Tennesse owned military sites

[redbarron06]

This if for the law smart folks out there.

I am a mamber of the National Guard and work on a TN military site on a daily basis. The site is not posted IAW TCA. It simply has a picture of a handgun with the red slash through it. I do have a valid handgun permit.

I guess this is a two part question:

1. Because these sites are state property do they fall under any other law other than § 39-17-1359.

2. As a member of the National Guard and assuming that either the Gov (being considered the commander of the National Guard), The Tennessee Adjudant General, or an officer in the chain of command for the administration of the site has established the intent to prohibit guns from the site would I being breaking the law (either TCA or UCMJ) by having a firearm in my car while at work on the facility?

Thank you in advance for any advice you can give me.

[johnharris]

Federal properties do not have to post in compliance with TCA 39-17-1359.

State owned, operated or managed properties do have to comply with TCA 39-17-1359 unless either a) they are using language that was grandfathered because it existed prior to the amendments to 39-17-1359 or b) the property is prohibited under some other statute or controlling regulation.

[redbarron06]

Mr Harris,

Thank you for information. I guess more of a concern to me is more on the side of the UCMJ. I know that you are an attorney but I dont know if you are familure with the UCMJ. Would it be legal for the National Guard to try to prosicute me under the UCMJ for something to the effect of "disobeying a lawfull order" if the order does not meet the standards of TCA?

[johnharris]

I have not researched it but it seems to me is the "lawful order" issue.

[CarlS]

I'm not an attorney, so take this to one of the base lawyers. I have, however, read and studied the UCMJ exhaustively while working as a military legal clerk (many moons ago). It's a fascinating document. The thing you need to keep in mind is that you, a member of the military, fall primarily under the UCMJ, except for offenses committed when off-duty and also outside the boundaries of a military installation. Under the UCMJ, disobeying a lawful order is what you are charged with. So, the question is "Is it lawful for a commander to post an order banning firearms when civilian law says otherwise?" The short answer is "YES, it is lawful". If you were charged, the constitutional question would not even be considered, because you would have violated a lawful order. As for the constitutionality, the military justice system is, by direction of Congress, with the concurrence of the supreme court, separate and distinct, and military members do surrender some of their rights to "the common good". My advice - visit JAG and seek lawful permission to transport and store your personal weapon in your vehicle while on base, so that it will be available to you while traveling to and from.

[redbarron06]