Lawmakers push for rules on troops’ guns

| December 12, 2012 | 20 Comments

We talked about this yesterday when two retired generals supported legislation that allowed commanders to ask their troops about guns, now there’s a bipartisan group of legislators in Congress pushing to add the language to the current Defense Bill. If you think there’s nothing nefarious about their intentions, consider who is sponsoring the bill – Hank (Guam is going to tip over from all of the Marines) Johnson and John (Halp us Jon Cary) Kerry, they’ve sent a letter to leadership of the Senate and House Armed Services committees asking for the language to be added to the Defense Bill;

“This is not an attempt to limit gun rights or an individual’s ability to own a firearm,” said Rep. Johnson. “Prohibiting commanders and mental health professionals from helping soldiers defies common sense and dangerously interferes with our obligation to ensure the health, welfare, morale and well-being of the troops. Military suicide is a complex problem that demands a range of actions to address it. This common sense provision adds another tool to help prevent tragic deaths.”

From the Stars & Stripes;

…mental health advocates have complained that the language has left them confused on how to discuss gun safety with troops struggling with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder or other mental illnesses.

Johnson’s staff said the new language would clarify that commanders and counselors can have those conversations with at-risk troops and suggest – but not mandate – those individuals use gun locks or give up their private weapons.

Yeah, that’s all bullshit. I’ll tell you why this is personal for me. I went to buy a gun one time when I was stationed in Georgia. In those days, the sheriff would check with a soldier’s commander before he’d approve the sale. My commander told him I shouldn’t have a gun…for no reason. I had no history of domestic violence or any other kind of violence. No arrests, no bad counseling statements, no problems on or off-post. But, the commander didn’t think I should own a gun – despite the fact that I was an infantryman and carried a weapon everyday. He changed his mind after I agreed to get a mental hygiene exam and the mental hygiene dweeb certified me as sane. He was the same idiot who tried to make me stand guard mount while my wife was in labor.

Like I said yesterday, if everyone is so worried about how to talk to troops about guns and staying within the limits of this law, all they have to do is issue a proviso every week with their safety briefings – outline what a soldier can do to secure their weapons. Tell them to get safety locks, gun safes, whatever. They tell them to not drink and drive without asking who in the unit drinks and who in the unit drives.

Counselors have more handouts than anyone in the military, why can’t they hand out a checklist for securing firearms to their clients without having to ask them if they own firearms?

From the Johnson/Kerry letter;

We so often hear that we must listen to military commanders “on the ground” and that those in command know what’s best for our troops. So let’s listen to what they are saying and protect our men and women in uniform from the deadly threat of suicide.

Yeah, GFY, assholes. Listen to the commanders when the issue is gun control, but not when they’re talking about fighting a war. Hypocrites. Let’s see the letter and who it comes from.

Like I said yesterday, less than half of suicides in the military are committed by using guns and less than half of those are committed with privately owned weapons – so you have to ask yourself, why are Johnson and Kerry and Big Army focusing on the least likely way the troops are committing suicide? Is it just because they can say that they’re doing something when they’re really doing the least they could do? Is it because they don’t want to give soldiers and Marines the treatment they deserve instead?

Category: Congress sucks

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (20)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    I used to live in a state in which doctors (regular MDs) were required BY LAW to inquire about guns in one’s home. The first time that happened to me, I was stunned and naturally asked why the question. The MD informed me it was the law. So, I did what almost anyone would do: I lied through my teeth. The difference is that I could not be prosecuted for keeping the truth from Dr. Gestapo but our troops can be for failing to tell the truth to their superiors. This sucks.

  2. Cajun says:

    In garrison, the “commanders on the ground” are just executing policy from higher. Saw the writing on that wall on the way out. BG Hildner, the 13th ESC GC at the time, attended our BDE Change of Command, his in-brief was pretty much a run-down of Big Army’s “back to basic” initiatives. Along the way, he stated repeatedly that “personally owned weapons” were a threat to Soldiers. I thought at the time, I’m so glad I’m leaving active duty.

  3. B Woodman says:

    Another nail in the coffin of the volunteer military (I almost said VOLAR) for thinking youth who may have been taught by their parents/elders to treasure their freedoms.
    Another straw on the camel’s back to add to the DADT, lets-not-win ROE’s, drawdown, too frequent rotations, and other silly stuff.

  4. Adirondack Patriot says:

    Tell you what, General. Given that Democrat Congressmen Jesse Jackson Jr., Patrick Kennedy, David Wu, and Dale Kildee were all mentally ill while in Congress, I propose that we should first find out how many Congressmen personally own weapons.

    You want more reasons? Sheila Jackson Lee. Alan Grayson. James Traficante. Dennis Kucinich.

    You first, Congressman. You first.

  5. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    Hey AP. Did you see the latest. Congresscritter Menendez of NJ had an illegal immigrant sex offender as an intern. Bwahahahahahahaha.

  6. Ex-PH2 says:

    Privately owned weapons are harder to control than government issued stuff, especially if your concern is less about what the troops might do to themselves than it is about what they might do to you.

  7. While the retards are making up more useless laws, can they pass one that requires military leaders to make sure they get the troops stuff they need…like AMMO! We rolled from Baghdad to Fallujah in Dec 04 with 30 5.56 MM rounds and 5 9MM rounds for my M9. Nobody knew we were in a fucking war.

  8. FatCircles0311 says:

    This is just the Libtards doing exactly what they said they’d do before election and that is to punish the 1%. They don’t trust the military and any excuse they can use to continue to limit the rights of people they hate they’ll do it. Make no mistake most of those “I support the troops” people are absolutely phony, they absolutely despise you, and your values. They’ve lost that culture war regarding whether they can get away with being honest about their feelings in public due to it showing during Vietnam so they simply use a mask now. It’s nonsense like this however that shows their true intentions and you better fricken believe they’ve infiltrated our military as well to push it get it through with a sense of legitimacy.

  9. J.M. says:

    #8 nailed it.

  10. Ben says:

    Knowing how the military handles everything, micromanaging soldiers’ lives…this can’t be good. I can see where this leads.

    PTSD and military suicides are a convenient excuse to do what they’ve wanted to do anyway–take away the guns.

    You can usually tell what a liberal is up to because he will preface his plan by telling you that he is not planning on doing exactly what he is doing. “This is not an attempt to limit gun rights or an individual’s ability to own a firearm.” Yes, it is. He had to attach that caveat because he knows that’s what it looks like. If a liberal tells you “I’m not trying to do ‘x’,” that means he’s trying to do x.

  11. fm2176 says:

    My units used to have a cycle where every two or three years we’d be asked to write down our firearms, including their serial numbers. I recall being asked at least once as a Joe at Campbell and being given a sheet for my Soldiers’ information at McNair on a couple of occasions. Every time my guns (and my Soldiers’ guns) had either been sold or were out of state.

    An ALARACT came out a year or two ago that prohibits commanders from asking about firearms with only a few limited exceptions. If that policy is reversed I too will simply be forced to lie again.

  12. Ex-PH2 says:

    @4 — This is one of my personal favorites in the news right now:

    Donne Trotter, a state senator who is lobbying to get Jesse Jackson Jr’s US Senate seat, was arrested for trying to bring a handgun and a loaded magazine onto a passenger plane.

    http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/anti-gun-state-senator-jailed-for-trying-to-board-a-plane-with-a-gun/question-3375155/

    Here’s the local report: http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-state-senator-due-back-in-court-for-ohare-gun-case-20121212,0,619441.story

    Please note, Trotter had not previously disclosed his relationship to the security firm he said he was moonlighting for on the income forms he’s required to fill out every year, and he is professed to be anti-2nd Amendment.

    Here’s a report from the Sun-Times columnist Laura Washington, who you will note is African-American:

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/washington/16871470-452/donne-trotters-gun-is-worse-than-his-stupidity.html

    I become more and more suspicious of anyone who actually WANTS to run for office. I frequently wonder exactly what it is they really want, and it’s always — ALWAYS — about having power over others.

  13. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    The great goal, of course, is to ban private ownership and possesssion of firearms. That requires a Supreme Court to rule such a prohibition to be constitutional. In the mean time, there are numerous objectives to be met, both in preparation for that day and to reduce gun ownership, as an end in itself, as we move towards that ultimate goal. The re-education of the populace regarding guns continues in full mode. Schools teach kids that guns kill and that the second amendment was written for a purpose long passed. The media consistently features gun-related tragedies and overlooks those saved from harm because the would-be victim or a helpful stranger had a gun. As we saw recently, even NFL football is now a forum for the anti-gun nuts. Still, the re-education of America isn’t going too well. The left succeeded in voluntarily disarming its own but the other side refuses to get in line. Thus, the other objectives, such as making permits all but impossible to obtain, restricting ammo and certain types of guns from private ownership, amassing databases of thoroughly identifed owners of what guns. It is a massive undertaking but it is singular in purpose: Ban private ownership of guns. Each objective, including this one, clothed, as it is, in preventing military suicides, seems innocuous. It isn’t and, to the aware citizen, is as transparent as Saran wrap.

  14. NHSparky says:

    Guns have two enemies–rust and politicians. This is merely proof of the second portion of that statement.

  15. OWB says:

    “This is not an attempt to limit gun rights or an individual’s ability to own a firearm,” said Rep. Johnson.

    That really is all you need to hear. As others have said, it is precisely about limiting a Constitutional protection we individual citizens have – the right to protect ourselves from thieves, robbers, and an over zealous government. What better tactical way of doing it than to first restrict/remove guns from those most qualified to use them properly?

  16. FOMSG says:

    So Dennis Reimer wrote a letter did he? Last letter I saw from him was back in the 90’s when he was CSA and he was explaining to commanders across the Army why he lied to the Senate about readiness.

    He’s been a liar and a tool from jumpstreet.

  17. Jonn Lilyea says:

    I just did an interview with Hope Hodge of Human Events on this subject.

  18. DefendUSA says:

    How the eff did THAT guy get to be in charge of troops? Good God!

  19. Nik says:

    I don’t know if this is something I heard somewhere or if I’m simply brilliant but:

    “An armed population is a threat to all tyranny.”

    Look at what’s happening. They know they’re going to trample on more and more citizen’s rights in order to enact Leftist plans. They don’t want an armed population able to resist and they damn sure don’t want people with guns who are well versed in their usage.

  20. FatCircles0311 says:

    Can’t wear a white t-shirt on liberty. Can march in political gay parades and participate in porn films while in uniform. Can’t be trusted using your constitutional rights but can be trusted to use those rights in foreign countries doing the dirty work 99% of society is unwilling to do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *