Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: MechAg94 on January 04, 2020, 08:51:47 AM
-
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/03/usmc-firearm-policy-updated-to-allow-concealed-carry-for-self-defense/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
USMC Firearm Policy Updated to Allow Concealed Carry for Self-Defense
A USMC memo on concealed carry changes that by authorizing “active Marine Corps Law Enforcement (LE) professionals who possess valid Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA) 18 U.S.C. §926B credentials to carry concealed privately owned firearms (POF) aboard Marine Corps property in the United States and U.S. territories for personal protection not in the performance of official duties.”
This seems like it is full of exceptions to the point of being useless, but I guess it is a step in the right direction.
-
Wasn't allowing the carrying of personal firearms on base the norm until Clinton?
-
Wasn't allowing the carrying of personal firearms on base the norm until Clinton?
Hah, no. Military has always wanted you to have guns only when they want to give them to you.
-
A USMC memo on concealed carry changes that by authorizing “active Marine Corps Law Enforcement (LE) professionals who possess valid Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA) 18 U.S.C. §926B credentials to carry concealed privately owned firearms (POF) aboard Marine Corps property in the United States and U.S. territories for personal protection not in the performance of official duties.”
Yipee Ay Oh Kaiyay.
And just how many U.S. Marines hold valid Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA) 18 U.S.C. §926B credentials? This is a nothing burger. The U.S. military needs to allow our soldiers -- ALL of them -- to carry for self defense.
Although the USMC memo sets limitations as to where off-duty Marine LE professionals can carry for self-defense, this policy is a clear step forward in the effort to eliminate the soft-target attraction of military installations.
I disagree. If it's a step at all, it's a very tiny baby step. Since the article used the Pearl Harbor incident as an example, let's ask -- how many of the personnel present in the vicinity of the shooting were properly LEOSA-credentialed USMC law enforcement personnel who would be covered by this new initiative?
-
I disagree. If it's a step at all, it's a very tiny baby step. Since the article used the Pearl Harbor incident as an example, let's ask -- how many of the personnel present in the vicinity of the shooting were properly LEOSA-credentialed USMC law enforcement personnel who would be covered by this new initiative?
That last is what I was curious about. Is this some new certification? Or something that exists now? Does that mean only Military Police can carry off duty?
-
That last is what I was curious about. Is this some new certification? Or something that exists now? Does that mean only Military Police can carry off duty?
I don't think it's all that new, but it is not something your typical grunt would have. MPs probably have it but I don't know. A few who were cops or deputies in civilian life might have it by accident, but wouldn't they mostly be National Guard or reserves?
It's mostly a nothingburger.
-
This is a very small step, indeed. But it is in the right direction. The local Base here has a sign declaring LEOSA is not valid. NO personal firearms are allowed by anyone unless registered w/ Post. And then under very limited circumstances. This disarms anyone who works there or even shops the PX, on their way to and home again, not being able to even lock up a handgun in your vehicle.
We didn't get to our current state of concealed carry in one ruling but in small steps, this is a small step.
-
Every base seems to be different and it is based on the whims of the current base CO. Here at Fairchild LEOSA is good to allow you to carry concealed on base. No LEOSA and you have to lock up your gun in a box, separate from the ammo while on base. That is a big step from banning all privately owned firearms just a few years ago. Now I can start or stop my day with a visit to the AFB without having to leave my gun at home.
On the other end of the spectrum you have Offutt AFB (https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/12/30/air-force-base-announces-new-restrictions-personal-weapons.html) that just in the last few days changed their policy to ban nearly all privately owned firearms. It seems the new CO may not be a big fan of privately owned guns on his base.
bob
-
That last is what I was curious about. Is this some new certification? Or something that exists now? Does that mean only Military Police can carry off duty?
It sounds to me like military police, but are all MPs LEOSA certified (whatever that means)? Here's what the actual law says the LEOSA act considers to be a qualified law enforcement officer:
(c) As used in this section, the term “qualified law enforcement officer” means an employee of a governmental agency who—
(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice);
(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency which could result in suspension or loss of police powers;
(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;
(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
-
Article 7(b) UCMJ is actually pretty wide.
Any person authorized under regulations governing the armed forces to apprehend persons subject to this chapter or to trial thereunder may do so upon reasonable belief that an offense has been committed and that the person apprehended committed it.
So yeah, probably most all MP's. There may be some small groups somewhere that don't meet this, but I doubt it. Scout would have known for sure.
-
Whew! I'm so relieved that it's limited to law enforcement. Can you imagine letting just any old Marine have a gun?!
-
Whew! I'm so relieved that it's limited to law enforcement. Can you imagine letting just any old Marine have a gun?!
Strip clubs in Oceanside would get a lot more frisky.