Would the military let you carry personal firearms in combat?

[lonegunman]

Another thread got me thinking, and I am wondering whether or not this practice is permitted.

Even if it is not officially permitted, it is something that a blind eye is turned to?

I have an uncle who was a infantry major in Korea, and he claims he carried a personal revolver most of the time, because 1911s got wet and froze up on him. Was this practice officially permitted or, was there an unenforced policy against it

 

[C.R.Sam]

Depends on who you are. Where you are. What you are doing.

I have carried personal firearms during several duty assignments. Authorized most of the time.

My leastest son is currently active. Same with him.

Sam

 

[CZ Gunner]

Was always more of a command/situational thing than a "military" thing. (Which includes "who you are".)

I was on a ship once that let everyone (who had them) bring their motorcycles along on one of the cruises. (AS 40: Submarine Tender)

Like I said ... depends upon the command/situation!

 

[Ala Dan]

During that nasty war in Southeast Asia, some personal
weaponary made it into combat. The two most frequently
mentioned handgun's used was the Smith & Wesson model
60's (circa 1965), and the Browning Hi-Power 9m/m's; and
I'm sure there were other's. In most instance's, I don't think
it was authorized as much as it was tolerated.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[ojibweindian]

CZ Gunner

That would be the USS Simon Lake? I was on the USSEmory S. Land (AS39)

 

[Nightcrawler]

My unit, the 107th Engineer BN, got a briefing on it. HUGE no-no. You can get court-martialed big-time for it.

See, today's Army is loathe to even issue the troops live ammo; the thought of someone carrying a personal firearm, something totally unauthorized, as one particularly anal-rententive sergeant I once knew put it, must make the likes of General Shinseki (or however the hell you spell his name) get a case of the bends.

I mean, after all, we can't have extra weapons on the battlefield...

Personally, as long as the soldier/Marine/airman/sailor is made to understand that maintaining and securing the weapon is HIS responsibilty, and that no taxpayer bought ammunition will go towards it, I don't see why they've got such a bug up their butts about it.

Just the way the Army is these days, I suppose.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

My "combat" was on a fast attack submarine, so personal firearms were kinda replaced with torpedoes and cruise missiles, although we did have small arms aboard.

One interesting fact, which I wonder if is still applicable, we could bring personal firearms on the sub and have them stored in the small arms locker. We could check them out, go to the range, then return them when we got back. I heard during the same time frame, this also applied to personnel on shore bases, storing personal weapons in the armory, but I never had the opportunity to try it.

 

[m1shooter]

I was in Desert storm and they didnt even let us have our bayonets(sp). On the night the air war started they issued ammo to us. We had ammo when we first got to Saudi Arabia but then it was for night gaurd duty,and they made us count every round.

It wasnt like I was "in the rear with the gear" I was a wrench turner with a m109 howitzer unit. We did do alot of shooting with the big guns but the only small arms fire I heard about was some idiot thought you do a function check with live ammo and damn near killed a few people.

As soon as the cease fire started it was bye bye ammo!

Our battery comander brought his own ammo for his sidearm. He must not have trusted us

 

[Nightcrawler]

I'm seeing a long-building pattern of soldiers being treated like, well, children.

They didn't issue ammo in the Gulf. I know a guy that was in Kuwait; for guard duty he and a buddy managed to scrape up three (3) rusty rounds of 5.56 for his M16.

Now, soldiers in Germany and other places aren't allowed to have beer.

Okay, now look. Soldiers drink too much. I don't drink, and don't like heavy drinking.

However, if a person is considered responsible enough to fight in a war, then he's responsible enough to drink. If he becomes an alcoholic and ruins his life, that's HIS problem, and shame on him.

Furthermore, if soldiers are responsible and mature enough to die in the mud in some third world craphole for the sake of some UN peacekeeping mission, then they're SURE AS HELL good enough to have LIVE AMMUNITION and all the friggin' weapons they need!

 

[WoundChannel]

I was just chatting with a guy in the U.S. Army who said they let him carry his privately owned pistol. He carries a Beretta 92 Vertec. I'm not sure what outfit he was with though.

 

[STLRN]

No it won't the only time you get away with it is 1) your CO doesn't know the rules. 2) You CO is weak and will not enforce rules 3) You CO is ignoring the rules 4) You don't get caught.

The military will issue you a more than adequate weapon if you need it, it may not perceive, because of historical precedence and reality, that you need a certain weapon type though.

 

[schild]

Many of the top gunsmiths of the Viet Nam era gave priority treatment to guns that were headed to Nam.

 

[EchoFiveMike]

It won't happen, as for why read my post in the "military buying all the Glocks" thread.

Yes, military personel are treated like children, it's a reflection of the gov't and society in general. It's also because we recruit anybody with a warm body and three brain cells because the recruiters are burned if they don't make quota (Gee sounds just like affirmative action, which sucks too!) Because we have lots of idiots, who are not held accountable for their actions (because NCO's disciplining them is wrong and vile and painful and can't be allowed, let's have the battalion commander send then to the brig for 30days or 60 days EPD/60 days restriction to barracks) we have the senior leadership distrusting the junior troops. We also can not get rid of deadweight people, it takes FOREVER to get rid of anyone(more than 6 monthes) and just like the federal government, when you can't get rid of non-performers, you turn to crap. So eventually, these goons make NCO if they stick around long enough(because you can't get rid of them) and then the cycle spirals downwards because now the people enforcing the rules are the same idiots who caused the problems in the first place.

It's basically a lack of trust issue. Same reason that troops are never issued ammo, even in a combat zone. The wimps in charge are more worried about the State Dept chimps having a diplomatic problem because some E3 blew away some scumbag in some 3rd world cesspool, than about that E3's whole command who get killed when the scumbags drive a truckbomb into the bldg. The moral high ground is the bodies of your own citizens that you're standing on. These people are the left overs from the Clinton years, but the rot is deeper than simply that. It's a mentality that's endemic to the US culture IMO. Protect my job, even at the cost of someone else's life. Me, me, me. Off the soapbox. S/F...Ken M

 

[bruels]

I think I invented "Don't ask, don't tell." No one asked me and I didn't volunteer that I had a Ruger Security-Six in my safe on USS Ranger in 1983-84. I wasn't wild about the S&W Model 37s they were going to issue aircrews if we had to go bomb Iran.

 

[MarineTech]

From what I can determine, this varies from unit to unit.

When I was serving with 7th Marines in the Persian Gulf, we were allowed to bring a personal weapon. I brought my grandfather's 1911A1 along. I do beleive this is actually against the UCMJ, but certain commanders turned a blind eye to it.

 

[mdlowry]

I was in the Navy and stationed in Norfolk. While I was there, a couple of the peir guards for one of the carriers was robbed at gunpoint. They had their Navy issue Berretta's stolen. After that incident, the policy was changed so that the peir guards were no longer armed.

I was stationed on a sub while there. I don't recall this ever being addressed, but I had this impression that this was a no-no. Personal firearms were not allowed on base (had to be stored at the armory if you had one). I believe you couldn't take one on the boat either.

mdlowry

 

[Chief Jones]

Never saw it authorized during my 20 years. It didn't matter if you were deploying to some 3rd world garbage pile where every person over the age of 12 was packing either. Hell, in Bosnia, it was not uncommon to be required to "show your rounds" to the LT every couple of days. Kinda degrading to a CW4, but what the hell.... One of the things that always bothered me was that most units I was in only qual'ed about once a year..kinda scary. Ever been in the chow line when a round was discharged in the clearing barrel? Other members have already pointed out the roots of the problems with our military, but those are also present in the rest of the country as well.

Check six,

Woody

 

[labgrade]

Who knows? Really.

Gotta depend on your CO (yer "buds," & those up the chain), the truest "don't ask/don't tell" (bruels - you most certainly never invented this as folks have been totin' "illegal stuff" since the dawn of Man ... )

Got "tagged" by my CO for carrying a S&W M29 (.44 mag for the unitiatiate) in a shoulder holster once (circa '76) - F'ing A-holes had us sighting our 16s with .22LR ammo, fer C'sake! (plot the trajectory) Told him I'd be much better off with a revolver than the damnable junk ... ! (9K+ words omitted) .... = walked (again) ... F'in' A-holes! (ah, the joys of mil'try service ... )

May be quite a bunch-a service orgs that "allow it," but I'd have my doubts. TOE describes certain & specifics & ye shal not deviate. Period.

Makes sense in many ways so another can refurbish from your dead body - wouldn't want "me" to try to stuff my M16 mag with yer .44 mag revolver fodder ... no?

.... but then again ..... (I've my doubts ... )

 

[Ancel48]

As some have said, it depends most of all on your command. In Beirut, I saw a Warrant Officer with a sawed-off, pistol gripped *&* Eastfield Shotgun; sure didn't look like Army issue. In Desert Storm, I know another officer who carried a Seecamp for "just in case". I think it was our Brigade Commander that directed in writing not to have personally owned weapons in Desert Storm but it could have been higher.

Every now and then someone shows up at a M9 range to qualify with his own Beretta. I never saw anyone with a Taurus but it's quite possible. I've never heard any level of command says it's authorized to have personally owned weapons in combat. If it's OK with them they remain silent and let nature take it's course. It's almost a moot point though since although it provides some psychological comfort and backup; a handgun is not the weapon of choice when the bad guys are using assault rifles, machine guns, RPGs, etc.

 

[PDshooter]

Well I'm in the Guard,16yrs now. I used to like it when we still had the 1911. My Colt S/S would really stand out at range qualification
New some guys who had there own side arms during the Gulf war they were 88Mike(Truck Drivers).
The unit I belonge to has a lot of Pro-Gun people in it. My X-CO is a Cop. We would always end up talking "Gun talk" People would bring things for "Show and Tell" on drill Weekend. Personal weapons are a big NO-NO... BTW
What do you expect from 11Bs