TexasCHLforum.com

NASHVILLE - Maj. Gen. Max Haston, Tennessee's Adjutant General, today announced that the Military Department has taken steps to increase the security of its personnel and facilities to include allowing Tennessee Army & Air National Guard members with valid Tennessee State Handgun Carry Permits to carry handguns at State Armories and facilities.

Haston's decision follows Governor Bill Haslam's directive, issued earlier this month in the aftermath of the deadly shootings in Chattanooga, to review current Guard personnel who are authorized to be armed in the performance of their duties, and identify and arm Guardsmen where necessary to protect themselves, citizens and Guard facilities.
...

Haston also announced that selected Guard personnel working on Federal facilities would be allowed to carry federally issued handguns.
"Federal law prohibits carrying a personally owned weapon on a Federal facility," said Haston. "Therefore, selected personnel working on Federal property will draw and carry a federally issued firearm for protection."

...

RTWT: http://www.tnmilitary.org/pdfs/15_30.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ELB wrote:

NASHVILLE - Maj. Gen. Max Haston, Tennessee's Adjutant General, today announced that the Military Department has taken steps to increase the security of its personnel and facilities to include allowing Tennessee Army & Air National Guard members with valid Tennessee State Handgun Carry Permits to carry handguns at State Armories and facilities.

Haston's decision follows Governor Bill Haslam's directive, issued earlier this month in the aftermath of the deadly shootings in Chattanooga, to review current Guard personnel who are authorized to be armed in the performance of their duties, and identify and arm Guardsmen where necessary to protect themselves, citizens and Guard facilities.
...

Haston also announced that selected Guard personnel working on Federal facilities would be allowed to carry federally issued handguns.
"Federal law prohibits carrying a personally owned weapon on a Federal facility," said Haston. "Therefore, selected personnel working on Federal property will draw and carry a federally issued firearm for protection."

...

RTWT: http://www.tnmilitary.org/pdfs/15_30.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perfect solution!! Congrats to TN for making it happen. I'd suspect that TN is about to see a massive surge in CHL applications from the Guard.

Well, not so fast. It appears the Tennessee Adjutant General is infected with the same fear of his own troops as the regular forces' leadership.

He has promulgated a long list of "thou shall nots" that effectively hamstrings the whole effort.

Remember, this all applies to NG and ANG members who already have licenses to carry from the State of Tennessee, and thus can carry pretty much any kind of loaded handgun in pretty much any kind of holster in public.

- "The carried weapon must "meet identical or nearly identical specifications of the M9 Beretta service pistol or smaller", and be .380, 9mm, .40, or .45 only. No revolvers, and no derringers (I'm not a fan of derringers myself, but really..). So a someone who carries 357 Sig, like some police departments, could not carry that handgun.
- Must be a holster that is "identical or nearly identical to the service-issued holster" on a waist-belt only on left or right side. Last I looked military holsters were not, for example, AIWBs, or even IWB. No shoulder holsters, no ankle.
- Thus they anticipate that the only way to conceal it is to wear a coat or jacket -- thus carry is limited to wearing the Class A uniform (in civilian terms this would be coat-and-tie) or the ACU uniform (the camouflage one that has a shirt ("blouse") that is roomy and designed not to be tucked in). No class B (shortsleeve shirt only) concealed carry.
- This also means you cannot carry if you are in an situation where removal of the ACU blouse would be authorized, e.g. when high temperatures are present or on details where the blouse could be removed. Doesn't matter if you are willing to keep it on, if it is authorized for removal, you can't carry a handgun. If you are in Class As and you might be going some place that you would have to or might take your coat off, then no-carry.


and most astounding of all:
===>> NO MAGAZINE locked in the pistol

(I'm surprised they didn't specify no round in the chamber as well, but whoever came up with that idea probably doesn't realize you carry a real defensive firearm with one in the chamber).

No Lawyer, Only Guns and Money has all the documentation on this here: http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... tails.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

See, that's the thing about progress. It doesn't come all at once, ESPECIALLY in the military. The fact that they're allowing it at all is a huge step.

Y'all can nitpick all you want, but at the end of the day there are more guys in uniform that can defend themselves than there were before.

I'm all for progress, but ordering the carrying a handgun for defense without a magazine is a major fail, not a nitpick.

ELB wrote:I'm all for progress, but ordering the carrying a handgun for defense without a magazine is a major fail, not a nitpick.

Right. Because having a mag in your pocket is much worse than being unarmed.

Empty pistol...wow. I guess you could throw it at the bad guy. I have to say when I was in the Navy in the '80's we were also trained to to carry a .45 1911 "paperweight style", and even worse they gave us one mag with 3 shots. Military doctrine for small arms seems to mostly have evolved around rifles.

I guess a pistol is pretty much a backup weapon for tankers, guards, officers, and so forth. With the exception of the special forces, I figure most LEOs are much better trained in handgun use and tactics. Still, if you're going to let military carry in the US, you might as well let them do it effectively.

Taypo wrote:

ELB wrote:I'm all for progress, but ordering the carrying a handgun for defense without a magazine is a major fail, not a nitpick.

Right. Because having a mag in your pocket is much worse than being unarmed.

its the same thing, you cannot draw your weapon, lock and load and get into action fast enough to keep a girl scout from flaming you period!

JP171 wrote:

Taypo wrote:

ELB wrote:I'm all for progress, but ordering the carrying a handgun for defense without a magazine is a major fail, not a nitpick.

Right. Because having a mag in your pocket is much worse than being unarmed.

its the same thing, you cannot draw your weapon, lock and load and get into action fast enough to keep a girl scout from flaming you period!

Why must it be all or nothing with you people? Everyone who carries knows that an unloaded pistol is about useless, but isn't it better than having it locked in the trunk? You're absolutely correct - its going to be extremely slow to draw, load and make ready. It's also about the least amount of risk to the unit, the public and the reputation of the service while still allowing carry.

Isn't that the required carry for MP's stateside?