Law Enforcement Specialties >> Military Law Enforcement >> Poll: CHL holders should be able to carry on military installations

Rate

Poll: CHL holders should be able to carry on military installations

2,824 Views
56 Replies Flag as inappropriate

Poll: Should certified CHL holders be allowed to carry on military installations?

Silver_warrior_max50

1470 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Bandit4



  • I would just ask most of you to look at it from a personal side ( I.E. YOU being allowed to carry) if you are an LEO or other trained professional that has been properly vetted to carry a concealed weapon.

Now that is the "rub" as some people look at it.  From a LEO point of view (or even from the legislature point of view), the laws allow very little lattitude for looking at things with feelings or "from a personal side".  If we start looking at things "from a personal side" then our integrity goes out the window because our biases start to kick in and then some people get preferential treatment.  Personally I know many people that could and probably should carry concealed. . . .even in places that don't allow it, but. . . . .the law does not allow it.


Let's try it from a different context. . . . .most of the NASCAR drivers are probably at, or even above, the level of driving capabilities of most LEO's. . . .yet the law does not  show them any favoritism and allow them to drive 200+mph down the roadway even though they may have the ability to.


As for carrying on a base, it is actually not a law enforcement issue. . . .it is a base commander issue.  Speaking of which. . . .you mentioned that it took LEO's 5 minutes to get there????  Where were the MP's?  They DO carry weapons yet it took local LEO's to confront and bring down Hassan.  The MP's are closer (i.e. ON BASE ALREADY), why didn't THEY take him out?


Speaking of frustrating to those that are "trained". . . .up until 2004, as a LEO traveling across country I would have to chose whether I would carry illegally or lock the gun up in the car somewhere. . . .especially traveling across states like Illinois that at the time seemed like they actually looked for LEO's since they arrested so many of them for carrying in their state.  In 2004 President Bush signed into law a bill that "fixed" that. . . . .sort of.  It allows us (i.e. LEO's) to carry across state lines but not onto Federal Property.  Then again, that is exactly what it is. . . .FEDERAL PROPERTY.  As the caretaker of the property, the owner/operator of that property gets to decide what happens on that property. . . .do they not?  If I want to go to a concert but the concert venue does not want concealed weapons on the property, by anyone. . . .they have the right to refuse me service unless I comply with their rules for THEIR property and there is not thing 1 I can do about it.  So, what is the difference?


I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them.

John Bernard Books, from "The Shootist"

-44 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

msp1672 says ...



 


As for carrying on a base, it is actually not a law enforcement issue. . . .it is a base commander issue.  Speaking of which. . . .you mentioned that it took LEO's 5 minutes to get there????  Where were the MP's?  They DO carry weapons yet it took local LEO's to confront and bring down Hassan.  The MP's are closer (i.e. ON BASE ALREADY), why didn't THEY take him out?


 



MSP, Like a LOT of Military bases these days, Ft. Hood No longer has MP's that do their Law Enforcement on Base. It is done by Civlian LEO's. A lot of the MPO's are overseas doing Infantry related Jobs, and working in the Federal and Local Military Jails and prisons. The reason it takes 5 minutes to get there (whether that is true or not, I don't know) is because Ft. Hood is the biggest Military Post in the US. It's quite a bit bigger than some towns. It could quite easily take way more than 5 minuted to get an adequate LE Response at any given location, at any given time.


The Individual that Brought down the Shooter was a Post Police Officer, meaning one of the Police Officers I mentioned that are hired to work on the base. There was NO local (Outside of Post) LE response at the time of the shooting.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

The Provost Marshals Office are responsible for oversight of MP's and DA Police and Most DA Police are Guard or Reserve members of the military not all. The MP's and DA Police are the ones responsible for allowing or Denying entry on base with weapons. They report to the PM's office. The Post Commander can not over ride the PM as carrying weapons on post is DOD wide not limited to just what ever base decides to allow or not to allow. Only a 4 Star or Higher can change that Policy. i don't agree with using MP's for grunt work we have 3 different MOS's for MP are 31B(Law Enforcement) 31E(Corrections) and 31D(CID) as I have read in army times they are slowly adding MP's to garrison duty. as alot of bases are becoming joint and are to big to just use DA Police. also we need to get soldiers screened for PTSD and monitor their e-mails more than ever. and to allow SOME soldiers to Carry at all times besides MP's and CID and DA Police.

Punksmileybest50_max50

6 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Great discussion...glad it was brought up.


I guess I still argue allowing Soldiers with CHL to carry on post like they do off post.  Hell, we are allowed to carry in Austin at the State Capitol! Some would argue the difference between a good military leader and a politician...but I submit that they are both at the same level when it comes to running our towns/counties/states/ and country.


I used  "5 minutes" in my previous post because I know the LE response was not as fast as I thought it would have been/could have been. I don't know how long it actually took them to respond.  But that brings up another good point.  The MP's/Fed LEO's that responded "grouped" in a parking lot nearby...created hasty battle plans...and then went into the area where the gun fire was coming from.  Perhaps...if the LEO's had just gone in immediately, they would have saved a couple more lives.  I don't know and I'm not trying to knock the police that responded that day.  I know each and every one of them will say they did the best they could...and I believe that.  I just feel that a military post with highly trained people is about the last place a MASCAL should happen at...and this one happened at the largest military installation in the continental US. In the Army, we always were told; "train as you fight".  Well...then don't let every Soldier carry a loaded weapon but have every Soldier on duty carry a weapon without rounds in it. That in itself would (could is a better term) cause the Soldiers to stay at a semi higher level of readiness.  Sitting in that AC'ed trailer that day, getting shot was the absolute last thing on their mind.  I guess I just want something that will make this less likely to happen again and if it does...I want the Soldiers to be more able to handle the situation quickly instead of standing there with no protection at all - waiting to be hit. My eyes still tear up when I think about how helpless they must have felt.....


The MP station is about 5 BIG blocks away from the location of the shooting. Fort Hood does still have MP's doing street duty but we have many more what are called "black suits" or Federal LE that are hired to work on post, and it was a Fed LEO that took down the shooter.

Punksmileybest50_max50

6 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



The Provost Marshals Office are responsible for oversight of MP's and DA Police and Most DA Police are Guard or Reserve members of the military not all. The MP's and DA Police are the ones responsible for allowing or Denying entry on base with weapons. They report to the PM's office. The Post Commander can not over ride the PM as carrying weapons on post is DOD wide not limited to just what ever base decides to allow or not to allow. Only a 4 Star or Higher can change that Policy. i don't agree with using MP's for grunt work we have 3 different MOS's for MP are 31B(Law Enforcement) 31E(Corrections) and 31D(CID) as I have read in army times they are slowly adding MP's to garrison duty. as alot of bases are becoming joint and are to big to just use DA Police. also we need to get soldiers screened for PTSD and monitor their e-mails more than ever. and to allow SOME soldiers to Carry at all times besides MP's and CID and DA Police.



I agree....and I don't think it's taking too great a risk to have additional Soldiers, while on duty, carrying as a Force Protection measure.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Once OEF and OIF are over we will have even more man power. I don't understand why we can't use national guard and reserves for force protection as most states are at 120% strenght. if you put soldiers on ADSW or AGR for force protection you will free up AD man power. problem from that comes to money as we keep bailing out banks and insurance companies for retarted mistakes and the admin cutting pay rasies for the military. but that is a whole different can of worms. I think they should have rules in place to allow 31B 11B 31E and 31D are just of the few mos I think should be allowed to carry off duty on post.

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I really believe the response time is irrelevant in this discussion.  An active shooter event unfolds rapidly.  Police, whether Civilian, MP/MAA, DOD, Sherrif or whatever agency are not omnipresent.  It took agencies at Columbine, VT, NIU, and a host of other events several minutes to arrive on scene as well.  Why should, or would there be a different set of response parameters for the MP's that any other agency? I believe that the Officers involved responded as quickly as possible, unfortunately as in any incident where innocent personnel get injured or killed, it is never fast enough.  I wish we were omnipresent and could prevent this sort of thing. 


Again, I don't think there should be concealed carry allowed on any installation.  The arguement that soldiers are trained is a fair one, however, CCW permits have not prevented shootings in other venues.  How many murders are there where the "bad guy" remains at large even though there are CCW laws in place?  Why would a military installation be any different? There are many trained military veterans walking the streets, shopping, teaching, etc so the arguement could be the same for anywhere in the US.  Yet, as I said, the incidents still happen and the casualties continue to be high.


Could allowing Soldiers to carry have saved lives? Sure.  Could it have added to the chaos? Yes.  Just as in all areas in the country crime and hostile persons plague us.  How do we stop it? We don't. We do our best to ensure the public is safe using all the resources we can. We fight to get laws changed to deter would be criminals from engaging in criminal acts, and we stay aware of our surroundings and focused on our tasks.


As for contract security at installations I agree there is no place for them. Not because they are inept, but because there is no control.  Presidential order has them out by FY 2012. As for DoD Police...there is another forum that addresses this issue, and yes, my opinion is they are needed. As for the UCMJ dealing harsher punishment than local LE...that idea is laughable.


PL Mentoring Team Member

-67 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

No, concealed carry on military installations is a no go. Anyone familiar with military culture of life on an installation should disagree with that idea. Soldiers can be seriously immature, its the nature of working in such a controlled and disciplined environment under extreme stress....when Soldiers are off duty, they play HARD.


I like the idea of civilian police forces on military posts. Thats how it should be. Military Police (which I am) are not infantry, infantry is a totally different ballgame trained purely for force on force while military police are trained to do several missions. However, an MP is a SOLDIER first and foremost...trained for war. Its his duty to be ready to deploy. Civilian police officers dont.


And yes, a well trained police officer can take on a military trooper, I see it every day. Especially since many a police officer has been a military trooper.

00_aa_max50

64 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Unless I missed something why not have MP's armed around the base?  I read the whole discussion here and that just seems like the logical answer.  I do have a LTCF here in PA, and I would NEVER think of carrying my firearm on a military base PERIOD.  First off its against the law for someone with a LTCF, CCW, to carry on federal property.  I think they should stop having military contractors provide security at these bases. 

-67 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Department of the Army Police are not private contractors, they are actual police officers with jurisdiction on federal installations. Military Police IN MY OPINION should be concentrating on the field.....we will be in active combat for here on out, just like the Israelis have been for decades. People really dont seem to understand the role of MPs in the GWOT era.....and they really show it on this forum

-44 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Department of the Army Police are not private contractors, they are actual police officers with jurisdiction on federal installations. Military Police IN MY OPINION should be concentrating on the field.....we will be in active combat for here on out, just like the Israelis have been for decades. People really dont seem to understand the role of MPs in the GWOT era.....and they really show it on this forum



BUMP! That's mainly because a lot of the people don't realize what MP's do these days. They hear the word "police" and they stick the civilian term to it. It used to be that way, but no longer.  Some of us who have been associated with the Modern military are more up to date on how things go now.

Thi_seal_max50

1751 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

BSL1123 says ...



PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Department of the Army Police are not private contractors, they are actual police officers with jurisdiction on federal installations. Military Police IN MY OPINION should be concentrating on the field.....we will be in active combat for here on out, just like the Israelis have been for decades. People really dont seem to understand the role of MPs in the GWOT era.....and they really show it on this forum



BUMP! That's mainly because a lot of the people don't realize what MP's do these days. They hear the word "police" and they stick the civilian term to it. It used to be that way, but no longer.  Some of us who have been associated with the Modern military are more up to date on how things go now.



BUMP to both of you! I spent 5 years AD in the Army as a MP. I have no problem with DoD police taking over the LE activities on post. That said I'll reply to the question at hand. IMHO I don't the anyone should be packing on post but on-duty LE. Anytime I visit NAS Pensacola I make sure to secure my weapon before going aboard. 


PL Mentoring Team Member

My day begins when yours ends.

-67 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Now here is where I have a differing opinion, I think police officers SHOULD be allowed to wear concealed on post...because they are police officers and all that goes with it from the training to the liability involved. CHL and police officers....big difference.


And yes, thats what I think exactly....people see "military police" and they think of a city police officer patrolling. I rarely see that in the Army anyway, I just got back from 2 weeks training on a joint active/reserve/guard Army post and it was patrolled by Fort Sam Houston Police Officers..one of which is an SSG in our MP Guard unit. I really think the Air Force has the best name for their MPs.....Security Forces...because thats really the role now, battlefield security.


 

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I was just on a Joint base and saw both MP's and 0083 series doing patrols and running radar. as more and more bases go joint you will see more and more mp's with 0083 and as the wars in iraq and afgan come to a end in the next year more and more mp's will be patroling the base. DA Police are more their for civilians than military. but as mp's come on and 0083 are still there they will be there for civilians and military.

Silver_warrior_max50

1470 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Now here is where I have a differing opinion, I think police officers SHOULD be allowed to wear concealed on post...because they are police officers and all that goes with it from the training to the liability involved. CHL and police officers....big difference.



Okay, how about LEO's carrying in an airport?  National Parks and Monuments?  Federal Buildings?  Capital Building?  While I'm not so sure about the National Parks bit, all of the rest are off limits to LEO's carrying.  If we should be allowed to carry on a military base, why not any of these other places?  No, I agree with your ealier post that:


". . . .No, concealed carry on military installations is a no go. Anyone familiar with military culture of life on an installation should disagree with that idea. Soldiers can be seriously immature, its the nature of working in such a controlled and disciplined environment under extreme stress....when Soldiers are off duty, they play HARD.


When you start making exceptions is when you start running into trouble.  Obviously, other than the working LEO, it is still a military base under federal law and they have the right to preclude anyone from carrying concealed, including off duty LEO's that have business on the base other than for LEO type of work.  Kind of like the courts here in Michigan, as long as you have a case where you were acting as a LEO, you can carry. . . .however, if you have business in court that you are a part of, no go.  I guess they are afraid you might shoot the judge if the case does not go your way.  Yes it may be very difficult to take the gun off. . . .but I would have to think that a military base is a whole lot safer than some of the more uppity places to live.  Anywhere you go you will have the abnormal incident (VERY RARE incident) but really. . . .has anything remotely resembling the thing with Hasan actually happened before and if so, does it happen on a regular basis?


I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them.

John Bernard Books, from "The Shootist"

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

No civilian LEO other than CID, NCIS, FBI, USMS, DEA, ATF should be allowed to carry on a military base. Unless that officer is in the national guard or reserves and even then they should check their weapons in at the PM's office or base armory. and not all soldiers are seriously immature.


Unless they are fresh from basic training and ait. I have seen very professional soldiers and I have seen immature soldiers. NO ONE should carry at airports unless they are Port Authority Police or Federal Air Marshals or soldiers on airport security duty. Anyone can carry in national parks as long as they comply with the states carrying law and have the proper permit if need be. Federal Buildings are a no go for anyone but secret service FBI, USMS, DEA, ATF, CID, NCIS or us capitol police. I know that in the state of NJ no one can carry inside a court room unless they have permission from the sheriff or a need to carry. Any one who knows military bases knows that when they drive onto the base there are signs that say no firearms allowed. they don't even keep ammo on a base it is kept off site in a secure building.

-67 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

msp1672 says ...



PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Now here is where I have a differing opinion, I think police officers SHOULD be allowed to wear concealed on post...because they are police officers and all that goes with it from the training to the liability involved. CHL and police officers....big difference.



Okay, how about LEO's carrying in an airport?  National Parks and Monuments?  Federal Buildings?  Capital Building?  While I'm not so sure about the National Parks bit, all of the rest are off limits to LEO's carrying.  If we should be allowed to carry on a military base, why not any of these other places?  No, I agree with your ealier post that:


". . . .No, concealed carry on military installations is a no go. Anyone familiar with military culture of life on an installation should disagree with that idea. Soldiers can be seriously immature, its the nature of working in such a controlled and disciplined environment under extreme stress....when Soldiers are off duty, they play HARD.


When you start making exceptions is when you start running into trouble.  Obviously, other than the working LEO, it is still a military base under federal law and they have the right to preclude anyone from carrying concealed, including off duty LEO's that have business on the base other than for LEO type of work.  Kind of like the courts here in Michigan, as long as you have a case where you were acting as a LEO, you can carry. . . .however, if you have business in court that you are a part of, no go.  I guess they are afraid you might shoot the judge if the case does not go your way.  Yes it may be very difficult to take the gun off. . . .but I would have to think that a military base is a whole lot safer than some of the more uppity places to live.  Anywhere you go you will have the abnormal incident (VERY RARE incident) but really. . . .has anything remotely resembling the thing with Hasan actually happened before and if so, does it happen on a regular basis?



Um...what? Ive carried in federal buildings, airports, military installations...etc etc etc. In fact Ive worn openly in all those places you mentioned except the capital building, neither in my state or nationally. Ive driven right through the front gates and into the battalion commanders office wearing my pistol on my belt. Ive also walked into an airport and picked up the fiance off the flight, picked up her bags from baggage, and back out to the car. I routinely walk into the federal building here in my city when I have needed to lias with federal agencies on joint efforts on particular warrant cases.


In all those cases....no one ever drew down on me and demanded I drop my openly carried weapon. Thats not how police officers interract with each other. As far as I am concerned, any cop whether state of federal office/agent can wear anywhere. Id never say anything to any cop from all 50 states and territories. thats silly.


 

Silver_warrior_max50

1470 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



msp1672 says ...



PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Now here is where I have a differing opinion, I think police officers SHOULD be allowed to wear concealed on post...because they are police officers and all that goes with it from the training to the liability involved. CHL and police officers....big difference.



Okay, how about LEO's carrying in an airport?  National Parks and Monuments?  Federal Buildings?  Capital Building?  While I'm not so sure about the National Parks bit, all of the rest are off limits to LEO's carrying.  If we should be allowed to carry on a military base, why not any of these other places?  No, I agree with your ealier post that:


". . . .No, concealed carry on military installations is a no go. Anyone familiar with military culture of life on an installation should disagree with that idea. Soldiers can be seriously immature, its the nature of working in such a controlled and disciplined environment under extreme stress....when Soldiers are off duty, they play HARD.


When you start making exceptions is when you start running into trouble.  Obviously, other than the working LEO, it is still a military base under federal law and they have the right to preclude anyone from carrying concealed, including off duty LEO's that have business on the base other than for LEO type of work.  Kind of like the courts here in Michigan, as long as you have a case where you were acting as a LEO, you can carry. . . .however, if you have business in court that you are a part of, no go.  I guess they are afraid you might shoot the judge if the case does not go your way.  Yes it may be very difficult to take the gun off. . . .but I would have to think that a military base is a whole lot safer than some of the more uppity places to live.  Anywhere you go you will have the abnormal incident (VERY RARE incident) but really. . . .has anything remotely resembling the thing with Hasan actually happened before and if so, does it happen on a regular basis?



Um...what? Ive carried in federal buildings, airports, military installations...etc etc etc. In fact Ive worn openly in all those places you mentioned except the capital building, neither in my state or nationally. Ive driven right through the front gates and into the battalion commanders office wearing my pistol on my belt. Ive also walked into an airport and picked up the fiance off the flight, picked up her bags from baggage, and back out to the car. I routinely walk into the federal building here in my city when I have needed to lias with federal agencies on joint efforts on particular warrant cases.


In all those cases....no one ever drew down on me and demanded I drop my openly carried weapon. Thats not how police officers interract with each other. As far as I am concerned, any cop whether state of federal office/agent can wear anywhere. Id never say anything to any cop from all 50 states and territories. thats silly.


 



Yes, I have worn onto airport property but you won't get into the "sanitized" area (i.e. that area reserved for boarding) to say goodbye at the gate.  As for federal places, try wearing and going into the St. Louis Arch museum or the arch itself.  Don't know that you would fair too well in D.C. museum's either.  Try the the National Capitol Building. . . .see how far you get there.


Yes, when you are working with an agency you have been "granted" special "privledges" that you would not otherwise have. . . .even as a LEO.  Otherwise, federal property is just that. . . .property that THEY get to pick and choose who does what on just as you do in your own home.  As for the police interaction. . . .you are not dealing with "regular" police officers at these sites.  You are dealing with people that are neither police officers with full police powers but aren't quite security officers either.  Seems that they are in a niche' of their own and while some that I have met have been somewhat laid back. . . .there are some that just seem to see things in a different light than everybody else.


I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them.

John Bernard Books, from "The Shootist"

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

The Only way you can carry into sterile areas of a airport are if you are on duty and have a letter from you police chief or capt stating why you are there and if you don't have that permission you are not getting past TSA and most likley will be on the ground with a M-4 pointed at you in flex cuffs. with capital building unless you are there for offical business you will not get past SS, uniformed or special agent. or the u.s. Capital police. And YES there are still military at all airports and train bus and subway stations in and around NYC, DC, and parts of NJ. as for National Parks ( Big Bend, Denali etc....) you can carry as long as you are in complanice with state carry laws. the Supreme Court already said that the 2nd amendment applies to National Forests and Parks like yellowstone. not saying anything like the st louis arch or the like. and as far as carrying on a military installation if I was on duty and saw anyone other than MP, DA Police or other federal law enforcement officer carrying they would be detaineed and processed for charges. YOU CAN NOT CARRY ON A MILITARY BASE PERIOD.... Unless you are going to and from the ranges. or some type of training. when I was at ft dix for 11B MOSQ training I had to turn my M-4 in at the end of the day no questions when I was there for AT I had to turn my weapon in at the end of the day. I couldn't carry when I was leaving for Iraq on ft dix. so as far as anyone carrying on a military base is nonsense they would be detained or would have to surrender their weapon at the pm's office.

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I'm not sure how things will play out, but I would suspect if S 1132 passes Police carrying on military installations will be allowed.  Most of the DoD Police won't mess with any Police Officer who is carrying, either retired or active, provided they meet the requirements of 18 USC 926.  If an officer is carrying on an installation they will most likely be explained the regulations and escorted to the armory to turn in their weapon.  If on duty, come as they are unimpeeded.  The only reason DoD police would even do that is for their own career survival...its a MUST thing, not a WANT thing. 


PL Mentoring Team Member

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 


Army Regulation AR 190-14


 


Implements applicable portions of Department of Defense Directive 5210.56.


o Clearly establishes minimum qualification requirements for military police


and Department of the Army law enforcement and security personnel (para 2-3).


o Expands authorization documentation options for authorizing officials (para


2-4).


o Limits and controls the carrying of firearms by Department of the Army


military and civilian personnel (para 2-6).


o Prohibits the carrying of non-Government owned or issued weapons or


ammunition (para 2-6).


o Prohibits carrying of firearms by persons taking prescription drugs or other


medication that may cause drowsiness or impair reaction or judgment (para 2-


7).


o Prohibits consumption of alcohol within 8 hours of carrying firearm or flying


in aircraft (paras 2-7 and 4-3).


o Requires the use of deadly force with firearms be applied equally to personnel


using a weapon or equipment which, when properly employed in their intended


application, would exert deadly force (para 3-2).


S 1132 is to ammend HR-218 will not give anyone the right to carry on a military installation it will allow federal police officers and DOD Police can carry off duty. thats all it means.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 


Army Regulation AR 190-14


 


Implements applicable portions of Department of Defense Directive 5210.56.


o Clearly establishes minimum qualification requirements for military police


and Department of the Army law enforcement and security personnel (para 2-3).


o Expands authorization documentation options for authorizing officials (para


2-4).


o Limits and controls the carrying of firearms by Department of the Army


military and civilian personnel (para 2-6).


o Prohibits the carrying of non-Government owned or issued weapons or


ammunition (para 2-6).


o Prohibits carrying of firearms by persons taking prescription drugs or other


medication that may cause drowsiness or impair reaction or judgment (para 2-


7).


o Prohibits consumption of alcohol within 8 hours of carrying firearm or flying


in aircraft (paras 2-7 and 4-3).


o Requires the use of deadly force with firearms be applied equally to personnel


using a weapon or equipment which, when properly employed in their intended


application, would exert deadly force (para 3-2).


S 1132 is to ammend HR-218 will not give anyone the right to carry on a military installation it will allow federal police officers and DOD Police can carry off duty. thats all it means.

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

I never knew the AR. Thanks for posting it. OPNAV has a similar one.


 All I'm saying with this is there could be a shift in the mentality of "big Army and Navy" to ammend the policy adding an exception for LE.  I feel if an LE comes on any military post they should be extended the same courtesies that DoD officers would want extended to them. 


Outside of LE I still don't think CCW should be allowed on Military installations.


 


PL Mentoring Team Member

-67 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

tjlglpd02 says ...



I never knew the AR. Thanks for posting it. OPNAV has a similar one.


 All I'm saying with this is there could be a shift in the mentality of "big Army and Navy" to ammend the policy adding an exception for LE.  I feel if an LE comes on any military post they should be extended the same courtesies that DoD officers would want extended to them. 


Outside of LE I still don't think CCW should be allowed on Military installations.


 



Well said and total agreement on professional courtesy. I get my haircuts on post all the time because I prefer the high and tight, and go on post in uniform, duty rig, with my sidearm...never a problem with either the Air Force Security Forces or the DoD cops. And I agree, CCW on post? Nossir. LE carry? Of course.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



tjlglpd02 says ...



I never knew the AR. Thanks for posting it. OPNAV has a similar one.


 All I'm saying with this is there could be a shift in the mentality of "big Army and Navy" to ammend the policy adding an exception for LE.  I feel if an LE comes on any military post they should be extended the same courtesies that DoD officers would want extended to them. 


Outside of LE I still don't think CCW should be allowed on Military installations.


 



Well said and total agreement on professional courtesy. I get my haircuts on post all the time because I prefer the high and tight, and go on post in uniform, duty rig, with my sidearm...never a problem with either the Air Force Security Forces or the DoD cops. And I agree, CCW on post? Nossir. LE carry? Of course.



You all are welcome on the AR the other one is AR 190-11 which is for arms ammo and explosives. some bases are more easier with police bringing weapons on base others are not so much. depends on the base and what policy's are in effect at the time. I guess it is up to the PM and the CO of the base. maybe you had your military id with you. cause civilians are not allowed on base unless they are open to the public for an event like fireworks or parade or open house.

Bronzestarribbon_max50

2043 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 4 years ago

 

Absolutely not.  The military is a whole different world and is policed by its own highly motivated and extremely dedicated group of law enforcement officers.  They are the only ones that should carry on a military installation no matter how small or large.  Different set of rules and situations that civilians, even us retired MP's now civilians and LEO need to respect.  We don't need to impose our training habits and off post methods on military soil.


Some things are better left to the military.  Many laws paralell, but there is a distinction and some twists to the can do's that they can do and we as Civilian LEO can not without PC and or a warrant.  For instance Search a Seizure, Suspicion vs PC.  If an area is posted that personnel are prone to search upon entry,  then they can and will do it.