MTT TL, sorry you find me "whiney."
Did you find somewhere in the law that actually defines what comprises a commander or senior staff director? If so, I missed that part.... seems you just assume the lowest level is the one that applies. That's conservative, as far as staying out of trouble goes, but it's the opposite of conservative, as far as assignment of powers to a functionary goes.
Meanwhile, back to the "Just don't go on a base" argument.... I was thinking about all the prime beach real estate that bases own, or have owned, in Florida alone.
Key West - NAS Boca Chica.
south of Miami - Homestead AFB.
Cocoa Beach area - Patrick AFB and Kennedy Space Center (ok, KSC is NASA, but it's effectively Patrick North).
Jacksonville - Naval Station Mayport. (NAS Jacksonville isn't on the beach, but has miles of riverfront and a good marina harbor, so that should also be considered; NAS Cecil Field didn't really have prime waterfront, but it's got a lot of land west of Jax.)
Tampa - MacDill AFB complex.
Panhandle east - Tyndall AFB complex.
Panhandle west - Eglin AFB complex, including Hurlburt and Duke fields, and numerous ancillaries... enormous square mileage of land.
Panhandle further west - NAS Pensacola.
Inland Florida, in addition to NAS Cecil Field and NAS Jacksonville, we have the Ocala National Forest bombing range, the bombing range down by Sebring that I can't place the name off the top of my head, and NAS Whiting Field up northeast of Pensacola.
Then there's Camp Blanding, south of Jacksonville and inland...
Orlando International Airport and its surrounds used to be McCoy AFB.
The Lake Baldwin development east of downtown Orlando used to be NTC Orlando.
I'm sure I'm forgetting others...
(Edit: Don't forget, most of those NAS or AFB locations also have OLFs, or OutLying Fields; Pensacola has or had a bunch of them.)
So, in Florida alone, look at the amount of square miles owned or previously owned by the military. Then look at how many miles of riverfront and coastline are involved.... then say it's no big deal, and we should all just be happy not to have access as civilians, or that we should be happy to surrender 2A rights in order to have access to beaches, rivers, and wilderness.
Now, MTT TL, do I think you are right about how the rules/regs are being enforced? Yes, that's how it is.
Do I think it's right? No, I don't.
Do I think the feds, including DOD, routinely overstep boundaries or do their best to accumulate power in a gradual but inexorable way? Most certainly.
I am not going to bring weapons on base, without authorization. I'm not encouraging anybody else to do so.
But I would love to see an NRA or SAF challenge to the way things currently work; and I think the way things currently work is a matter of 1) law drafted during an era when the US was notorious for acting like a paranoid ninny, led by TailGunner Joe and his ilk; and 2) the executive branch usurping powers whenever feasible.
If you think that's whining, then I'm whining.
Meanwhile, I'd love to see some actual numbers for the amount of square miles that currently fall under the regs and laws in question.