en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/268288 Comments by Postcomments http://ucgblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/yes-were-back-on-this-topic-again.html#IDComment14910043 This post was submitted by CDR Laahs using the CGBlog.org post comments service: In general terms, the Lautenberg Amendment (18 USC § 922) bars a person convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from possessing a firearm or ammunition. The ban applies for the convict's lifetime. There is no military or law enforcement exception, which means that a Coast Guard member who is convicted should not have access to firearms. The amendment also prohibits the possession of firearms by persons who have an active restraining order against them as a result of a domestic violence incident, even though they have not been convicted. Unlike the lifetime ban, the prohibition based on a restraining order ends with the restraining order. Upon notification the Command removes the member from any position that requires or has access to firearms. A full explanation of Coast Guard policies regarding the Lautenberg Amendment can be found in the Ordnance Manual, Commandant Instruction M8000.2D, and the Personnel Security Program Manual, Commandant Instruction M5520.12C The Privacy Act is not optional and it carries criminal penalties if violated. It is a shield that protects the individual, not the agency, from invasion of privacy. Because the Coast Guard follows the law, we protect privacy even when that means refraining from effectively rebutting erroneous information in the public domain. Without violating any individual's privacy, we can say that we have reviewed this matter and found the Coast Guard fully complied with the Lautenberg Amendment. We are reviewing ways of using employee certification that they comply with the amendment when qualifying with weapons to better ensure no violations take place with government firearms. This is an official United States Coast Guard posting for the public's information. Our posting does not endorse this site or anything on it, including links to other sites, and we disclaim responsibility and liability for the site and its content. CDR Bob Laahs Chief, Policy & Standards Division Office of Military Personnel Commandant, U.S Coast Guard Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:34:16 +0000 http://ucgblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/yes-were-back-on-this-topic-again.html#IDComment14910043 http://www.cgblog.org/2008/11/dissecting-coast-guards-policy-of.html#IDComment11378654 On behalf of C. T. O'Neil Mr. Erickson, I think you and your readers should take comfort in the idea that our guidance is described as interim. I view the approach as rather enlightened. Instead of making a change to the public affairs manual, we issued the guidance via ALCOASTs which allows for more rapid dissemination, and allows the guidance to later be adopted through a change to the manual or, if necessary, allows the guidance to be changed before being promulgated in the manual. It isn't a test or a barometer as much as it is a recognition that we're going to learn a few things as we move along and that the lessons we learn may warrant an adjustment or two to our guidance. The approach affords everyone a certain degree of flexibility. Bottom line, our organization gains some groundrules to use while exploring social media and multiple, time-consuming changes to a manual are avoided. Respectfully, C. T. O'Neil Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Chief of Media Relations (CG-09222) This is an official United States Coast Guard posting for the public's information. Our posting does not endorse this site or anything on it, including links to other sites, and we disclaim responsibility and liability for the site and its content. Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:47:35 +0000 http://www.cgblog.org/2008/11/dissecting-coast-guards-policy-of.html#IDComment11378654