Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gun laws a minefield for military
The Orange County Register ^ | Sunday, February 9, 2003 | GORDON DILLOW

Posted on 02/09/2003 7:23:45 PM PST by An Old Man

Sunday, February 9, 2003

Gun laws a minefield for military

By GORDON DILLOW The Orange County Register

As thousands of U.S. military personnel in California deploy to the Persian Gulf in preparation for war, some of them are having a serious problem.

They can't get guns.

Oh sure, the military provides them with an array of weapons: M-16s, grenade launchers, squad automatic weapons and so on. They're heavily armed.

But a lot of military types, particularly guys in special-operations units, like to supplement some of the standard-issue weaponry with privately purchased handguns and gun-related equipment of their own choosing. Often the handguns and equipment they can buy in the private market are better and more advanced than the standard-issue stuff.

But getting those handguns can be a big problem in California, which has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. Although law enforcement personnel are exempted from many of the restrictions on purchasing firearms, military personnel stationed in California are not - even if they're on their way to a combat zone.

"It's a sad state of affairs," says Evan Carolyn, a former Marine who owns Evan's Gunsmithing and Shooter's World in Orange. "There's no way for us to assist these guys in getting the best stuff they can."

For example, recently some members of a special-operations unit - I'm not supposed to say which unit - told Evan they wanted to buy some compact 9-millimeter handguns as personal backup weapons before they shipped out. Unfortunately, there's a 10-day waiting period for firearms purchases in California - and the unit had to leave before the waiting period was up.

And even if they had bought the handguns, they would have had to make do with 10-round magazines instead of the 13-round magazines the weapons are capable of holding. That's because California law bans the sale of "large capacity" magazines - more than 10 rounds - to anyone but police officers.

"We're seeing this kind of thing all the time," Evan says. "This is how we're treating the military in California."

Spokesmen for the state Attorney General's Office, which regulates firearms sales, told me they were aware of the problem involving military personnel and firearms restrictions - but there's not much they can do about it. Even if he wanted to, the attorney general can't waive any of the statutory restrictions on gun sales - not even for guys headed off to war.

And as for the state Legislature amending the gun laws to exempt military personnel under certain special circumstances - well, don't hold your breath. After all, they're the same guys who passed these silly, ineffective laws in the first place.

So that's the situation we have today in California. Apparently we trust our military personnel to handle tanks, machine guns, missiles, grenades, mortars, howitzers, aircraft carriers, submarines, jets, bombs and nuclear weapons. And after making them wait a week-and-a-half, we even trust them enough to let them buy a handgun that holds ten rounds.

But they'd better not ask for one that holds eleven.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; gun
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
To: joesnuffy
Hopefully, I will. But I ain't sure of that.
21 posted on 02/09/2003 7:56:29 PM PST by patton (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Britton J Wingfield
LOL.
22 posted on 02/09/2003 7:56:54 PM PST by patton (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man; Shooter 2.5; Travis McGee; sneakypete
I'm starting to REALLY WONDER just why the police seem to have so many more privileges than the "average" person.

As far as the military goes, while I'd LIKE to have the ability to purchase whatever I want whenever or wherever, I also want the same for everyone else. Just because I'm Active Duty doesn't mean, to me, that I should have MORE rights than the average Joe.

That said, I'm fully qualified on pistols and shotguns, courtesy of Uncle Sam. Thus, here in Florida, i was exempt from the standard "safety course" required to get a CCW. Big Deal.

What I would LOVE to see is someone from Cali's joke of a government forced into giving a REASON for this policy. Be funny to watch them squirm.

23 posted on 02/09/2003 7:58:36 PM PST by Long Cut (Daddy-To-Be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Newbomb Turk
Newbomb:
When I was in the service 1942-1946 we went to the second hand stores in Los Angles and bought used guns, both automatic and the old six-shooter type, (bought clips to use rimless cartrages) We carried them to Guadacanal, Bouginville and Guam. There was just not enough 1911's for all the troups. Nobody that I know bought a rifle though.

Good evening and the very best to you and yours.

Semper Fi
Tommie

24 posted on 02/09/2003 8:00:17 PM PST by Texican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Britton J Wingfield
In 65, the general qualifier was the ammunition. If it was not used in any other weapon then the firearm was forbidden. Of course a few folks had .22's with cans on them. Not a general issue item, but they were lifesavers.
25 posted on 02/09/2003 8:11:41 PM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Texican
It makes perfect since to me. We are going to kill people right. Let the soldier take anything he wants to get the job done. after all who is risking their hide.
But alass our PC military will never allow it. We must only us NATO approved Caliber weapons and ball ammo. After all we wouldn't want to offend the french.
26 posted on 02/09/2003 8:19:49 PM PST by Newbomb Turk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
A while back on FR, I wrote that military personnel E-5 and above should be able to carry a sidearm at all times and concealed when not on duty.

That didn't go over too well on this board.

I wonder who in the Pentagon or government could write an order making that possible? Or is that one more step to a Police State?
27 posted on 02/09/2003 8:22:34 PM PST by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Actually they could just have the PX/BX sale firearms again. Military Installations are federal reserves, the same as a Indian reservation. The same rules that allow casinos on the reservations would allow gun stores on bases.
28 posted on 02/09/2003 8:23:34 PM PST by Kadric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Britton J Wingfield
"civilian airliner . . . preventing me from taking a backup piece"

You can carry in your luggage if you declare the firearm at check-in.

29 posted on 02/09/2003 8:32:04 PM PST by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
"A while back on FR, I wrote that military personnel E-5 and above should be able to carry a sidearm at all times and concealed when not on duty."

I still feel guilty about it...why can't EVERYONE do this, if they've got no record of criminal behavior?

I'd probably ultimately go for it. However, I'd specify that the individual be QUALIFIED, by whatever standards his service sets; and that he NOT have been subject to any judicial OR non-judicial punishment within, say, one enlistment.

Hell, while we're dreaming, I had an idea a long time ago about all service people being issued special KNIVES, fixed-blade, as a symbol of their completion of Boot Camp. The blades would then become part of their uniform, subject to inspection at ALL times, and become their property upon honorable discharge.

I thought that the Spec-Plus line was a good place to start...their knives are both rugged AND easy on the wallet. They are also almost magic when properly sharpened.

Each service's knife would be specific to that service. For example, the Marines would keep their Ka-Bar, of course. The Navy could design its own, as could the Army. The Air Force could just take a Spec-Plus "Airforce" as-is.

All would be serial-numbered, embossed with the service's letters and seal. Their use, care, and cleaning and sharpening would be taught THOROUGHLY in Boot Camp.

30 posted on 02/09/2003 8:35:54 PM PST by Long Cut (Daddy-To-Be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kadric
The same rules that allow casinos on the reservations would allow gun stores on bases.

oooh, oooh, oooh. An interesting thought. How about gun shops on the indian reservation? No state oversight. No state restrictions. Or is this already precluded?

Consider the historical irony of having to buy guns from the indians....

31 posted on 02/09/2003 8:39:44 PM PST by no-s
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Thus, here in Florida, i was exempt from the standard "safety course" required to get a CCW. Big Deal.

Believe it or not,but in NC,I had to go through the whole damn safety course,including "convincing" a certified firearms instructor that I could safely handle a handgun. This is after being a SF weapons NCO,a graduate of a 2 year gunsmith course,a gunsmith in two different gun shops,and owning my own gun shop for a while. I even used to work on the sheriff depts guns for them,and STILL had to take the damn course. The highlight of which was having some 22 year old dummy want to try to lecture to me that I was "shooting too fast,and likely to lose control of my weapon." The retired Colonel who was running the thing lauged at him and told him to look at my target and then leave me alone. I was shooting a custom 45ACP Colt Combat Commander that I had built myself,and it was/is the closest thing to a magic wand I have ever seen.

32 posted on 02/09/2003 8:46:22 PM PST by sneakypete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Squantos; Travis McGee; VaBthang4; sneakypete
This is why some of us vets fly our US flag upside down.

If I was the commander of this unit I'd be real open to the notion of marching up to the capitol in Sacramento and reminding those goobermint A-holes who's lives we were off to defend and who's walnuts were going in harms way. I'd then stick my boot up their asses until they repealed the ludicrous gun laws we have.

Un-friggin believable

33 posted on 02/09/2003 8:47:06 PM PST by spectr17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Newbomb Turk
Remember the article said "Special Ops". They can pretty much carry any thing they want.
34 posted on 02/09/2003 8:51:20 PM PST by AlabamaRebel (Sergeant, US Army 1978-1985)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Newbomb Turk
In USAF CCT we qualified with issue S&W .38 revolvers in the late 70s and mid 80s. Most carried goverment model .45s or Browning Hi-Powers in 9mm. .357 wheelguns were popular for backups and little single shot .22 derringers for hideouts.
35 posted on 02/09/2003 8:54:22 PM PST by spectr17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kadric
The same rules that allow casinos on the reservations would allow gun stores on bases.

The PX at Fort Greeley, Alaska sells guns. I don't know why those in the lower 48 don't.

36 posted on 02/09/2003 8:55:11 PM PST by arm958
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man
Does anyone know which, if any, of the 'friendly' ME countries allow foreign civilian citizens to bring in privately owned firearms?
37 posted on 02/09/2003 8:55:49 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There ought to be a law against excessive legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
I'm waiting for the day that its' okay for a soldier to go into combat, but he can't carry a weapon at all because he is not 21 as the law states.

Any damn gun law these people come up with is stupid. They dont stop crime, buy help crime.
38 posted on 02/09/2003 8:56:18 PM PST by AlabamaRebel (Sergeant, US Army 1978-1985)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Most ME countries seem to have a lot of firearms on the open market.
39 posted on 02/09/2003 8:56:50 PM PST by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sneakypete
See, that just makes me sick. Oh, and I'm supposed to believe that the cops arew SOOOooo much better trained than ANY civilians that only THEY, our praetorians, should have access to guns.

I probably put over 2,000 rounds a year through my Springfield. Probably 500 through the shotgun. How often does a cop shoot his weapon?

Sorry, but lately I've been somewhat down on the police. They've had some rather famous screwups lately, as well as having some not-so-famous run-ins with Sailors I know here in town. The idea, advanced by the Left, that I should rely on these clowns for my safety is starting to sound downright insulting. This article is another example of it. I'm sure that the ONLY reason such laws exist is that the Great State Of California(tm) doesn't want ANYONE not on its direct payroll carrying heat.

40 posted on 02/09/2003 8:58:58 PM PST by Long Cut (Daddy-To-Be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson