Military gun registration

[windcatcher]

I found this post on another site which addresses an issue I heard on talk-(free)radio I heard last week: I present it here for any interested in discussion, unedited, with permission of its author obtained:

Government Demands Inventory of All VFW Weapons

http://www.infowars.com/government-demands-invento.....w-weapons/

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=100151

Let's not forget....
www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92395

Also the infamous....
www.29palmssurvey.com/survey.html

For those of you too lazy to follow the links...here's a short synopsis...

#1 Government demands inventory of all VFW weapons

#2 US military wants inventory of personal weapons/permits at Ft. Bliss, TX

#3 Same as #2, at Ft. Campbell, KY

#4 Survey given to Marines at 29 Palms Marine Corps Base, asking if they agree to US troops used within the US and bordering countries.

In #4, the following is also a question:

46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-approved firearms. A 30-day amnesty period is established for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of irregular citizen groups and defiant individuals refuse to turn over their firearms to authority. Consider the following statement: [SD D A SA NO]

"I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the United States government."

 

[BigBossman]

Its ridiculous that our own soldiers would have to have a permit just to use a gun, especially if that's the job they are being trained to do.

You'd think that the federal government would already have a record of every gun that is on each & every military base.

 

[Baptist Believer]

You'd think that the federal government would already have a record of every gun that is on each & every military base.

Having a record of a firearm and actually possessing the firearm are two very different things. That's what an inventory is - checking to see if you actually possess the items your records tell you that you have. Retail stores do inventories all the time to determine how many items have been stolen or damaged, so they can reorder what they need.

I'm pleased that the government is taking stock of things to ensure that firearms are not being pilfered and that they have enough.

Oh, and for what it's worth, that "29 Palms Survey" was written for a master's degree project. It was NOT an official Department of Defense survey and in no way represents the government. Anyone could write such a survey and it wouldn't represent any intent of the government to do anything.

 

[BigBossman]

Having a record of a firearm and actually possessing the firearm are two very different things. That's what an inventory is - checking to see if you actually possess the items your records tell you that you have. Retail stores do inventories all the time to determine how many items have been stolen or damaged, so they can reorder what they need.

Yeah, I know. They keep track of which weapon is assigned to who don't they? I don't have a problem with inventory being kept or the fact that they keep a list of serial numbers to the firearms assigned to each soldier. I have a problem with our soldiers being required to have certification or license just to be issued a firearm for combat. Isn't that what training is for? Isn't that why we have drill instructors? Who has to pay for this certifictaion?

 

[poncho]

It would be interesting to see the results of such a survey and find out just how many of our military personel would betray their oath to defend the U.S. constitution, disregard posse comitatus, and fire on U.S. citizens because their government decided to break the laws of the land and confiscate legally owned firearms.

I would venture a guess that the majority would not. At least I hope. On the other hand I would also venture a guess that those who say they would probably have a big promotion in their military future. Besides our combat troops have been training to do the missions (in CONUS) outlined in this survey for awhile now along with foreign troops.

Just in case all of us "extremists" who still believe in the constitution of the United States and national independence decide the international tyrants in control of our government and media have gone to far. While I was watching tv last night I noticed that all the networks were airing the same propaganda. Trying to tie legitimate political movements like Ron Paul's campaign for liberty, the 9/11 truth movement, pro lifers and pro constitutionalists with radical groups who have used violent means. The government and media is trying very hard to make the claim that none of us can be trusted with any liberty and that we're all potential terrorist threats to the "international community".

 

[BigBossman]

It would be interesting to see the results of such a survey and find out just how many of our military personel would betray their oath to defend the U.S. constitution, disregard posse comitatus, and fire on U.S. citizens because their government decided to break the laws of the land and confiscate legally owned firearms.

I would venture a guess that the majority would not. At least I hope. On the other hand I would also venture a guess that those who say they would probably have a big promotion in their military future.

I couldn't see our soldiers doing it, but I could easily see the U.N. doing such a thing.

 

[poncho]

I couldn't see our soldiers doing it, but I could easily see the U.N. doing such a thing.

It's just a matter of promoting those who would and weeding out those who wouldn't. The propaganda being put out now by the government and corporate mass media "dissenters are terrorists" is reaching a fever pitch now. Also, Bush has made sure that UNESCO remains in charge of teaching our children how to be good global citizens instead of good U.S. citizens.

A few years of global indoctrination, backed up by a determined media propaganda campaign aimed at our youth and we'd quickly have a generation of young people ready to kill and be killed for the "international community" aka the New World Order. It's all happening today right in front of our eyes.

Whether one chooses to believe it or not.

We were warned 200 hundred years ago what to look for. Read the words of Thomas Jefferson below.

 

[Freedom]

Its ridiculous that our own soldiers would have to have a permit just to use a gun, especially if that's the job they are being trained to do.

You'd think that the federal government would already have a record of every gun that is on each & every military base.

That isn't what's being said here. The KY commander was asking for information on his soldier's PRIVATE weapons. Why should soldiers hold their own weapons when they are armed by the military? I wouldn't think that would be desirable. Presumably the military issues weapons that are appropriate for their skill level and mission. Why should soldiers take it upon themselves to override their superior's judgment and carry weapons that the military thinks is inappropriate for them?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

That isn't what's being said here. The KY commander was asking for information on his soldier's PRIVATE weapons. Why should soldiers hold their own weapons when they are armed by the military? I wouldn't think that would be desirable. Presumably the military issues weapons that are appropriate for their skill level and mission. Why should soldiers take it upon themselves to override their superior's judgment and carry weapons that the military thinks is inappropriate for them?

You would presume wrong. Military weapons are notorious for sloppy action, inaccuracy, & shoddy maintenence.

 

[windcatcher]

This doesn't sound like a reference to use of private weapons while on duty in the military: It sounds more like infringement on citizen rights..... and targeting military personnel as being obligatory as a special group to compliance which may for-shadow what is later expected of all citizens at large.

Another major U.S. military base is requiring soldiers who live off the premises to provide descriptions, serial numbers, calibers, makes and models of any of the guns they own privately, and do not take onto the premises of the installation.

According to a copy of a "Weapons Registration Form" submitted to WND by a soldier from Fort Bliss in Texas, the soldiers have to provide their own information including Social Security number, a physical description and addresses and telephone numbers, along with the serial number, type, action, make, caliber, finish, location stored, model, overall length and barrel description of each weapon they own.

 

[Revmitchell]

This doesn't sound like a reference to use of private weapons while on duty in the military: It sounds more like infringement on citizen rights..... and targeting military personnel as being obligatory as a special group to compliance which may for-shadow what is later expected of all citizens at large.

American soldiers are owned by the US Government.

 

[windcatcher]

American soldiers are owned by the US Government.

That may be..... but their families are not 'owned' by the US Government...... and when living off base in private housing, the privately owned firearms, whether for self protection or hunting, should be no business of the government.

 

[Salty]

That may be..... but their families are not 'owned' by the US Government...... quote]

Then I take it you are were never in the military.

 

[windcatcher]

That may be..... but their families are not 'owned' by the US Government...... quote]

Then I take it you are were never in the military.

No I was not in the military: For the first 12 years of life I was the brat of a military career Dad. Except for the first years of my life.... maybe as much as 2 years, we lived off base. No, we weren't 'owned' by the government.

 

[OldRegular]

This doesn't sound like a reference to use of private weapons while on duty in the military: It sounds more like infringement on citizen rights..... and targeting military personnel as being obligatory as a special group to compliance which may for-shadow what is later expected of all citizens at large.

Another major U.S. military base is requiring soldiers who live off the premises to provide descriptions, serial numbers, calibers, makes and models of any of the guns they own privately, and do not take onto the premises of the installation.

According to a copy of a "Weapons Registration Form" submitted to WND by a soldier from Fort Bliss in Texas, the soldiers have to provide their own information including Social Security number, a physical description and addresses and telephone numbers, along with the serial number, type, action, make, caliber, finish, location stored, model, overall length and barrel description of each weapon they own.

Could this be the fallout from the Homeland Security paper questioning whether returning veterans would join right wing extremist groups?

 

[OldRegular]

American soldiers are owned by the US Government.

I disagree! I was in the service and no one owned me!:sleeping_2:

 

[Revmitchell]

That may be..... but their families are not 'owned' by the US Government...... and when living off base in private housing, the privately owned firearms, whether for self protection or hunting, should be no business of the government.

Not when you are a soldier. Nothing is private and you can make no decisions for yourself.

 

[sag38]

Hence the saying, "If the Army wanted you to have a family they would have issued you one." During my time in the service very little consideration was given to those who had families other than a lot of lip service.

 

[windcatcher]

Not when you are a soldier. Nothing is private and you can make no decisions for yourself.

Hence the saying, "If the Army wanted you to have a family they would have issued you one." During my time in the service very little consideration was given to those who had families other than a lot of lip service.

If one's a parent or a wife of a husband or the husband of a wife..... it is also true that very few decisions can be made 'for yourself'.

But one chooses, also, as to what they keep private...... unless some untoward event happens to unveil something hidden.

 

[Revmitchell]

If one's a parent or a wife of a husband or the husband of a wife..... it is also true that very few decisions can be made 'for yourself'.

But one chooses, also, as to what they keep private...... unless some untoward event happens to unveil something hidden.

Let me assure you they can stop you from getting married if they so choose. I had my wisdom teeth pulled under orders. I had to ask permission and get my CO to sign authorization for me to join the Rodeo Team on my off duty time. I was given orders to donate to the Naval Relief fund. When you sign up you literally sign your life away.