Military Base visit - Lackland AFB

[harrycallahan]

My daughter graduated basic this past week so I had the occassion to visit Lackland, AFB San Antonio, Tx. I am very new to my chl and the practice of concealed carry so I planned a bit more on this trip than I have in the past. I already new I couldn't carry on base so I made plans with my hotel to store my gun in a safety deposit box during the times we were on base. All in all everything went as planned. Until check out day. We left the hotel, gun in holster, on our way to make a last visit to my Airman and it dawned on me that I'm stuck. I cannot go on base. Not to be deterred I stopped at the Information Office at Valley-hi gate and asked the MP what I should do. I presented my DL/CHL and breifed him on my situation. I fully expected a big fat NO way. Mostly because they have this BIG sign stating the the possession of a firearm while on base in any manner is a Felony. What I got was the exact opposite. I was informed that as long as I travel straight to get my airman,then leave, that I could go ahead and keep it with me as long as it is unloaded and locked in the glove box. Otherwise I would have to obtain an escort from the gate to the amory and secure the weapon there.
I learned a bit about traveling with a firearm and while I appreciate the protection it affords me it is a big responsibility. And, I now know to always travel with a lockable case in the event I have to secure my firearm. Had I been forced to check it into the armory I would have had nothing other than my holster to hand it over in.
I also confess that while I know I possess the right to carry my gun, I was very nervous when approaching a military MP to ask such a question. My experience though was one of complete professionalism each and everytime. Our military service men/women are simply the best!

FYTI: I am not saying that this is policy. I am saying this was my experience only. If you carry on base it is illegal. However, they do have procedures if you arrive and have your firearm.

[Keith B]

My daughter graduated basic this past week so I had the occassion to visit Lackland, AFB San Antonio, Tx. I am very new to my chl and the practice of concealed carry so I planned a bit more on this trip than I have in the past. I already new I couldn't carry on base so I made plans with my hotel to store my gun in a safety deposit box during the times we were on base. All in all everything went as planned. Until check out day. We left the hotel, gun in holster, on our way to make a last visit to my Airman and it dawned on me that I'm stuck. I cannot go on base. Not to be deterred I stopped at the Information Office at Valley-hi gate and asked the MP what I should do. I presented my DL/CHL and breifed him on my situation. I fully expected a big fat NO way. Mostly because they have this BIG sign stating the the possession of a firearm while on base in any manner is a Felony. What I got was the exact opposite. I was informed that as long as I travel straight to get my airman,then leave, that I could go ahead and keep it with me as long as it is unloaded and locked in the glove box. Otherwise I would have to obtain an escort from the gate to the amory and secure the weapon there.
I learned a bit about traveling with a firearm and while I appreciate the protection it affords me it is a big responsibility. And, I now know to always travel with a lockable case in the event I have to secure my firearm. Had I been forced to check it into the armory I would have had nothing other than my holster to hand it over in.
I also confess that while I know I possess the right to carry my gun, I was very nervous when approaching a military MP to ask such a question. My experience though was one of complete professionalism each and everytime. Our military service men/women are simply the best!

FYTI: I am not saying that this is policy. I am saying this was my experience only. If you carry on base it is illegal. However, they do have procedures if you arrive and have your firearm.

I had a similar experience at Sheppard when I went to pick up my Nephew from Technical School at Christmas a few years ago. I called the base and talked to the desk Sgt and advised I would only be going directly to the dorm and picking up my nephew and then proceeding straight back out of the base. He advised if I would keep it on me and not exit the vehicle that I was OK loaded, but if I needed to exit the vehicle it needed to be unloaded and locked up. When I arrived at the main gate, I showed them my DL and they asked if I had received 'earlier instructions and if I had any questions'. I told them no and they gave me directions in to the dorm. When I pulled up my nephew came out of the door and I didn't have to exit the vehicle. He loaded his gear and we headed straight back to the gate. The MP just smiled and waived me on through as we exited the gate.

[Heartland Patriot]

Very happy to hear that both of you had such great interactions with the security personnel on USAF installations. There IS some common sense left.

[E.Marquez]

Very happy to hear that both of you had such great interactions with the security personnel on USAF installations. There IS some common sense left.

While I approve of the outcome I would submit others should take caution. Both of those posters above violated federal law and post policy at, at least one of the locations. Like one LEO that may let you slide on a speeding infraction and another stop and infract you on the same day. Another MP (SP) on the same instaliton may likely not have the same commonce approach and be willing to look the other way as you violate federal law and local policy.

I'm all for the right for conceled carry on post. But right now federal law and all post policy's I know of say it's a NOGO.

IF someone has access to a written post policy that specifies conceled carry is allowed I would be greatful if you could send it to me.

Thanks

[harrycallahan]

Very happy to hear that both of you had such great interactions with the security personnel on USAF installations. There IS some common sense left.

While I approve of the outcome I would submit others should take caution. Both of those posters above violated federal law and post policy at, at least one of the locations. Like one LEO that may let you slide on a speeding infraction and another stop and infract you on the same day. Another MP (SP) on the same instaliton may likely not have the same commonce approach and be willing to look the other way as you violate federal law and local policy.

I'm all for the right for conceled carry on post. But right now federal law and all post policy's I know of say it's a NOGO.

IF someone has access to a written post policy that specifies conceled carry is allowed I would be greatful if you could send it to me.

Thanks

There was no concealed carry by the definition you are implying. You cannot very well be guilty of violating law if you're acting under a directive given to you by a federal officer. Written post policy is that I would be escorted to the armory where I would then hand over my weapon and then retrieve it at such time as I was leaving. That implies to me that I possess the weapon in some manner. Now, if I implied that I was actively performing conceal and carry on base I was not. I was instructed by three different officers at the gate to remove it from my person, unload and lock it prior to base entry. At my next visit I'll do exactly the same thing, I'll ask. If I get a different answer I'll comply with that directive to the letter.

I take offense to what you are implying through your above statements. I violated no rule, ordinance or law of any kind by following to the letter the MP's directive at the gate. For if you actually think that a U.S. soldier in charge of base security doesn't know or respectfully follow his base commanders orders regarding security at his base, then you have demonstrated ignorance to the highest degree because you KNOW-NOT-WHAT-YOU-SPEAK of! I was not caught doing anything wrong, nor was I let off the hook because I was a nice guy.

[E.Marquez]

There was no concealed carry by the definition you are implying. You cannot very well be guilty of violating law if you're acting under a directive given to you by a federal officer. Written post policy is that I would be escorted to the armory where I would then hand over my weapon and then retrieve it at such time as I was leaving. That implies to me that I possess the weapon in some manner. Now, if I implied that I was actively performing conceal and carry on base I was not. I was instructed by three different officers at the gate to remove it from my person, unload and lock it prior to base entry. At my next visit I'll do exactly the same thing, I'll ask. If I get a different answer I'll comply with that directive to the letter.

I take offense to what you are implying through your above statements. I violated no rule, ordinance or law of any kind by following to the letter the MP's directive at the gate. For if you actually think that a U.S. soldier in charge of base security doesn't know or respectfully follow his base commanders orders regarding security at his base, then you have demonstrated ignorance to the highest degree because you KNOW-NOT-WHAT-YOU-SPEAK of! I was not caught doing anything wrong, nor was I let off the hook because I was a nice guy.

No attempt was made to say you did anything intentionally wrong, or against what you were directed to do..
That does not change federal law.
Yes I know Soldiers (and Airmen which is what you would have spoken to at an Airbase) and yes, they often get both the commanders intent wrong and do what the "Think" is right, vice what has been directed..They are both human, and young in most cases, those that stand duty at a gate are the most inexperienced and junior.. They get things wrong sometimes.
Yes, I inferred from what you wrote and I read,, you were carrying concealed, as well in the other posters response, I suppose I answered both posts with one response, and should have made two.

Glad it worked out for you. Hope it works out for you next time as well.

[srothstein]

For if you actually think that a U.S. soldier in charge of base security doesn't know or respectfully follow his base commanders orders regarding security at his base, then you have demonstrated ignorance to the highest degree because you KNOW-NOT-WHAT-YOU-SPEAK of!

Harry,

First, congratulations on the graduation and please thank your daughter for her service for me.

Secondly, I think you did exactly how I would have handled it (or maybe even more compliant with rules than I might have been). I also know that the military has changed quite a bit since I got my discharge 30 years ago.

But if you think any experienced NCO obeys every order and every rule, then it has changed a lot more than I thought. When I was in, NCOs knew how to "interpret" the post regulations to allow what they wanted to do and thought they could get away with. In this case, I would guess they also thought concealed means concealed.

[erick619]

.

[alvins]

what is the deal with millitary bases not allowing guns anyway?they have all sorts of weapons on base and their worried about someone with a chl and a gun?

[Heartland Patriot]

Very happy to hear that both of you had such great interactions with the security personnel on USAF installations. There IS some common sense left.

While I approve of the outcome I would submit others should take caution. Both of those posters above violated federal law and post policy at, at least one of the locations. Like one LEO that may let you slide on a speeding infraction and another stop and infract you on the same day. Another MP (SP) on the same instaliton may likely not have the same commonce approach and be willing to look the other way as you violate federal law and local policy.

I'm all for the right for conceled carry on post. But right now federal law and all post policy's I know of say it's a NOGO.

IF someone has access to a written post policy that specifies conceled carry is allowed I would be greatful if you could send it to me.

Thanks

Bronco78,

I know that what you said is accurate. Those signs at the front gates of installations (no matter what service) are the law. As a former NCO, I could have worded my response a little better. I was just glad things went smoothly for the individual. (You know how sergeants are, just want to get it done.) To the best of my knowledge, though you would know better than I, the regulation/law has not changed. Maybe there are commanders who have decided on some "commonsense enforcement policy", but I'd wager likely not. If I go to the JRB here in Ft. Worth (not often, but I do) I make sure that I do NOT carry that day. You can get one gate guard that uses "common sense" and the next that follows the letter of the regulation/law without deviation. And they do random inspections of vehicles, too. Better for folks to be safe than sorry.

(BTW, glad you made it back home.)

[Heartland Patriot]

what is the deal with millitary bases not allowing guns anyway?they have all sorts of weapons on base and their worried about someone with a chl and a gun?

Most weapons on a military installation are locked up, believe it or not. The military/security police have them, of course. And servicemembers that require them for duty or training would be issued them and when they are done, they get turned back in to a unit or installation armory (depending on the service and/or installation you are talking about). Commanders are held accountable for all the personnel under their command. Each and every servicemember is highly trained and it takes time and money to replace them if something happens to them. I believe commanders are more concerned with young troops doing stupid stuff with weapons and causing injury/death than they are about a random attack on a particular installation that security cannot handle. I'm not saying that I agree with that 100%, or that I am even 100% accurate in my assessment, it is only IMHO, of course.

[Kythas]

what is the deal with millitary bases not allowing guns anyway?they have all sorts of weapons on base and their worried about someone with a chl and a gun?

I think it has less to do with the military and more to do with an overall Federal ban on weapons on any Federal property.

Even though the Constitution, including all Amendments, are supposed to expressly apply to all Federal property.

Just my opinion. I have no doubt I could be wrong.

[E.Marquez]

what is the deal with millitary bases not allowing guns anyway?they have all sorts of weapons on base and their worried about someone with a chl and a gun?

In the big picture, Pres Clinton signed a bill in 1993 that changed things.. On federal property, you could no longer carry a legally owned and concealed weapon unless doing so as an authorized LEO. And even that LEO had to have a reason.

Then you have post (Base) commanders that add in local policy,, like in 2006 the Fort Richardson commander who forbid soldiers in his command from carrying a concealed weapon at any time, to include off post, where state law allowed it.

To current Fort Hood policy that states you can bring a privately owned weapon on post for lawful use (hunting or target shooting at the post open range) but it must be registered at the MP station first.. the catch to the newish FH policy... you can not have the gun when you show up to register it.. So if are coming for the first time and do not know the policy.. you get turned around after being detained at the gate when you declare you have a gun.. and it gets better..... At Fort Hood, even if your gun is already registered,,,,, and your there for a lawful purpose, and the gate guards do NOT ASK if you have a weapon, is is the gun possessors responsibility to announce you have a gun to the gate guard, who will then detain you while you answer his questions as to your purpose, prove it is registered on post.

As to why do "they do this"? who knows, same reason "They" disarm soldiers in combat when a congressmen, Secretary of defense or Pres or Vice Pres or other political party member comes to "meet and Greet" the soldiers. The Soldiers are required in most cases the last few years to disarm, move in to a hanger or other secured building and "listen" to the great ones.

ONE QUICK EDIT:
I had the pleasure of meeting Mike Conaway TX Representative, while deployed to Afghanistan this last time.. Not only did he NOT make his security detail disarm the Soldiers, when I asked about that as a "station policy or procedure for visiting political folks" he stated he was happy and felt more secure with being surrounded by the Military members in an are of combat WITH their weapons. And yes I noticed at the time he did not actually answer my question but gave me his personal opinion .. I read between the lines that he would only speak for his own opinion and not speak on any others policy or procedures,, I let it drop out of respect.

[The Annoyed Man]

Very happy to hear that both of you had such great interactions with the security personnel on USAF installations. There IS some common sense left.

While I approve of the outcome I would submit others should take caution. Both of those posters above violated federal law and post policy at, at least one of the locations. Like one LEO that may let you slide on a speeding infraction and another stop and infract you on the same day. Another MP (SP) on the same instaliton may likely not have the same commonce approach and be willing to look the other way as you violate federal law and local policy.

I'm all for the right for conceled carry on post. But right now federal law and all post policy's I know of say it's a NOGO.

IF someone has access to a written post policy that specifies conceled carry is allowed I would be greatful if you could send it to me.

Thanks

There was no concealed carry by the definition you are implying. You cannot very well be guilty of violating law if you're acting under a directive given to you by a federal officer. Written post policy is that I would be escorted to the armory where I would then hand over my weapon and then retrieve it at such time as I was leaving. That implies to me that I possess the weapon in some manner. Now, if I implied that I was actively performing conceal and carry on base I was not. I was instructed by three different officers at the gate to remove it from my person, unload and lock it prior to base entry. At my next visit I'll do exactly the same thing, I'll ask. If I get a different answer I'll comply with that directive to the letter.

I take offense to what you are implying through your above statements. I violated no rule, ordinance or law of any kind by following to the letter the MP's directive at the gate. For if you actually think that a U.S. soldier in charge of base security doesn't know or respectfully follow his base commanders orders regarding security at his base, then you have demonstrated ignorance to the highest degree because you KNOW-NOT-WHAT-YOU-SPEAK of! I was not caught doing anything wrong, nor was I let off the hook because I was a nice guy.

harrycallahan.......You might want to rephrase the last part of that statement so that it will have application to Sergeant Major Bronco78 [newly returned from Afghanistan where he was Regional Command operations Sergeant Major]. He might not brag on that, but I will for him, and he might actually know a thing or three that you don't. So "yelling" at him in ALL-CAPS and calling him ignorant is way out of line. Sometimes we show our own ignorance in things without intending to, but a good man will apologize and try to walk his comments back when his error is pointed out to him. I'd like to think that you're a good man.

Just my 2¢.

[E.Marquez]

harrycallahan.......You might want to rephrase the last part of that statement so that it will have application to Sergeant Major Bronco78 [newly returned from Afghanistan where he was Regional Command operations Sergeant Major]. He might not brag on that, but I will for him, and he might actually know a thing or three that you don't. So "yelling" at him in ALL-CAPS and calling him ignorant is way out of line. Sometimes we show our own ignorance in things without intending to, but a good man will apologize and try to walk his comments back when his error is pointed out to him. I'd like to think that you're a good man.

Just my 2¢.

Thank you, but in all fairness, I too inferred something from the two posts that was not there..

I understood in the initial post, that the weapon was carried... I did read about the instructions given to the OP, but not that he complied with them..

In any case.. only carrying a concealed weapon is governed by federal law..
The mere possession on a post or base is controlled at the base commander level.

If Lackland Airbase and the Base Wing commander (502nd) has policy that allows personal weapons to be brought on base, then good for them.. Nice to see it.

So long as the 802nd security forces squadron understands and implements those policies, all should be well.