FWIW, student naval aviators at Pensacola can buy guns in Florida. They're on PCS orders.
FWIW, student naval aviators at Pensacola can buy guns in Florida. They're on PCS orders.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
I'll admit I'm pretty ignorant of the laws, but there were a couple of military guys in buying guns at one of the local gun stores today. There was a lot of asking questions such as "what address should I list, the one on my drivers license, which is my official residence or where I'm living now in Pensacola?"Originally Posted by HCM
See above.
SNAs are PCS'd to Pensacola and are legal state residents.
My basis: I was a student naval aviator that like all of my classmates received PCS orders to Pensacola for flight training.
IIRC, any training over 6 months gets PCS orders. I might be wrong on the number of months, but 6 months rings a bell.
Last edited by TGS; 12-11-2019 at 04:15 PM.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Military members can buy guns in their permanent state of residence Or in the state where they are permanently assigned by the military or their “Permenant Station.”
Normally an assignment of one year or more will result in permanent change of station orders or PCS. Anything less than one year is considered temporary duty or TDY.
For various administrative and financial reasons I’ve see people sent on temporary duty somewhere for 364 days, Set home and then return for another 364 days.
Last edited by HCM; 12-11-2019 at 04:20 PM.
For clarity, as TGS mentioned, the flight students can buy guns when in flight school at NAS Pensacola.
Nomally military orders need to be one year or more to be considered PCS for firearms purchase purposes.
One of our local gun shops here regularly has to decline firearm sales to service members in a military medical program based hear that lasts eight or nine months.
This is exactly the case.
If were are to argue that the Rights enumerated in the first ten amendments are inalienable, then they apply to every human being, regardless of race or incidental location on the globe. Why would you wish to restrict anyone from having a weapon? The good people far outnumber the bad people and all of the bad things which can be done with a weapon are already illegal - kind of reveals the foolishness of the argument against someone being denied a right due to accident of birth.
Rights work both ways and not just when you like the way they play out. It's why the very idea of "hate speech" is so evil.
Rights are not ignored for those in jail, they have been removed through due process based on the willful denial of rights of another entity. That is why convicts don't have their full bundle of rights.
I didnt say anything about constitutional rights one way or the other. I simply listed a mundane activity that citizens of foreign countries uncontroversially do in the United States that the Governor's statement would theoretically preclude. That is so people (hopefully the governor) could look at this possible policy and say, "OK, it sounds neato to come up with something that might have kept this particular guy from legally buying the gun...do I really want to do this considering the other effects of that policy and the fact that he may have simply obtained his firearms in another manner?"
Any mouth breather can react to stimuli ("Fire bad!"), but I expect my elected officials to at least think about the second and third order consequences of laws before they run off at the mouth.
I would also posit that if, in the minds of many gun owners, its OK to ban an entire category of people from possessing firearms simply because they MIGHT do something nefarious, that does not bode well for the future of the 2A.
Last edited by Chemsoldier; 12-11-2019 at 07:50 PM.
In this particular case, he was going to eventually end up strapped into a jet. Crashing that into a well chosen building would have probably caused a lot more casualties than a shooting spree.
(as an aside, what's with the buddies filming? I'm guessing that when we're done with them they will face the tender mercies of Saudi justice. I doubt that will go any easier because they only filmed instead of getting their own gun and shooting.)
We already do, it's called Felon In Possession Of A Firearm. The Second Amendment was never created with sporting purpose in mind. It was created as the citizen's hedge against a tyrannical government. Saudi Arabians visiting the U.S. have no dog in that fight thus I have no problem with applying the 2A solely to U.S. citizens and restricting a foreign citizens ability to possess firearms. It has no more deleterious affect to our rights or the Constitution than prohibiting foreign nationals from voting in our elections.
Hey, I have a great idea we on pistol forums.com should all be familiar with. Reciprocity! How about we give foreign nationals visiting our country the same exact rights and privileges in our country that U.S. citizen would enjoy while visiting their country.
Reply With Quote