Information for Army Forum Members

E

Eghad

New member
I dont know if this was put out for all military branches. I ssume some version of this message was. This applies to Army Commanders and Installations.

**************** UNCLASSIFIED / ****************

Subject: ALARACT 333/2011 - CONTROL AND REPORTING OF PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS

Originator: /C=US/O=U.S.

GOVERNMENT/OU=DOD/OU=ARMY/OU=ORGANIZATIONS/L=CONUS/L=WASHINGTON DC/OU=DA

PENTAGON TELECOMMUNICATIONS(UC)/OU=ALARACT RELEASE AUTHORITY(UC)
DTG: 311939Z Aug 11
Precedence: ROUTINE
DAC: General
To: /C=US/O=U.S. GOVERNMENT/OU=DOD/OU=ARMY/OU=ORGANIZATIONS/OU=ADDRESS
LISTS/CN=AL ALARACT(UC)
/C=US/O=U.S. GOVERNMENT/OU=DOD/OU=AUTODIN PLAS/OU=AIG 6-AZ/OU=ALARACT
--------------------------------------------------
UNCLASSIFIED/

THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN SENT BY THE PENTAGON TELECOMMUNICATIONS CENTER ON BEHALF OF DA WASHINGTON DC//DAPM-ZA//

SUBJECT: CONTROL AND REPORTING OF PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS.

PASS TO SENIOR COMMANDERS, INSTALLATION COMMANDERS, UNIT COMMANDERS, PROVOST MARSHALS AND DIRECTORS OF EMERGENCY SERVICES.

1. REFERENCES:

A. SECTION 1062, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011(PUBLIC LAW 111-383).

B. ARMY REGULATION 190-11, PHYSICAL SECURITY OF ARMS, AMMUNITION, AND EXPLOSIVES, 28 JUN 11.

2. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS ON THE REGISTRATION, STORAGE, AND AUTHORIZED USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED FIREARMS BY SOLDIERS.

THE MAJOR POLICY CHANGES CONCERNING PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS IN RECENTLY PUBLISHED REFERENCE B ARE IN CONCERT WITH PUBLIC LAW IN REFERENCE A. SENIOR COMMANDERS HAVE SPECIFIC AUTHORITY TO REGULATE PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS, EXPLOSIVES, AND AMMUNITION ON ARMY INSTALLATIONS.

3. ON-POST REGULATION: PURSUANT TO REFERENCE B, THE SENIOR COMMANDER AT EACH INSTALLATION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE INSTALLATION.

THIS AUTHORITY INCLUDES:

A. PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS UNLESS AUTHORIZED;

B. REQUIRING REGISTRATION OF FIREARMS FOR PERSONNEL RESIDING ON THE INSTALLATION;

C. REQUIRING REGISTRATION OF FIREARMS BROUGHT ONTO THE INSTALLATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENGAGING IN AN AUTHORIZED ACTIVITY (E.G. HUNTING OR MARKSMANSHIP EVENTS);

D. REQUIRING THAT THE PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS OF SOLDIERS RESIDING ON-POST BE SECURED IN THE INSTALLATION ARMORY/UNIT ARMS ROOM UNLESS AUTHORIZED TO BE STORED IN QUARTERS; AND

E. REQUIRING THAT PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS ARE PROPERLY TRANSPORTED ON THE INSTALLATION.

4. OFF-POST REGULATION: THE ABILITY OF A COMMANDER TO REGULATE THE PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS OF SOLDIERS WHO RESIDE OFF-POST IS SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITED BY REFERENCE A AS NOTED BELOW:

A. THIS STATUTE PROHIBITS THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FROM ISSUING ANY REQUIREMENT, OR COLLECTING OR RECORDING ANY INFORMATION "RELATING TO THE OTHERWISE LAWFUL ACQUISITION, POSSESSION, OWNERSHIP, CARRYING, OR OTHER USE OF A PRIVATELY OWNED FIREARM" BY A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES NOT KEPT ON A
MILITARY INSTALLATION.

B. THERE ARE THREE STATED EXCEPTIONS TO THIS PROHIBITION. THE FIRST TWO APPLY WHEN SOLDIERS ARE ENGAGED IN OFFICIAL DUTIES OR ARE IN UNIFORM AND ARE SELF-EXPLANATORY.

C. THE THIRD EXCEPTION ALLOWS COMMANDERS TO REGULATE PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS WHEN A SOLDIER IS UNDER INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION, OR ADJUDICATION OF AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF LAW, INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO WHETHER A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES CONSTITUTES A THREAT TO THE MEMBER OR OTHERS. IMPORTANTLY, AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF LAW OR THREAT TO SELF OR OTHERS IS NECESSARY BEFORE THE COLLECTION OF OFF-POST PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPON INFORMATION. WITHIN THIS EXCEPTION, COMMANDERS WHO COME TO A REASONED CONCLUSION (BASED ON DIRECT OBSERVATION AND/OR REPORTS FROM FRIENDS, FAMILY OR HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS) THAT A SOLDIER IS A THREAT TO HIMSELF/HERSELF OR OTHERS MAY INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE POTENTIAL THREAT OF VIOLENCE.

D. WHEN A COMMANDER BELIEVES A SOLDIER WHO RESIDES OFF-POST IS A RISK TO SELF OR OTHERS, THE COMMANDER MAY MOVE THE SOLDIER ON-POST (WHERE THE ON-POST RULES FOR REGULATION OF PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS APPLY) AND/OR REQUEST THE SOLDIER VOLUNTARILY TURN-IN HIS/HER PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPON FOR STORAGE.

E. COMMANDERS SHOULD SEEK THE ADVICE OF THEIR SERVICING JUDGE ADVOCATE PRIOR TO TAKING ANY ACTION OR COLLECTING ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING PRIVATELY OWNED WEAPONS MAINTAINED OFF-POST.

5. POC IS

6. EXPIRATION DATE CANNOT BE DETERMINED.
 
Last edited:
M

Mike Irwin

Staff
Regarding reference A, a couple of years ago weren't commanders at several bases requiring soldiers who lived off-base in civilian housing to report all firearms that they owned?
 
U

Uncle Buck

New member
I retired in Oct 2004 from the A.F., Up to that time I was never asked nor required to report any gun I had at my off-base residence. I lived in base housing in 1986 - 1988, at Pease AFB, NH and again, was never asked about any guns I might have.

Although the message says DOD it is addressed specifically to the Army. I wonder if this was sent out to all CONUS bases by the other branches as well.
 
Last edited:
C

chadstrickland

New member
My best friend is in the army 11b in Washington state and he says they are given the option to let the armory hold there weapons if they live off base or they can keep them at there house.
Idk about suicidal people..he says they give out these "anti suicide" cards but other than that idk
 
T

TNT

New member
Mike I know for fact that there were efforts made to do such things and beings from the reports I gathered that it was ruled as unconstitutional and there for could not be enforced. That was as of 5yrs ago what it is now I could not say

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=5465
Now there have been contradictory stories since that have been out since but I do not believe they could do such a thing being that is would be a infringement on the service members rights. On base as Buck noted is a different story.
 
E

Eghad

New member
Yes there were some attempts at some installations to make off base personnel register their weapons. I want to say this was on Ft. Riley, Ft Bliss and Ft Campbell?
 
Last edited:
J

jgcoastie

New member
I know the Coast Guard is the red-headed stepchild of the Armed Services, and we're not always included in the fun... But no such guidance (AFAIK) has been issued to base CO's in Uncle Sam's Confused Group.

Because we have so many small (compared to our counterparts in other branches) units scattered all over the coast and rivers, and most have enlisted Officer's In Charge (OIC) vice commissioned Commanding Officer's; such a policy would be near impossible to enforce in the CG.

EDIT: To the OP, is internet release authorized for the above message? Unless specifically stated in the message, most official message traffic is not authorized for internet release. Just a thought...
 
J

jgcoastie

New member
Eghad, ok, I wasn't aware of that link. It may prove useful in the future, thanks!

Yes, we are a military force, but also a law enforcement force, search and rescue, customs, aids-to-navigation, and a whole lot more... I doesn't make sense to many people, I question it myself sometimes... The best way I've found to describe it is multi-mission, which is an understatement in itself...

Hence the term: Uncle Sam's Confused Group = we don't always know what we're supposed to be doing, but we do it very well!

;)
 
G

globemaster3

New member
FWIW, I have not seen that in any official USAF traffic.

However, not surprising after the Ft Hood incident combined with domestic problems at other bases in recent times.

Not saying I agree, but understanding military leadership, I can see where they wanted to get out some guidance that field commanders can utilize to justify removal of weapons if the person is deemed a hazard to themselves or others.

And para 4.E. was a nice touch to ensure the legal aspects were covered.
 
H

hermannr

New member
The interesting part is...it is notice of what a commander CAN do, NOT MUST do...with the little tidbit about, if it is off post, you better just leave it alone.

One of our daughters had her husband just get out. While he was active, Ft. Bliss sent a "health and welfare" team out to check out their off post housing. Daughter would not let them in the house, read the nosey bizzybodies the riot act and told them not to come back.

Sounded pretty funny according to Grand-daughter, but yes, Ft. Bliss trys to exert their influence far beyond their own borders.
 
A

Achilles11B

New member
Eghad, I was stationed at Ft. Bliss from 2008-2011. I can personally vouch for the weapons registration going on there. If you were a firearm owner, you had it registered with the MP's. It was a post policy. I had always assumed (being as it was my only Stateside assignment) that it was like that everywhere.
 
E

Eghad

New member
The health and welfare guys already knew they they had to bluff there way into off post housing to get inside without probable cause. I am glad she ran them off.

I was deployed when they came through our tents for a health and welfare inspection. I was na E-8 and I had an E-7 doing the inspection. My little section of the tent was clean and tidy because crumbs begat mice and mice begat cobras in the tent.

She then asked me if she could search my stuff. I told her NO! I then asked her if she was doing a search or an inspection. I told her I did not know what army she was in because a search requires probable cause and you just said you came to do an inpection which does not require probable cause. Plus she might want to read me my rights. She made a move to go around me and I stopped her. Of course she then got pouty and left. My supervisor was an O-4. He aksed me about it and I told him what the problem was.

end of story...lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top