Army General bans OFF BASE concealed carry in Alaska

[azurefly]

Originally Posted by deriust

The question is, is it within said general's lawful power to issue a command that directly violates constitutional and states rights, to personnel when OFF BASE?

I am suddenly unable to protect myself when OFF BASE because general so and so said so? I can't have 'x' amount of drinks per night in my OFF BASE home, while not on duty?

I have trouble seeing this as lawful at all. Someone care to show me something in the UCMJ which says these types of orders are lawful?

Beyond all this, doesn't anyone care to comment on the fact that military personnel are trained in the use of weapons, and some are directly responsible for the upkeep and use of weapons from bayonets on through the spectrum to nuclear missiles?! And this guy, this jerkoff general, believes that they need to be forbidden from using weapons of their own, for the protection of themselves and their families, while off base and having nothing to do with military service?!

How can a military general possibly be ANTI-GUN?!?! It is LUDICROUS!

-azurefly

[spacemanspiff]

link usually requires registering, and does have popups.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story...-7461348c.html

Army tightens concealed gun policy for Alaska troops
DISCIPLINE: 8 incidents involving soldiers' personal weapons cited for decision.
The Associated Press
Published: March 20, 2006
Last Modified: March 20, 2006 at 02:36 AM
FAIRBANKS -- Soldiers based in Alaska are no longer allowed to carry privately owned concealed weapons, under a new U.S. Army Alaska policy.

The ban is in response to several incidents involving soldiers and weapons, officials said.

"In the last six to eight months, there have been a number of incidents involving soldiers and privately owned concealed weapons that indicated a need to look at this policy," said Maj. Kirk Gohlke.

Incidents include a fatal shooting in Fairbanks that led to the current trial of three Fort Wainwright soldiers, Gohlke said.

A jury is deliberating the fate of Lionel Wright, Freddy Walker and Christopher Cox, who are charged with second-degree murder in the August death of Alvin "Snoop" Wilkins. The soldiers have pleaded not guilty, claiming self-defense in using personal weapons during a confrontation that killed Wilkins.

Gohlke said there have been seven other instances involving Alaska soldiers and personal concealed weapons in Fairbanks and Anchorage. He did not comment on specifics.

The new policy states that "soldiers who fail to comply are subject to adverse administrative action or punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice or both."

Military personnel and civilians also are prohibited from having or transporting a concealed weapon at any time at a military installation in Alaska under a policy that has been in place for some time.

Alaska law, however, is much less restrictive. In 2003, Gov. Frank Murkowski signed into law a bill that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns in public without a permit.

Joe Nava, a Fairbanks firearms instructor, said there are still benefits for getting a concealed firearm permit, although the state doesn't require it.

Permit holders are eligible to buy a gun from a dealer without a background check, are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in 29 other states and are entered into the police computing system as a permit holder.

Nava disagreed with the Army's new policy.

"The military is taking away (soldiers') ability to protect themselves off base and that's not right," Nava said.

Gohlke, however, said the policy applies only to concealed weapons, not weapons for recreation and hunting.

"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

[Wildcard]

"Our interest here is simply to protect the health and welfare of soldiers and promote good order and discipline," Gohlke said. "The intent is not to restrict soldiers' rights."

Then let them carry their legally concealed weapons. No problem.

[stevelyn]

Beyond all that, doesn't anyone care to comment that military personnel are trained in the use of weapons........

Training would imply a lot of time and effort is put into weapons training and that they are proficient in their use and decision making as when to use them. That's not the case.

More accurately they are familiarized in weapons use under very strict and regimented circumstances with one or two range trips a year. Most soldiers have trouble on a 25 meter Zero Range.

This shortcoming has revealed its ugly self since the WoT and the military has been scrambling to get better training for its personnel by contracting civilian firearms instructors to teach soldiers and marines how to shoot and safe weapons handling.

With that said, I think the USARAK Commander has responded in the typical knee-jerk fashion antis are notorious for. Here they have three of their troops up on charges of second degree murder. If the charges are accurate then those soldiers need to pay the price for their bad decision making.
However, punishing or taking away the rights of others is poor policy. It's been shown to be poor public policy. It's poor military policy.