Transferring to an Army base... but I am Navy


E

evolve

New member
So my question to you is:

If you were transferring to another military installation and you were from a different branch of service, would you register your firearms with the base or just keep them in your residence? I ask because I have a large safe with my firearms and am Navy, but I will be transferring to an Army installation and staying in base housing. They are asking for my firearm information. I really don't want to give them that info. What would you do?
 

Whatever installation you're residing on is the one's you must comply with. Also, I don't like your Aqua-flage... jus' sayin'.
 
Living on base requires providing the Provost Marshall with your weapon information. Mainly to help them with recovery of them if stolen. Living in the barracks, you are required to have them locked in the arms room.
 
evolve said:
So my question to you is:

If you were transferring to another military installation and you were from a different branch of service, would you register your firearms with the base or just keep them in your residence? I ask because I have a large safe with my firearms and am Navy, but I will be transferring to an Army installation and staying in base housing. They are asking for my firearm information. I really don't want to give them that info. What would you do?
Click to expand...

I am assuming that nobody is requiring you to live in base housing (which is different than the barracks)? When you accept base housing, you agree to abide by the regulations of said housing, part of which is usually registering firearms with base security. You don't want to abide by the regulations...than live somewhere else. It's that simple. Get caught violating the regulations and at a minimum you will be barred from living in base housing ever again. Base housing is a privilege, not a right. If you are being required to live on base and don't comply with the regulations, then it becomes an issue of unwillingess to follow orders, which can either go towards disciplinary action - or administrative seperation from service if you can convince them that following orders would go against your good conscience, religion, etc.

Even if you are being ordered to live in base housing.... the US military is still VOLUNTARY. You agreed to abide by lawful regulations and orders. It's right in the oath you took. So, you have to decide for yourself whether it violates the Constitution for the military to require you to disclose ownership of firearms to them. Disclosure of personal firearms would be a 4th Amendment argument, not a 2nd Amendment argument. Confiscation and bans on firearms possession becomes the 2nd Amendment issue.
 
nosreme said:
Military people having to follow orders is not a function of voluntariness of service or of the oath. It's a function of military status.

Disclosure of firearms is not a 4th amendment issue. (It might involve 5th amendment/Article 31 UCMJ implications if asked of a firearms-violation suspect). What provisions of the constitution may or may not apply is way beyond what's necessary to address the OP's question, so there's no point in adding erroneous constitutional commentary to what otherwise is a pretty good answer.
Click to expand...

Well, aren't you the expert....

10 USC § 502 - Enlistment oath: who may administer | Title 10 - Armed Forces | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute
10 USC 502

(a) Enlistment Oath.— Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
“I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
Click to expand...

So....explain to us how following orders is not a function of the oath of enlistment?
 
nosreme said:
Yes, as a matter of fact, I am. Oaths don't confer jurisdiction. The UCMJ does.
Click to expand...

Unless the person voluntarily takes the Oath and voluntarily signs the contract of enlistment or voluntarily accepts a commission, the UCMJ has no applicability to them. Military members currently volunteer to come under the authority of the UCMJ. The point is, the OP voluntarily agreed to become subject to the orders of the officers appointed over him, including an order to register his firearms with base security if he chooses to live in base housing, and to forego possession of personal firearms in barracks that he might be assigned to live in.
 
NavyLCDR said:
Unless the person voluntarily takes the Oath and voluntarily signs the contract of enlistment or voluntarily accepts a commission, the UCMJ has no applicability to them. Military members currently volunteer to come under the authority of the UCMJ. The point is, the OP voluntarily agreed to become subject to the orders of the officers appointed over him, including an order to register his firearms with base security if he chooses to live in base housing, and to forego possession of personal firearms in barracks that he might be assigned to live in.
Click to expand...

Oaths solemnize events like commissioning and enlistment. Legally, they aren't determinative of very much. In fact there are any number of appellate cases where defendants (accuseds in militaryspeak) in courts-martial asserted--and proved--that they hadn't taken an oath, or taken a proper oath (like not repeating it in formation oaths, leaving out the statuorily-prescribed reference to god, etc) or properly filled out the enlistment forms, arguing that they were not subject to military jurisdiction because their enlistments were void as a result of a defective--and therefore invalid--oath. They lost--without exception. Taking the oath and voluntarily entering the Service certainly are big moral deals with important moral dimensions as well as ones of personal and professional integrity, but they are not what obligates the OP to comply with the (idiotic) rules or what will get the OP into trouble if he doesn't comply with applicable military gun rules, however stupid and CYA they might be.
 
Thanks all. I in no way intended to break any rules, I was just posing a question. Just because I DONT WANT to do something does not mean I am in any way going to do anything to not "obey the orders of the...". I am sure there are things that others in this very post have done that they in no way wanted to do, BUT they did it because it was the right thing to do. Lots of high horses here eh... Again, thank you all for very thoughtful and thorough responses.
 
evolve said:
Thanks all. I in no way intended to break any rules, I was just posing a question. Just because I DONT WANT to do something does not mean I am in any way going to do anything to not "obey the orders of the...". I am sure there are things that others in this very post have done that they in no way wanted to do, BUT they did it because it was the right thing to do. Lots of high horses here eh... Again, thank you all for very thoughtful and thorough responses.
Click to expand...

Just to throw this out here if you choose not to register them you would have to either take them to your quarters and leave them there until you PCS or risk them being found in a random search every time you drive off post with them. Which would likely end your career.

Alternatively you might want to find an off post, climate controled storge company and store them there
 
Evolve: The simple answer to your question is to obey the orders for the installation. No big deal. In all my years of service, and living in military housing, I didn't have any problems concerning my weapons. They were registered (again, no big deal) and no one ever questioned me about having them. During hunting seasons, I carried my weapons in a gun rack in my truck while proceeding to my hunting areas and was never stopped. Actually, it was a non-issue and we all lived happily ever after. Just obey the rules.
 
Oldgrunt said:
Evolve: The simple answer to your question is to obey the orders for the installation. No big deal. In all my years of service, and living in military housing, I didn't have any problems concerning my weapons. They were registered (again, no big deal) and no one ever questioned me about having them. During hunting seasons, I carried my weapons in a gun rack in my truck while proceeding to my hunting areas and was never stopped. Actually, it was a non-issue and we all lived happily ever after. Just obey the rules.
Click to expand...
Some bases actually have on base hunting so even that is a non-issue. Just do what the base requires to remain legal. We had guns in our base housing in both Turkey and Japan.

As for the off base housing and needing to tell about family members living there having guns, that is a sticky wicket. Say two adult brothers live off base. One is in the military and does not own any guns. The other brother is a civilian and owns guns. Some bases have said that those have to be reported. That is a violation of the civilians rights. Also, unless it has changed, ANG facilities are not allowed to store personal weapons in their firearms storage facilities. I haven't checked since 2004 when I applied for a job in Jax. HR 6523 (111th Congress, NDAA 2011, Section 1062 ) banned the military from asking about or maintaining records of any military or civilian employee ownership of firearms off base as long as the person was off duty and out of uniform. NDAA 2013 Section 1071 reopened it in the case of those thought to be of high risk of suicide or harm to others.
 
wolf_fire said:
What in the world is "Aqua-flage"?
Click to expand...
It is a joke foisted upon the Navy guys by someone higher up. The only ones wearing something like that should be guys who are needing to hide in the water, such as the SEALs. Just like the Army found out that jungle-flage doesn't look right in a desert environment.
 
Howdy,

S&W645 said:
It is a joke foisted upon the Navy guys by someone higher up. The only ones wearing something like that should be guys who are needing to hide in the water, such as the SEALs. Just like the Army found out that jungle-flage doesn't look right in a desert environment.
Click to expand...

+1!

Back in '84 I was TDY to Ft. Bliss ( El Paso, Tx ) for training with the 3rd ACS and went into the field ( desert ) with newly issued woodland camouflage BDUs.

I was in the Air Force at the time and the Army got a kick out of our uniforms because they were pretty and stood out like a sore thumb. I switched back to old faded green fatigues which actually blended in better than the BDUs.

Paul
 
NavyLCDR said:
Even if you are being ordered to live in base housing.... the US military is still VOLUNTARY. You agreed to abide by lawful regulations and orders. It's right in the oath you took. So, you have to decide for yourself whether it violates the Constitution for the military to require you to disclose ownership of firearms to them. Disclosure of personal firearms would be a 4th Amendment argument, not a 2nd Amendment argument. Confiscation and bans on firearms possession becomes the 2nd Amendment issue.
Click to expand...

The question is actually about money. The best solution would be to live off-base, but many bases that have housing will not authorize payment of a housing allowance if there is on-base housing and the member declines. If you didn't know, we don't make a stellar wage. Know that the Army is really kind of pro-gun :) but if you live on base they also have regular housing inspections to ensure you aren't trashing the place. Having a gunsafe might raise questions. Check the base policies and see what options you have.
 
wolf_fire said:
What in the world is "Aqua-flage"?
Click to expand...

aquaflage: blue and grey, digital pattern camouflage currently in use by the US Navy; also: digiblues

The new aquaflage was far more comfortable and versatile than the old uniforms, but added a whole new element of danger to falling overboard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 120 (members: 0, guests: 120)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,262
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1

Share this page

Back
Top