[justin_stuart_21]

Good Morning Everyone,

I need some advice from some if possible. I am in the U.S Army for a few more months I do carry concealed when I am off post. I recently was told about the following policy letter I pasted below. It can also be viewed at (http://www.usarak.army.mil/policies/PUBS-ACROBAT/USARAK_Policies/CGCOFS POLICY STATEMENT 20.pdf) Please note that is requires adobe. I have spoke to a soldier who used to be a detective and a cop and says that this letter has no real justification. What do some of you think?

Thanks

Jutsin Stuart

APVR-RUPM
DEPARTMENT THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, ARMY ALASKA
724 SERVICE LOOP
FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA 99505-5000
21 FEB 06
MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Concealed Weapons Policy (CG/CofS Policy #0-20)
1. Carrying concealed deadly weapons by USARAK Soldiers represents a significant risk to the
safety and welfare of this command. Accordingly, all Soldiers assigned or attached to USARAK
are prohibited from carrying a concealed deadly weapon in public places off of all USARAK
posts. All persons are prohibited from carrying concealed deadly weapons on USARAK posts
IAW USARAK Regulation 190-1.
2. Definitions:
a. Carry means on or about the person, or uncased within the immediate vicinity of the
person, so as to be available for immediate use, e.g. in the person's automobile.
b. Deadly weapon means any fiream or anything designed for or capable of causing death
or serious physical injury.
c. Concealed means hidden from plain view.
d. Firearm means a weapon, including a pistol, revolver, rifle, or shotgun, whether loaded or
unloaded, operable or inoperable, designed to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive
charge or primer.
e. Public place means a place to which the public or a substantial group of persons has
access. This includes locations involved in the sale of alcoholic beverages, highways,
transportation facilities, schools, places of business, places of amusement, parks, playgrounds
and prisons. It also includes hallways, lobbies, and other portions of apartment houses and hotels
not constituting rooms or appartments designed for actual residence.
3. This policy is punitive. Soldiers who fail to comply with the requirements of this policy are
subject to adverse administrative action and/or punishment under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.
CHARLES H. ACOBY
Major General, USA
Commanding
DISTRIB UTION:
A

 

[cmidkiff]

Letter appears quite clear to me. As much as I disagree with the position of the people who wrote this, their meaning is clearly stated.

No carrying on or around USARAK posts by USARAK personel.

As a punitive violation, if caught violating this policy, you could be punished under the UCMJ.

All that said, you have to decide for yourself. Are you willing to break this policy, and stand for the punishment, in order to defend yourself? I don't know what advice we can offer. How likely is it that Major General Acoby will change his mind?

 

[fed_wif_a_sig]

Ohhh it has plenty of jurisdiction...it covers every single member of the armed forces stationed, attached or assigned to HQ Army Alaska.

Its an order plain and simple and no matter what you want to do you MUST comply. Its the stupidest order I have ever seen given but its an order and as a soldier you are bound by the UCMJ to comply.

2nd, Immediately contact the NRA. I would reach out to them and see if they can do something about it. The contact info for the NRA Institute for Legislative Action at
NRA-ILA
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
800-392-8683 - Grassroots Hotline

But, I hope you're a member. Sucks to be you but an order is an order.

 

[duckhunter]

I have spoke to a soldier who used to be a detective and a cop and says that this letter has no real justification. What do some of you think?

Talk to a JAG before you take your buddy's advice - I believe he is incorrect. At first blush, this looks like it is well within the Commander's legal purvue. The Uniform Code of Military Justice gives Commanders a remarkable level of discretion in regulating a service member's on and off-duty conduct. I don't agree with the policy, but nevertheless it seems legal. Again, I would talk to the post JAG.

 

[ka0azs]

Uncle Sugar owns you 24/7 during your enlistment. There's no real "off duty", simply times that you're not required to be at your duty location. In my opinon (INAL, but did serve 10 years as an Officer), this is a legally binding order and you are obligated to comply with it. Whether it is "justified" or not is of no relevance.

You might want to call the JAG office and make sure they've seen it and agree as to it's legality.

I would also think that the Alaska state congressional/Senatorial delgation might be interested in this. Funny how even Flag Officers can change their opinons when they get a few inquiries from Capitol Hill.

 

[jarhead79]

Here's what I get from it. I'm no lawyer, but while I was in, I nitpicked every rule and regulation that I came across. It's amazing how much misinterpretation there is when it comes to decyphering military crap. (by crap I mean CRAP)

In AK, as I understand, one may carry concealed without permit. This conservative law, mixed with what I know of young American fighting men, is not a good mix. There is more irresponsibility among our ranks than can be appreciated. I feel that it is caused by the micro-management of them when they first come into the military. They aren't made to be responsible for anything they do unless it is heignous.

Anyway, this is a way for the command to try to control these young'uns. In Southern California, they take certain areas off limits for servicemen and will burn you hard if you go there and get caught. In a sense, you lose many freedoms when you joint to defend the same freedoms. (but this is no news)

In a nutshell, it's an over-zealous commander, trying to buck for his set of wings or next star. Seen it once, seen it a hundred times. This is 'usually' where the silly rules come from. One or two soldiers carry a gun concealed and do something stupid with it over the course of a few years and the one officer says 'I'll put a stop to that, I'm Superman'. And there's your rule.

You've got a choice. Continue carrying and risk getting charged (if you get caught). Or, don't carry for a few more months to ensure your discharge. Me, it'd depend on how rough the neighborhoods are that you frequent.

 

[Tom357]

Perhaps of more import is CG/CofS Policy #0-17, regarding privately owned firearms belonging to all personnel attached or assigned to USARAK. IIRC, Commanding General/Chief of Staff policies have the force of general orders within the command, and so have the force of military law. They also take precedence over state/local law. If I were you, especially since you are apparently going to be discharged in a few months, I would comply with the General's orders until you muster out.

 

[czman2006]

When I was in the USN, I was checking in to a new command and was given a letter from XO (Executive Officer) to sign stating that any contraband found in or on my bunk aboard ship was my responsibility. Someone could place a joint on my bunk and I was guilty! I refused to sign, stating that it was a violation of my rights which I did not give up when I enlisted and took a copy to the ship's legal officer. Within four hours all command service jackets had the letter pulled and the XO had a serious talk to by the ship's XO. Don't violate it at this point but check with the legal office on base and stand up for your rights.

 

[P95Carry]

prohibited from carrying a concealed deadly weapon in public places off of all USARAK
posts.

Am I reading this bit right? Is this as I take it to be - stating that you would be barred from carry - anywhere, at all? On base I can easily understand but - to deny you any right of legal carry in your personal and private life away from base - that seems a serious breech of your basic rights.

 

[rstickle]

I have spoke to a soldier who used to be a detective and a cop and says that this letter has no real justification. What do some of you think?

The General said so! That is enough justification for right now. Unless something changes his mind I'd assume that you can be charged with "something" under UCMJ if you are caught.

 

[Roadrunner]

On base I can easily understand but - to deny you any right of legal carry in your personal and private life away from base - that seems a serious breech of your basic rights. (emphasis added)

That's the Army's specialty. It's a legal order as far as I can see, a ridiculous one but still a legal order. Take it up with your Congressman, JAG office, and maybe the SGM of the Army, maybe it'll help. Beyond that, get the hell out of the Army (that's what I did).

 

[ka0azs]

Am I reading this bit right? Is this as I take it to be - stating that you would be barred from carry - anywhere, at all? On base I can easily understand but - to deny you any right of legal carry in your personal and private life away from base - that seems a serious breech of your basic rights.

Yep, you're reading it right. However, as I stated before, in the military you don't really have a personal or private life, away from or on base.

Active duty personnell don't give up all of their rights as citizens when they join up, but many of them are severely restricted or "suspended" while they are in the service. Politically related speech for example.

One of the biggest transitions I had to make when I left active duty was realizing I could tell my employer (legally that is, smart is another matter) to go to hell on any issue not related to my work hours on his property.

 

[ExSoldier]

I tried to post something earlier but the dang thing wouldn't transmit, so I'll try again.

JUST DAMN Things have changed since I was on active duty as an officer in the early 1980s! Back then I had a CCW and used to carry on post but off duty. However, when the Red Brigades (terrorists) killed General Dozier in (IIRC) '83, all general staff officers were directed to carry an issue 45 in condition 2 at all times on post and CCW other times. At that time I served on the G4 (Logistics) staff of a two star. Life was good as an officer then. I couldn't take the PC BS today.

You MUST follow the orders and directives of the superiors above you! Civilians don't understand but yes the army can regulate your actions 24/7. Hey they make you cut your hair, right? Is that fair? To a civvie well...no. But there is a legitimate reason to the short hair rule. This crap is globalism at it's worst. But, it's not worth a BCD (Bad Conduct Discharge) that will ruin your entire life! Get out and don't look back.

 

[duckhunter]

Getting a little defensive here, but not flaming anyone.

I just love how we are encouraging guys to get out of the Army (USN, USAF, USMC, USCG) because they don't agree with some of the regulations. Come on. If you really believed the recruiter when he told you it was going to be all milk and cookies in the military, you obviously didn't do a whole lot of research.

Contrary to popular belief, General Officers don't just sit around and think up ridiculous rules and regs - they are usually responding to a problem. Obviously there was a problem with this particular issue, but no-one has provided background on what it might be.

As I stated in a previous post, I don't agree with the reg. But bellyaching about having to follow the rules doesn't accomplish a whole lot. If the Army isn't for you, by all means get out. If you can't or won't follow the rules, I will help you get out.:rant:

Rant off.

 

[Roadrunner]

duckhunter, no offense taken. I had no problem serving my four years. I'll be damned if I do any more. Some people don't have a problem with all of the rules and regulations. I do. I gave them four years of my life and don't regret it, I encourage others to do the same. I likewise thinks it's idiotic to stay in if all of the BS is more than you can handle.

 

[duckhunter]

I'm with you Roadrunner. I had a lot of guys in the same situation - tried my darndest to reup them, but they had done their job and wanted to move on to greener pastures. It is certainly a lifestyle decision as opposed to only a career decision.

 

[czman2006]

I'm a 20 year USN retiree, E-8, and while I agree there are some restrictions in any branch of the military, to tell a service member you can use a firearm to defend this country in Iraq (or elsewhere) but you can't defend yourself in the parking lot of the local WallyWorld is nonsense and should be challenged through the right channels. The military is definitely not for everyone but servicemembers still have the right to defend themselves and their loved ones, as do we all.

 

[Airedale]

Justin,
Let me give you some retired Sergeant Major advice.

Your sh*thouse lawyer buddy is an idiot. If the document you posted is legitimate, then do what it says.

If you must, visit your friendly JAG office and they will explain it's legality. I guarantee that it was staffed through the JAG and has been deemed appropriate.

The Commander isn't "bucking" for anything. At this point in his career, he has a pretty good idea whether he'll pin on a third star or not. Publishing a memorandum isn't going to get him promoted.

There is a reason for a restrictive action like this. Don't listen to the barracks experts. I can't begin to tell you how many troops I saw crash and burn following guidance from barracks lawyers.

If you violate this memorandum and get caught, tough luck.
Dave

 

[frankmako]

After 11 years as a Army Officer I can tell you one thing, follow the memo. Check with JAG for off base carry rules.

 

[Bags]

Ohhh it has plenty of jurisdiction...it covers every single member of the armed forces stationed, attached or assigned to HQ Army Alaska.

Its an order plain and simple and no matter what you want to do you MUST comply. Its the stupidest order I have ever seen given but its an order and as a soldier you are bound by the UCMJ to comply.

2nd, Immediately contact the NRA. I would reach out to them and see if they can do something about it. The contact info for the NRA Institute for Legislative Action at
NRA-ILA
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
800-392-8683 - Grassroots Hotline

But, I hope you're a member. Sucks to be you but an order is an order.

hmm.. this might not be a LEGAL order.... you don't have to follow illlegal orders.

There are 2 schools of thought.. define "around" and is there enough gray area for a lawyer to battle the case. I know this much, when fighting a general and the UCMJ, even if you win, you lose