A Free Forum
For A Free People

---

What do you think of the military requiring information on soldiers' private weapons?

	Soldiers already have access to military weapons - they don't need private ones
	Soldiers must obey orders without question
	For the period of their enlistment, soldiers voluntarily surrender certain rights - this order seems like a reasonable imposition
	The military has responsibility to soldiers' families to create a safe environment for each service member
	This was just a reasonable attempt to implement a training program for soldiers with privately owned weapons for their own safety
	It makes sense if the guns are kept on base ... but that's already covered under other regulations
	I'm sure it was just a bureaucratic snafu
	The order was rescinded, the system worked - chill out
	If this was only about implementing a training program, why were soldiers required to give serial numbers for their private weapons?
	How does someone who has sworn an oath to protect and defend the constitution come up with such a tyrannical order?
	Even though this order was rescinded, it's scary that the military brass could even contemplate this violation of the Constitution
	This is a reflection of the new environment created by Obama's victory
	If we're going to trust soldiers with the firepower of government weapons, surely we can trust them with their own private guns
	If solders aren't allowed to have guns, who can?
	This is the most insane thing I've ever heard
	There is no justification for this gross violation of soldiers' privacy
	Members of the military have not given up their constitutional rights ... including their Second Amendment rights
	Other

Please login to submit your poll response:
Email:
Password:
First time here? Click here to register Lost your password? Click here

orders from headquarters
Posted by woodwalker on Mar 29, 2009 09:52

read germany`s gun reform from the 1930`s then look at obama`s just about the same
"an un-armed society is easier to control"
heads up america we have a communist in the lead!

right to bare arms
Posted by horse and buggy betty on Mar 27, 2009 00:32

this push has been coming
some in our gov what it made easy for us to be taken over and controled call it the mark 666 or what have you but its our lifes at stake and my rights
im tired of loosing any more rights time to take a stand NOW!!

RE: Great Leader Obama would be proud
Posted by on Mar 26, 2009 11:03

I just can't get over the feeling that this was some sort of "trial balloon" sent up by our top cop and Obama's buddy Eric Holder who is RABIDLY anti gun.

He once said that if it was up to him just buying a hand gun would cause you a prison term! Never mind the second amendment!

Obama and holder are an anti gun pair!

Darkelf

Reply to: jb103989
Great Leader Obama would be proud of this step to try and make citizens give up their constitutional rights! This is a thinly veiled attempt to confiscate all weapons. If this were allowed, then Great Leader Obama and Devine Leader Pelosi could say that since the military has to provide this information (and they are trained to use weapons) then the average joe surely can't be trusted or trained to use his. Next thing you know there will be statues to Great Leader springing up all over the U.S. (hey it's already happening) and you will be required to pay homage. Look on the bright side, once thetransformation is complete, travel to North Korea should become routine!

RE: RE: RE: First the Military
Posted by RyanVet on Mar 25, 2009 18:52

Uhm, am I the only one a little disturbed to see STORMFRONT as the "lead purveyor" of this nonsense? I'd rather not rely on neo nazis for my politically oriented current events, thanks.

Reply to: fly on the wall
I read where Obama told Russia all guns would be taken away for the U.S. by Sept. 2009 Google it.
Australia banned guns and now only criminals have them and their crime rate has gone way up.

The criminals will not turn in their guns.

We, per our constitution have a right to own a gun. The only one's who should have them taken away are criminals.

Do not let this happen in our country.

RE: Orders from Headquarters
Posted by RyanVet on Mar 25, 2009 18:43

So explain to me again the connection between this junior officer's (very) misguided attempt to follow a post safety recommendation and... "Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and their ilk (I capitalized for you, you're welcome)." I'm afraid I left my conspiracy theory 101 textbook at home, so I need a refreshing.

Reply to: Thom
There were so many correct answers to this poll that being able to pick only one was a serious problem. It is uncontionable that ANYONE from the DOD, in any position, would even consider this terrifying order. As your selection of answers said, if it's a "training" issue why demand serial numbers, where they are kept, and if you have been issued a carry permit and where it was issued from. NONE of this has even the most remote relationship to training. And why do they feel that a group of people, MANY of whom have been intimately involved with firearms in civialian life, and ALL of whom have been trained in firearm usage in the military, need further training in their own firearms. With the small exceptions involving tear down, loading, and care, firearm saftey and storage are universal with all firearms. Are they saying they are doing a lousy job in training. After basic training, my own additional training consisted of enhanced live fire training at Fort Benning, GA. sniper school and qualification in any specific weapons I would be expected to use. Having recieved this training, I did feel that I had received useful ballistics information that I could carry back to the real world with me. Nothing else was addressed as far as issues regarding any private weapons I owned. They apparently thought I was qualified to fire the .54 cal. flintlock muzzle loader, the .223 cal. Savage Varmit rifle, the 12 ga. Remington autoloader, the Crossman pellet rifle, the Daisy Red Rider, or any other firearm I had since the issue never came up. I will not stand for any further attempts to abrogate the Constitution. The worst thing to ever happen to America has been obama, pelosi, reid, and their ilk. I have no respect for them and cannot, in good concious, follow them. Please believe me when I say that we are no more than 18 months away from an order of Marshall Law because "too many things are thwarting our efforts to quell this catastrophy with the actions we must invest in." It will be represented as "temporary", but will override all of our freedoms. I say that obama is unsuited for, ignorant of, and not qualified to assume the office of the President. Only the people of America can recall him. It requires a vast outpouring of indignant insistance of a very large portion of ***
(Edited for length)

RE: RE: First the Military
Posted by fly on the wall on Mar 25, 2009 16:35

I read where Obama told Russia all guns would be taken away for the U.S. by Sept. 2009 Google it.
Australia banned guns and now only criminals have them and their crime rate has gone way up.

The criminals will not turn in their guns.

We, per our constitution have a right to own a gun. The only one's who should have them taken away are criminals.

Do not let this happen in our country.

Reply to: Patriot1775
YES!!! There are plenty of idiots who think the government and the police will protect them from criminals who have guns. How else can you explain BHO being elected? I rest my case!

Orders from Headquarters
Posted by Thom on Mar 25, 2009 14:54

There were so many correct answers to this poll that being able to pick only one was a serious problem. It is uncontionable that ANYONE from the DOD, in any position, would even consider this terrifying order. As your selection of answers said, if it's a "training" issue why demand serial numbers, where they are kept, and if you have been issued a carry permit and where it was issued from. NONE of this has even the most remote relationship to training. And why do they feel that a group of people, MANY of whom have been intimately involved with firearms in civialian life, and ALL of whom have been trained in firearm usage in the military, need further training in their own firearms. With the small exceptions involving tear down, loading, and care, firearm saftey and storage are universal with all firearms. Are they saying they are doing a lousy job in training. After basic training, my own additional training consisted of enhanced live fire training at Fort Benning, GA. sniper school and qualification in any specific weapons I would be expected to use. Having recieved this training, I did feel that I had received useful ballistics information that I could carry back to the real world with me. Nothing else was addressed as far as issues regarding any private weapons I owned. They apparently thought I was qualified to fire the .54 cal. flintlock muzzle loader, the .223 cal. Savage Varmit rifle, the 12 ga. Remington autoloader, the Crossman pellet rifle, the Daisy Red Rider, or any other firearm I had since the issue never came up. I will not stand for any further attempts to abrogate the Constitution. The worst thing to ever happen to America has been obama, pelosi, reid, and their ilk. I have no respect for them and cannot, in good concious, follow them. Please believe me when I say that we are no more than 18 months away from an order of Marshall Law because "too many things are thwarting our efforts to quell this catastrophy with the actions we must invest in." It will be represented as "temporary", but will override all of our freedoms. I say that obama is unsuited for, ignorant of, and not qualified to assume the office of the President. Only the people of America can recall him. It requires a vast outpouring of indignant insistance of a very large portion of ***
(Edited for length)

RE: First the Military
Posted by Patriot1775 on Mar 24, 2009 07:28

YES!!! There are plenty of idiots who think the government and the police will protect them from criminals who have guns. How else can you explain BHO being elected? I rest my case!

Reply to: KC from KC
First the Military and then the rest of the country. Why is the Government so concerned about everyone's weapons? It's just a control measure so the American people become dependent on government. I don't believe for one minute that the government will go door to door to ensure everyone is safe after they take away "legal" guns. Is anyone stupid enough to believe the criminals are going to give up their "unregistered & illegal" guns?

On Post vs Off Post
Posted by Willbo17 on Mar 23, 2009 12:32

I retired with almost 27 years in the Army. When you came on post, if you were going to live on post you were asked if you had any weapons. If you weren't going to live on post it was never an issue. Even if you did live on post, if you were an officer it wasn't like they were going to come check your private quarters. It just wasn't that big a deal.
However, in light of Obama's Brave New World and HR 45, I think there is reason for concern. I am not some gun nut but I do believe some are working to restrict our 2nd Amendment rights... and I hope all those congress critters are found to be liars, cheats and [giffled] from [fliggled] wounds.
(Edited)

Great Leader Obama would be proud
Posted by jb103989 on Mar 23, 2009 09:06

Great Leader Obama would be proud of this step to try and make citizens give up their constitutional rights! This is a thinly veiled attempt to confiscate all weapons. If this were allowed, then Great Leader Obama and Devine Leader Pelosi could say that since the military has to provide this information (and they are trained to use weapons) then the average joe surely can't be trusted or trained to use his. Next thing you know there will be statues to Great Leader springing up all over the U.S. (hey it's already happening) and you will be required to pay homage. Look on the bright side, once thetransformation is complete, travel to North Korea should become routine!