Rick; you are missing my point. I understand LEOs can be armed on federal property; the laws cover that.
Omega; I was armed as part of a duty RFF on many occasions. I am calling BS on someone saying they were always armed and only faced a command sanctioned three days in in the brig if they were caught.
Tony
This should surprise nobody. What I find rather sinister is that a good many of his "supporters" would find it more satisfying and useful if he really was in that particular jam.Originally Posted by DCP
Just not making any special effort ought to do it. You might want to ignore falsified news stories while you are about it.
As to the BS call, I could care less. Different branches, bases, and units on those bases do things differently. We were a small, tightly knit unit, and there were a lot of things we did different from most, and a lot of regs were basically ignored. This was a transition period shortly after 9-11 and a lot of things were in the developmental stages. My service period was 00-05, as it says in my signature line. I will not give unit designations due to this may create fallout for people other than me, and I will not put other people's necks on the line. We were armed, with unofficial permission ( CO approved on a personal level and carried along with us, but the official policy was that we had been told that it was against regs for us to carry). All I will give you as to specifics on my unit is this: Does SPMAGTF mean anything to you?
I passed my last psych eval, how bout you?
Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
I don't think anyone here, me included, wants anything like this to happen to this guy. No good can come from having any charges brought against him, none! I for one am not surprised something like this surfaced, and am not at all surprised at the backtracking the PTB are doing. Many of the quotes, even in their backtracking leave the possibility open to charging him.
I don't feel this is a made up story, there were a few outlets that picked this up, even though it all seems to originate from Allen West's site; I am not ready to throw the BS flag quite yet on this story, while most everyone can agree that what he did was a good thing; having a personal weapon is against regs and I have no problem believing some bureaucrat wanting to charge him.
"Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it."
~Pericles~
"There exists the possibility that the commander saw a hairy Arab, possibly glimpsed a gun for which the man could have had a permit, and isn't obliged to conceal in Tennessee, and started shooting."
Well this guy was obviously not some open carry commando testing the law by sporting a hand carried rifle at McDonalds while his friends post the video on youtube.
Open carry may be a right, but if you walk up on someone at the wrong time or place with a gun in your hand you might very well find yourself full of little leaky holes. Common sense says that theres a time and place for any type of behavior, and regardless of intent theres far too much street crime, mass killings and home invasions these days for people to walk around with a gun in their hand with no expectation that they might put someone in fear for their safety or the safety of the family and that person may shoot first and ask questions later.
If carrying a handgun keep it in a holster whether visible or not, if carrying a rifle invest in a gun sleeve or case.
If you walk into someones place of business with a gun in your hand don't go crying foul if they pump a few slugs into you just to be on the safe side.
As noted any non LEO civilian walking onto military property carrying a weapon in their hands has already broken the law.
From the looks of things Alan West got a text message from someone who did not have his facts straight, then the story spread due to many people quoting West's second or third hand information.
Whenever there are multiple shooters, good guys as well as bad guys, involved they will test all weapons involved to be sure just who shot who. Friendly fire incidents are always a possibility.
I knew you would know, Love Life.I was hoping Anthony B would look it up though and learn a bit about how these units operate and why, and how they were/are shaped by post-9/11 events. These are NOT your standard units that do things by the book just because some pencil pusher or desk jockey said so. I was in when 9/11 happened, and we took what we thought best from our previous training, what we thought other branches/units did better, and threw away anything we thought was not to our benefit in this war that the terrorists started but we were going to finish. We were guided by our Oaths and our conscience, and little else because the policies that had gotten us to that point had obviously failed (9/11 happened) and we didn't have the experience to draw on at that time that our military has now almost 15 years later. We made a lot of mistakes, learned a lot of lessons, and inflicted a lot of damage on the enemy, but we were NOT as well polished as the current MARSOC units that were developed from our teams. I don't know how things are in the units now since I have been out of the game for 10 years now, but back then, our focus was on combat efficiency, and little concern was given to what rule said what--and that was true for our entire command.
Last edited by Lonegun1894; 08-04-2015 at 04:04 AM.
I passed my last psych eval, how bout you?
Or the navy backed after after this hit the internet and went viral... a LOT of people were pressuring their congress critters to do something to stop it.
By all news accounts I have read, the Navy has repeatedly stated they are looking into the incident and no one has been charged yet - never have they stated the Lt. Commander would not be charged or reprimanded. Nothing good will come of this for this particular Warrior. These are strange times we are currently living in.
A lot of us who were in SF carried most all the time too. Wasn't hard to carry concealed with the old jungle fatigues and especially when loose fitting BDU and DCUs came in. Had company and even battalion commanders who also carried. It was the nature of our business regardless of the stateside regs made by base commanders and DOD officials. Many LEOs also continued to carry concealed in the NG and USAR. Biggest problem was avoiding "health & welfare" checks at the gates. Most of us had the weapons we carried registered on post anyways so a quick unload and lock in a pistol case before hitting the gate/inspection point was easy enough.
Larry Gibson
Over use of force, the charge did not stick to go to trail, it still did to much damage to the service members career. even though they was fighting for there life at the time, Mainly it did not go over wells with the locals, It was much more than one big gun
I've crewed the M2 50 quite a bit and I never heard if such a thing.
This isba myth that continues to roll on. The Geneva Convention does not ban the 50cal. Its only mention of ammunition is against hp or explosive rounds on human targets.
I Am Descended From Men Who Would Not Be Ruled
Fiat Justitia, Ruat Caelum
Even the above is partially correct. It doesn't say anything against HP ammo, but rather expanding ammo designed to inflict unnecessary suffering. If HP ammo was unlawful, then our snipers wouldn't be allowed to use HPBT match rounds. But this ammo has been approved because they said that while it is HP, it is NOT expanding, and the HP aids in accuracy. I guess this is the govts way of saying that not all HPs are the same.
“The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.” Declaration (IV,3) concerning Expanding Bullets. The Hague, 29 July 1899.
I passed my last psych eval, how bout you?
It wouldn't let me edit:
I meant to add that the description can be taken to include HP, SP, and even jacketed where the nose is fully covered but the base is exposed, but all that aside, it is HOW the bullet is intended to function on/after impact and not so much what it looks like. The whole letter of the law vs the intent of the law thing, if that makes sense.
I passed my last psych eval, how bout you?
this is a disgrace, a slap in the face
since when has it been a crime to defend yourself and fellow soldiers?
is that not what you are trained to do?
I know orders are orders and rules are rules but use your head,if possible..
Hit em'hard
hit em'often
People would be amazed at the amount of people who pack heat on gubmint installations.
When this story initially appeared, it came from Allen West.
He said that Ltcdr. White (pr someone representing him) asked West if White 'could reach out to him' ... and West said yes.
There had to be something said (by somebody) that led White to think he might need some high-profile help.
Even if no charges have been filed as of this time, it is conceivable that White was told that on the matter of him being charged the question was one of 'when', not 'if'.
Now, the Navy has two bones to pick with White.
He had an unauthorized weapon in his possession ... and he got everybody mad at the Navy.
The Navy doesn't like for people to make waves.
Last edited by montana_charlie; 08-04-2015 at 06:20 PM.
Retired...TWICE. Now just raisin' cows and livin' on borrowed time.
No it is not "against the Geneva Convention" (actually it would be the Hague Accords) nor has it ever been "illegal" as such to use the 50 caliber against personnel. However, there have been "rules of engagement" in Iraq and Afghanistan regarding the use of heavy weapons. The use of other than personal weapons, unless authorized at a certain level (usually battalion or higher), by combat troops on patrol for self defense was prohibited in some area's of Iraq and in Afghanistan. The reason was we were paying too much for the damage caused from the use of such weapons; grenade launchers and crew served GPMGs including the M2. BTW; the use of hand grenades, mortars, heavy guns on armored vehicles and artillery were also severely restricted. The more and more we restricted our military in "presence patrols" and "peace keeping" the more and more the enemy ceased to fear us and the more our own Soldiers, Marines, Airmen and civilians were killed, maimed and wounded........for absolutely nothing once again just as in Viet Nam, will we never learn?
Larry Gibson
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
Reply With Quote