How dare he carry something first designed and issued over 100 years ago; get with the times General! Sheesh (Photos embedded in original article)

https://www.military.com/daily...Y#Echobox=1560525164

Once again, social media is fascinated with the type of weapon the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan uses.

This time, the attention is on Army Gen. Scott Miller's sidearm. On May 28, Afghan media tweeted pictures of Miller meeting with Afghan officials while holstering a .45 caliber M1911A1 pistol -- which the Army no longer issues to soldiers.

After Military Times reported that Miller is a former special operator who was likely issued the pistol years ago, some barracks lawyers took to Facebook to claim Miller should face non-judicial punishment for bringing a personally owned, unauthorized weapon to a combat zone.

One critic even claimed that Miller was "a good example of I'm above the law toxic leadership."

However, this is not a case of different spanks for different ranks.

Miller was first issued the .45 pistol in 1992, and it became his official general officer-assigned weapon in 2009, his spokesman, Army Col. David Butler, told Task & Purpose.

The general fires his weapons regularly and encourages other troops downrange to go to the firing range as well, Butler said.

This is the second time that Miller's weapon of choice has caused a stir. In November, he was photographed holding an M4 carbine while on his way to attend a meeting. This came a month after a gunman opened fire at a meeting Miller was attending, killing an Afghan police commander and wounding Army Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Smiley.

Some speculated that Miller was armed with a carbine as a result of the insider attack, but Butler said at the time that the general was simply carrying the weapon from his helicopter and he gave the M4 to another service member before meeting with Afghan officials.

These damn lawyers got too much time on their hands,time to issue them weapons and sent to the front lines.
Maybe an 1860 Springfield 58 caliber mussel loader

When I was PL of PSD, we took the SCO to meetings with the afghans nearly daily. He always carried his M4 and M9 enroute, we walked there, but he always took his M9 with him into the meetings. I would ask if he wanted me in there with him. Sometimes he would and other times he’d say “nah, I’ll be fine.” I think it really came down to him not wanting to be the only American in the room surrounded by them.

quote:

Originally posted by 45 Cal:
These damn lawyers got too much time on their hands,time to issue them weapons and sent to the front lines.
Maybe an 1860 Springfield 58 caliber mussel loader

Barracks Lawyers aren't real lawyers, they are usually troops who post bullshit on the internet. Used to be they started verbal bullshit but now they gots the Facebook.

So general officers get a specific weapon assigned to them, instead of being assigned a weapon that's part of the TO&E of whatever unit they fall in?

Interesting. Did not know that.

quote:

Originally posted by AllenInWV:
So general officers get a specific weapon assigned to them, instead of being assigned a weapon that's part of the TO&E of whatever unit they fall in?

Interesting. Did not know that.

Pistols, yes.

https://www.army.mil/article/6...ram_has_rich_history

http://www.nramuseum.org/guns/...fficers-pistols.aspx

Honestly who gives a shit? He’s just doing what generals do, which is whatever the hell they want.

Honestly, he doesn't look like someone you want to fuck with, regardless of the pistol or rifle he may be carrying.

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
Honestly who gives a shit? He’s just doing what generals do, which is whatever the hell they want.

Yup...this right here. Bitchers gonna bitch...

It used to be that General Officers were allowed to add to their uniforms and carry their sidearm of choice. Think Patton.

It may have changed after him, but General Officers still have a lot of leeway and the barracks lawyers can just STFU.

"Toxic Leadership" is a very distinct problem, and has literally NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING to do with what type of pistol a General carries.

Retards have wayyyy too much time on their hands if this is all they can find to complain about. . .

Apparently he's not too popular with the troops he commands.

story makes no sense

says he was issued the pistol in 1992.

So how is it in 2019 - 27 years later - he still has the same gun?

the gun would have been unit property - not personal property

---------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Sig209:
story makes no sense

says he was issued the pistol in 1992.

So how is it in 2019 - 27 years later - he still has the same gun?

the gun would have been unit property - not personal property

Keep reading the next few words in the OP...

"Miller was first issued the .45 pistol in 1992, and it became his official general officer-assigned weapon in 2009"


If you'll then check out the link provided by RHINOWSO, it's explained that Generals are able to request issue of a pistol from the General Officer Management Office, which is then issued to them by the Anniston Army Depot and becomes their individually issued pistol (not unit property) for the remainder of their career, plus they have the option of purchasing it when they retire.

Not that it matters, but the one crappy pic I could find kind of looks like a Springfield Armory hammer with the enlarged loop they use. Curious what it is now.

People should be happy that THIS general is carrying a weapon and is able to defend himself and others when needed. It should not matter what he is carrying, but that HE IS carrying. God Bless

Patton would have driven them nuts....

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Sig209:
story makes no sense

says he was issued the pistol in 1992.

So how is it in 2019 - 27 years later - he still has the same gun?

the gun would have been unit property - not personal property

Keep reading the next few words in the OP...

"Miller was first issued the .45 pistol in 1992, and it became his official general officer-assigned weapon in 2009"


If you'll then check out the link provided by RHINOWSO, it's explained that Generals are able to request issue of a pistol from the General Officer Management Office, which is then issued to them by the Anniston Army Depot and becomes their individually issued pistol (not unit property) for the remainder of their career, plus they have the option of purchasing it when they retire.

No I read / know all that. Still doesnt make sense - as written.

They are inferring the exact serial numbered gun he was issued in 1992 - 27 years ago - is the same one he was 'granted' as a GO in 2009. Use of the words 'THE .45 pistol' ' is specific... Using words 'A .45 pistol' would be non-specific...

I am aware of the fact GO's can have their own private pistol. And that makes sense for a lot of reasons.

And I think it's outstanding he selected a .45 as opposed to a 'ceremonial' model / caliber.

But I'm saying the article makes no sense because a lot of the years they reference he was NOT a GO.

It's just a poorly written article.

-------------------------------------

The internet is open to almost anyone and almost anywhere. I've always wondered how many extremists/ANTIFA are posting just to stir the pot.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Apparently he's not too popular with the troops he commands.

The way government works. You can misappropriate millions of dollars. If everyone loves you, nothing happens. If everyone hates you, termination for coming to work half hour late.