For those of you familiar with my earlier threads with the words "Gun-Free Zones - US Military Installations," you must have read where I was waiting on a response from the DOD as requested by Senator Shelby. Here is yet another update.
After waiting over 60 days with no response, I once again contacted the senator and explained I have had no response from the DOD. I went on to remind him there have been two shootings here in north Alabama, at a middle school and at a major university, both involving fatalities, and that both were within "gun-free zones." I expressed my view that this issue simply cannot be left to go by the wayside. I also expressed my fear that another event at a military installation is inevitable.
Today, I got a call on my cell from one of the senator's aides. He obviously saw my letter, and made a call on my behalf to the DOD. He spoke with a colonel who promised to get an answer soon from Mr. Stanley (see my earlier threads) as to why I have received no response. I will hopefully hear something soon.
Clearly, the promise of a response does not mean responding to my real questions, but we can always hope.
My primary questions were (are):
1. WHY does the current policy restrict CCW on military installations? It is not enough to simply point to a regulation or policy. That merely puts the restiction into force; it does not explain the reason for it.
2. Just WHO makes the decision allowing or disallowing CCW on post? I've seen various regulations and policies, but they are rather ambiguous, with words to the effect that if the local intelligence community (with no identification other than that) determines the threat exists and notifies the base authority (commander?, general?, local police?, etc.), he/she may grant certain people the ability to CCW "for the duration of the threat." If such a decision does lie at the base/post level, it seems to me the senator would not have involved the DOD, but would have contacted someone locally, don't you think?
Anyway, now you all have the latest scoop.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Jonny
After waiting over 60 days with no response, I once again contacted the senator and explained I have had no response from the DOD. I went on to remind him there have been two shootings here in north Alabama, at a middle school and at a major university, both involving fatalities, and that both were within "gun-free zones." I expressed my view that this issue simply cannot be left to go by the wayside. I also expressed my fear that another event at a military installation is inevitable.
Today, I got a call on my cell from one of the senator's aides. He obviously saw my letter, and made a call on my behalf to the DOD. He spoke with a colonel who promised to get an answer soon from Mr. Stanley (see my earlier threads) as to why I have received no response. I will hopefully hear something soon.
Clearly, the promise of a response does not mean responding to my real questions, but we can always hope.
My primary questions were (are):
1. WHY does the current policy restrict CCW on military installations? It is not enough to simply point to a regulation or policy. That merely puts the restiction into force; it does not explain the reason for it.
2. Just WHO makes the decision allowing or disallowing CCW on post? I've seen various regulations and policies, but they are rather ambiguous, with words to the effect that if the local intelligence community (with no identification other than that) determines the threat exists and notifies the base authority (commander?, general?, local police?, etc.), he/she may grant certain people the ability to CCW "for the duration of the threat." If such a decision does lie at the base/post level, it seems to me the senator would not have involved the DOD, but would have contacted someone locally, don't you think?
Anyway, now you all have the latest scoop.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Jonny