas with him. It seems that it is up to the command to decide depending on the mission.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 10:40:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Sukebe: I have a buddy who is a Naval Aviator.
View Quote
_______________________________________________ Darn Sukebe, you must be ex-squid ? Few folks know to call Naval Air "Aviators" as opposed to the far lesser "pilot." _______________________________________________ In subs we were required to carry only Navy-issue torpedos and missles. Sometimes even these got a little bulky in a bar !
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 10:44:22 AM EDT
Bad Idea..There will be a search upon return to CONUS..We had to dump all our gear ..And I was on a detail that searched vehicles, embark crates, etc..for weapons and other non issue "souvenirs"...how thorough it is depends on who does it..Special teams can sometimes pick and choose weapons...however special teams also have access to an enhanced armory of weapons not usually issued..Its not worth losing the weapon or the NJP or court martial that may ensue. Also if he lives in the barracks, he won't be able to keep it with him..It will have to be checked in and out of an armory each time he wants it.If he's stationed overseas, a whole new set of rules applies. Let him stick with issue...it's good gear..he'll get what he needs.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 10:53:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/17/2001 10:47:37 AM EDT by Sukebe]
Originally Posted By 5subslr5:
Originally Posted By Sukebe: I have a buddy who is a Naval Aviator.
View Quote
_______________________________________________ Darn Sukebe, you must be ex-squid ? Few folks know to call Naval Air "Aviators" as opposed to the far lesser "pilot." _______________________________________________ In subs we were required to carry only Navy-issue torpedos and missles. Sometimes even these got a little bulky in a bar !
View Quote
Close, Marine Corps Aviation. I trained and served with a lot of Sailors. Good people. As far as the Ranger goes, according to his father it has been approved by his CO.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:00:27 AM EDT
Ditto what Suekebe said, get it approved by the CO and its cool, had a buddy carry his Glock 17 in Desert Storm instead of the M9.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:03:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By moNgReL66: Let him stick with issue...it's good gear..he'll get what he needs.
View Quote
it might be good gear but I was in a track and there are many instances that I can think that a hand gun would have been a lot better than the M16A2/M203 I had I like the M16 but in a small area the pistol would be good.....Artilleryman (enlisted) are not normaly issued a pistol/handgun
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:06:13 AM EDT
Like what somebody scratched on the inside of the Bradley, "When you're ducking behind this wall, just remember it was made by the lowest bidder" Issue gear is good, otherwise they would approve it. Have a little faith, baby.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:19:30 AM EDT
I was in an LAV..If you are crew you can get a pistol..If you scout a 203 or carbine..A handgun is fine maybe if you want more leg room..but not if you want to shoot something But I'll tell ya'..bottom line..Its the UCMJ ...and its not to be messed with.Its not like the real world rules. I'd hate to see your buddy busted or worse.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:33:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 11:35:28 AM EDT
If his CO does approve a personal handgun, make it a 9mm. Any other caliber won't help if you can't get ammo for it. I would think he would also be required to qualify with it, possibly with issue ammo.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 12:26:56 PM EDT
Most likely he will not be allowed to use it. As far as living in the barracks...well....there are ways around that. Weapons training battalion in Parris Island used to be able to support a third world country with what my platoon alone had in the barracks. I will say however that I did wise up and move all mine to a buddy who lived in housing....dont trust armorers with my gear.
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 12:36:42 PM EDT
When returning from the Gulf War we were told that we could not return to the states with any weapons/ammo/ordinance. At that time I was ready to get the hell home so I ditched my 12.7 Soviet round. Several other people did the same. When time came for searching they hand-picked only a few to check.... and I was one of them. Earlier I had contemplated breaking down a AK-47S ( folding-stock ) that I found over there. The inspection they performed was half-a$$. They made us empty or sea-bags half way and then pretended to look in them. I could have packed away alot of stuff. But at the time it wasnt worth it....
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 12:59:34 PM EDT
They NEVER checked our s##t coming back from Kosovo but it would behoove you not to take any unnecessary risks. Personal weapons are generally considered a no-go - but again my unit has never checked - thats one deployment and probably a dozen field problems later. BTW - I don't need to pack anything extra. I AM the armorer
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 4:02:32 PM EDT
I was in the Army and the biggest problem I see with personal weapons is that you probably bring personal rounds. No matter what you could have some big damn problems if it is against the Geneva Convention. You are there as a representative of your country and if you are shooting soft jacketed bullets at an enemy you are BREAKING a treaty that the US has signed on your own. You do not have the RIGHT to do this. Those boards of inquiry would have fun with you if it ever became an incident for some reason. Just remember, they will fnck you for DOING your job the way they tell you to when it becomes convenient, what do you think they will do if you are breaking the rules and are an embarrassment? -Velveeta
Link Posted: 12/17/2001 4:42:08 PM EDT
Use of personal fire arms is like a regional/theatre CINC level prohibition, there are standing orders in all the Joint Commands that say troops cannot do it. No Company, Battery, Troop, Battalion, Squadron, Regiment, Brigade or even division commander can countermand these orders (These orders are reinforced by similar standing orders in almost ever Corps and Division in the US military). If some Company commander is stupid enough to authorize it, than that doesn't lesson the action against the person caught with the weapon, it makes the Commander also eligible for violation of Articles 92 and 98 and possibly 88, 89, 90, 92, 98, 133 and 134 depending on if he made any statements on why he authorized the use of the weapon. If someone claims to have carried a personal weapon in the recent past, they are either lying or like Burn weren't caught by someone who knows what the rules are.
Top Top