Court rules open carry on military bases not unlawful!

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by GAGunOwner, Aug 5, 2007.

  1. GAGunOwner

    GAGunOwner Active Member

    Found this on opencarry. It might be of interest to some.



    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum4/3980.html
     

  2. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,067
    245
    63
    I need WAY more information before I go openly carrying on a military base. There is nothing in that little blurb that tells me much of anything to guide my actions.
     
  3. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,120
    71
    48
    Military Reservations?

    I'm not sure the legal difference between a military "base" and a military "reservation," but many military reservations have public roads going right through them, yet some of them have guard checkpoints. One time I told the sentry on duty that I had both a camera and a firearm in my vehicle, and was he sure it was OK to proceed? He said it would be fine, so long as I didn't use either one while on the government installation. (Of course I know that what a corporal pulling guard duty says isn't exactly a controlling interpretation of the law, but I figured that whatever training he had on the subject, the MPs would have had the same training and thus reacted the same way.)
     
  4. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    6,172
    0
    0
    I remember many, many times OCing on military bases and no problems ever arose from my doing so.


    Of course, I was a member of the US Army at the time...

    It's possible, I suppose, that could have had something to do with the near total absence of problems. :)





    :oldtimer:
     
  5. budder

    budder Moderator Staff Member

    Was this pre- or post- Civil War? ;)
     
  6. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    He was an aide to Friedrich Wilhelm Ludolf Gerhard Augustin Steuben.

    No...really....that's his name.
     
  7. mswicord

    mswicord New Member

    228
    0
    0
    In the post 911 era all installations I've been on have positive control at the gate; you must show id and have a purpose for being there. It is posted no firearms and I've been asked if I had a firearm.....

    I'm confused.
     
  8. brianh

    brianh New Member

    917
    0
    0
    Until very recently I worked on both Fort McPherson and Fort Gillem here in Atlanta. At all the installation entrances there are prominent signs announcing that Ga. firearms permits are not valid on the installations. About 3 years ago the installations started putting signs at all the pedestrian crosswalks telling driver it is mandatory to stop 'cuz the state law says so. I emailed the installation security director and asked why Georgia state law was being selectively enforced on the installations. Of course I got a "whatch'a talkin' about?" response, so I answered back that I noted drivers are required to adhere to state law and stop for pedestrians in crosswalks but legal Georgia firearms permit holders are not allowed to carry firearms on the installation.

    All I got back was essentially 'we make the rules, now go away'.

    For a very, very long time the Army has been afraid of guns. It's own and other's.
     
  9. GAGunOwner

    GAGunOwner Active Member

    The buildings on the military base are publically owned or operated anyway so they are public gatherings. I guess they are uniformly adhering to state law afterall.
     
  10. Hawkdriver

    Hawkdriver Member

    301
    0
    16

    Wouldnt the military be exempt then per GA code? :D

    Come on, its the military. When I go to a range with my current unit, I have to be supervised by E-4, spoon fed rounds to qualify.

    Even while deployed while in FOB mode, I cant even have a magazine in my weapon.

    I cant imagine being able to bring my weapon to work. Thats absurd!

    I can however shop for tampons in wally world if I want, locked and loaded and my pistol shoved down my pants (in a holster of course :D) completely unsupervised by my chain of command.


    A sad state of events for sure.
     
  11. M249

    M249 New Member

    3,033
    0
    0
    The .mil restrictions on carry are ridiculous, but here's why they exist:

    A friend of mine brought a shotgun to the barracks, shooting his roommate, a few NCO's, and then himself.

    I was on staff duty... bad day for sure. :(

    http://classstation.spub.ksu.edu/Collegian/issues/v099B/sp/n119/news-Fort-Riley-wishart.html

    Of course, I was also in Tim McVeigh's company, and another friend hung himself in the barracks around this same time.

    It was not a good year for the 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry.

    There was also the Engineer battalion down the street that had shootings on a semi-regular basis, so the post commander has to make it look like he's trying to do something about the thugs the recruiters keep sending him.
     
  12. brianh

    brianh New Member

    917
    0
    0
    M249,

    I'm sorry for your loss and can't imagine what you had to endure. However, the Army's fear of guns far predates your experiences.

    It actually started back in the late 1970's. I was in ROTC in college (1974 - 79. I was on the 5-year plan. One quarter of study, one quarter of drinking... :wink: ). We came back to class after the summer break in 1975 to find all of the weapons had been removed from our detachment arms room. Our detachment ops officer, Major Holt, told us that the Army was scared after a rash of National Guard armory break-ins where large numbers of weapons had been stolen. ROTC units across the US were told to turn in their active weapons. Before that time we had select fire M-14's, a few M-16's, a few 1911's, some inactive training aids like M73 LAW tubes and quite a few guns belonging to detachment members. After that summer all we were left with were some plugged Springfields.

    It was about this time that the Army adopted mandatory intruder detection systems on all arms rooms (even though most were within eye shot of the supply sergeant during the day and the CQ at night), daily rack counts, weekly serial number inventories, two man entry rules, double locks INSIDE the arms room on the racks, storage containers, heck, even the gunsmith tools. While the National Guard armory break-ins may have spurred the move I put the real reason down to the rapid emergence of the post Vietnam, risk avoidance zero-defect Army. Weapons were bad, bad, bad and had to be locked up, counted, re-counted and triple counted continuously. The loss of a weapon for ANY reason was an unsurvivable incident. Entire chains of command from platoon leader on up to battalion commander were relieved because some knucklehead under their command lost or intentionally 'misplaced' a weapon or weapon component.

    Soldiers possessing privately owned weapons were a risk, and commanders became reluctant to approve weapons purchase requests (required in North Carolina if you were not a state resident). We would hand a kid an M203 and tell him to go out and shoot off hundreds of rounds of 5.56 and dozens of 40mm grenades, but if that same kid wanted to buy a used S&W Model 10 from a local gun store his chain of command deemed it 'too risky' to allow him to purchase a firearm (yes, this is a real incident).

    We made great strides in killing off the zero defect mentality during the Reagan years, but this fear of guns remained and now permeates the Army. I retired in 2002 after 23 years of service, and the Army was as afraid of it's (and everyone else's) guns then as they were in 1975.

    Oh, and the public gathering statute in the Georgia law has nothing to do with the Fort McPherson/Fort Gillem rule. I doubt the bozos in charge out there have even read the Georgia law.