2pid, do lower standards mean the military is not "broken"?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
increase from last year, the Army said.

Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.

The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm

(i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
wanted to join? LoL.)

***

The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.

Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
felony convictions.

"Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
according to Col. Sheila Hickman.

In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.

"DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."

No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."

It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
jail.

But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.

"In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml

***

From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
"moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.

"How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
from his county.

That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/43999.html

***

The Army is lowering recruitment standards to levels not seen in at
least two decades, and the implications are severe—not only for the
future of the Army, but also for the direction of U.S. foreign policy.

The latest statistics—compiled by the Defense Department. and obtained
through the Freedom of Information Act by the Boston-based National
Priorities Project—are grim. They show that the percentage of new Army
recruits with high-school diplomas has plunged from 94 percent in 2003
to 83.5 percent in 2005 to 70.7 percent in 2007. (The Pentagon's
longstanding goal is 90 percent.)

http://www.slate.com/id/2182752/

Shall we now 'discuss' a broken military, 2pid?

You truly are an imbecile. LoL.

[[email protected]]

On Nov 16, 12:21 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
> under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
> including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
> increase from last year, the Army said.
>
> Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
> reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
> medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
> who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
>
> The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
> past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm
>
> (i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
> should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
> wanted to join? LoL.)
>
> ***
>
> The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
> convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
> alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
> reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.
>
> Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
> felony convictions.
>
> "Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
> according to Col. Sheila Hickman.
>
> In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
> enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.
>
> "DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
> Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."
>
> No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
> arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."
>
> It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
> jail.
>
> But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
> Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.
>
> "In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
> have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
> says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml
>
> ***
>
> From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
> "moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
> percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
> no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
> were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
> service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
> gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.
>
> "How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
> County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
> from his county.
>
> That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
> invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
> legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
> sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
> battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.
>

Once convicted of a felony, a crime which _could result_ in a one
year prison sentence even if a misdemeanor, or a domestic violence
violation of any kind, a person is Federally prohibited from owning
any Title 1 firearm, which is a handgun, rifle or shotgun not covered
under Title II (short barreled rifles and shotguns, fully automatic
firearms and firearms with silencers). This can ONLY be waivered by
Presidential (not state, even if the State was the convicting agency)
pardon, by reversal of conviction, or in specifically notated cases by
administrative restoration of firearm rights by the BATFE.

However, law enforcement and military persons convicted of nonfelony
Domestic Violence may be allowed to carry and possess firearms on
duty even though as a civilian they cannot possess that same weapon
off duty unless their agency has a policy requiring agents to carry at
all times. That includes a secret but known considerable number of
NYPD and Port Authority (NY/NJ) police officers and military policemen-
including Air Force personnel subject to Personnel Reliability Program
monitoring. For the retarded or liberal (but I repeat myself) that
means PEOPLE GUARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

My own grandfather did four months for beating the hell out of his
uncle, who was abusing the family. He was released from jail in
Maryland to join the Navy during WWII and wound up becoming a Navy
Captain shortly after the end of the Korean conflict. He bought
firearms and used them recreationally (hunting and trap and skeet
shooting) in a legal manner all his life. Technically he was in
violation of the Lautenberg law the last few years of his life, but no
one bothered him about it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 16, 5:20*pm, wrote:
> On Nov 16, 12:21 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
> > under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
> > including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
> > increase from last year, the Army said.
>
> > Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
> > reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
> > medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
> > who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
>
> > The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
> > past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.
>
> >http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm
>
> > (i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
> > should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
> > wanted to join? LoL.)
>
> > ***
>
> > The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
> > convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
> > alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
> > reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.
>
> > Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
> > felony convictions.
>
> > "Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
> > according to Col. Sheila Hickman.
>
> > In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
> > enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.
>
> > "DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
> > Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."
>
> > No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
> > arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."
>
> > It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
> > jail.
>
> > But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
> > Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.
>
> > "In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
> > have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
> > says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.
>
> >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml
>
> > ***
>
> > From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
> > "moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
> > percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
> > no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
> > were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
> > service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
> > gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.
>
> > "How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
> > County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
> > from his county.
>
> > That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
> > invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
> > legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
> > sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
> > battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.
>
> *Once convicted of a felony, a crime which _could result_ in a one
> year prison sentence even if a misdemeanor, or a domestic violence
> violation of any kind, a person is Federally prohibited from owning
> any Title 1 firearm, which is a handgun, rifle or shotgun not covered
> under Title II (short barreled rifles and shotguns, fully automatic
> firearms and firearms with silencers). This can ONLY be waivered by
> Presidential (not state, even if the State was the convicting agency)
> pardon, by reversal of conviction, or in specifically notated cases by
> administrative restoration of firearm rights by the BATFE.
>
> *However, law enforcement and military persons convicted of nonfelony
> Domestic Violence *may be allowed to carry and possess firearms on
> duty even though as a civilian they cannot possess that same weapon
> off duty unless their agency has a policy requiring agents to carry at
> all times. That includes a secret but known considerable number of
> NYPD and Port Authority (NY/NJ) police officers and military policemen-
> including Air Force personnel subject to Personnel Reliability Program
> monitoring. For the retarded or liberal (but I repeat myself) that
> means PEOPLE GUARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

I am not aware of a military exception to Lautenberg:

https://www.marines.usmc.mil/RS/CRSC/Conference%20Power%20Point%20Presentations/lautenberg.ppt#18

> *My own grandfather did four months for beating the hell out of his
> uncle, who was abusing the family. He was released from jail in
> Maryland to join the Navy during WWII and wound up becoming a Navy
> Captain shortly after the end of the Korean conflict. He bought
> firearms and used them recreationally (hunting and trap and skeet
> shooting) *in a legal manner all his life. Technically he was in
> violation of the Lautenberg law the last few years of his life, but no
> one bothered him about it.

I recall having to annually sign a Lutenberg statement when I was in
the millitary.

I found this:

E. Command Responsibilities. Commanders requesting guidance concerning
the Lautenberg Amendment should contact their Trial Counsel or the
Administrative Law Division at 239-2717. DOD and Army policy requires
the following to implement and enforce the Lautenberg Amendment:

1. Notify soldiers that it is unlawful to possess firearms and
ammunition if they have qualifying domestic violence convictions;

2. Check local unit files to determine whether soldiers have
qualifying convic*tions and report soldiers known to have such
convictions through command channels to HQDA;

3. Detail soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
to duties not requiring the bearing of weapons or ammunition;

4. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
from deploy*ments for missions requiring possession of firearms or
ammunition;

5. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
from attending military schools where instruction in weapons or
ammunition is part of the curriculum;

6. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
from receiving OCONUS assignments;

7. Transfer – where possible – soldiers having or believed to have
qualifying convictions from TOE to TDA units and organizations; and

8. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
from re-enlisting.

http://www.riley.army.mil/view/article.aspx?articleId=827-2002-08-09-41021-5

[[email protected]]

On Nov 16, 6:30 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 5:20 pm, wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 16, 12:21 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
> > > under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
> > > including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
> > > increase from last year, the Army said.
>
> > > Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
> > > reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
> > > medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
> > > who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
>
> > > The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
> > > past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.
>
> > >http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm
>
> > > (i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
> > > should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
> > > wanted to join? LoL.)
>
> > > ***
>
> > > The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
> > > convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
> > > alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
> > > reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.
>
> > > Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
> > > felony convictions.
>
> > > "Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
> > > according to Col. Sheila Hickman.
>
> > > In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
> > > enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.
>
> > > "DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
> > > Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."
>
> > > No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
> > > arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."
>
> > > It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
> > > jail.
>
> > > But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
> > > Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.
>
> > > "In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
> > > have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
> > > says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.
>
> > >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml
>
> > > ***
>
> > > From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
> > > "moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
> > > percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
> > > no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
> > > were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
> > > service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
> > > gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.
>
> > > "How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
> > > County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
> > > from his county.
>
> > > That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
> > > invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
> > > legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
> > > sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
> > > battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.
>
> > Once convicted of a felony, a crime which _could result_ in a one
> > year prison sentence even if a misdemeanor, or a domestic violence
> > violation of any kind, a person is Federally prohibited from owning
> > any Title 1 firearm, which is a handgun, rifle or shotgun not covered
> > under Title II (short barreled rifles and shotguns, fully automatic
> > firearms and firearms with silencers). This can ONLY be waivered by
> > Presidential (not state, even if the State was the convicting agency)
> > pardon, by reversal of conviction, or in specifically notated cases by
> > administrative restoration of firearm rights by the BATFE.
>
> > However, law enforcement and military persons convicted of nonfelony
> > Domestic Violence may be allowed to carry and possess firearms on
> > duty even though as a civilian they cannot possess that same weapon
> > off duty unless their agency has a policy requiring agents to carry at
> > all times. That includes a secret but known considerable number of
> > NYPD and Port Authority (NY/NJ) police officers and military policemen-
> > including Air Force personnel subject to Personnel Reliability Program
> > monitoring. For the retarded or liberal (but I repeat myself) that
> > means PEOPLE GUARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
>
> I am not aware of a military exception to Lautenberg:
>
> https://www.marines.usmc.mil/RS/CRSC/Conference%20Power%20Point%20Pre...
>
> > My own grandfather did four months for beating the hell out of his
> > uncle, who was abusing the family. He was released from jail in
> > Maryland to join the Navy during WWII and wound up becoming a Navy
> > Captain shortly after the end of the Korean conflict. He bought
> > firearms and used them recreationally (hunting and trap and skeet
> > shooting) in a legal manner all his life. Technically he was in
> > violation of the Lautenberg law the last few years of his life, but no
> > one bothered him about it.
>
> I recall having to annually sign a Lutenberg statement when I was in
> the millitary.
>
> I found this:
>
> E. Command Responsibilities. Commanders requesting guidance concerning
> the Lautenberg Amendment should contact their Trial Counsel or the
> Administrative Law Division at 239-2717. DOD and Army policy requires
> the following to implement and enforce the Lautenberg Amendment:
>
> 1. Notify soldiers that it is unlawful to possess firearms and
> ammunition if they have qualifying domestic violence convictions;
>
> 2. Check local unit files to determine whether soldiers have
> qualifying convic*tions and report soldiers known to have such
> convictions through command channels to HQDA;
>
> 3. Detail soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> to duties not requiring the bearing of weapons or ammunition;
>
> 4. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from deploy*ments for missions requiring possession of firearms or
> ammunition;
>
> 5. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from attending military schools where instruction in weapons or
> ammunition is part of the curriculum;
>
> 6. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from receiving OCONUS assignments;
>
> 7. Transfer – where possible – soldiers having or believed to have
> qualifying convictions from TOE to TDA units and organizations; and
>
> 8. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from re-enlisting.
>
> http://www.riley.army.mil/view/article.aspx?articleId=827-2002-08-09-....

If "Anti-Semitism" (i.e., a general opposition to or prejudice
against Jews, as the term is commonly used) ever does spring up again
in the United States, (Bret does not count, because I have secret
evidence he was born in Canada) one will certainly have to admit that
the enthusiasm of Lautenberg, Dianne Feinstein, and many other Jewish
legislators for gun control has played some part.

My grandfather left the Navy in the early 1960s after twenty years
with full retirement. He was therefore long retired before Lautenberg.
His hunting companions were mostly old retired military and LE people
and they knew full well he was in technical violation, as did he, and
no one bothered him. That said, it is possible he could have argued
that the conviction did not meet the standard for "domestic violence"
under Lautenberg, although courts given similar cases have ruled
similar charges did. If every technical violator of Lautenberg were
prosecuted, the FCIs dealing with geriatrics would be overrun and
everyone knows it. Under Bush II there has been an unofficial policy
of sort of looking the other way with people whose convictions date
from the 1950s or earlier.

It's de rigeur on the left and the right alike to regard Bush II with
the utmost contempt. While I agree he's one of the lesser persons to
occupy the Oval Office, you have to give credit where it's due. We
haven't had a Waco, a Ruby Ridge, or an Oklahoma City under his
tenure. We''ll see if that continues under the new Presidency.

[BretLudwig]

Lautenberg is a cocksucker.

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Noi, 19:30, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 5:20*pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 16, 12:21 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
> > > under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
> > > including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
> > > increase from last year, the Army said.
>
> > > Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
> > > reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
> > > medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
> > > who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
>
> > > The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
> > > past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.
>
> > >http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm
>
> > > (i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
> > > should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
> > > wanted to join? LoL.)
>
> > > ***
>
> > > The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
> > > convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
> > > alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
> > > reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.
>
> > > Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
> > > felony convictions.
>
> > > "Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
> > > according to Col. Sheila Hickman.
>
> > > In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
> > > enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.
>
> > > "DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
> > > Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."
>
> > > No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
> > > arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."
>
> > > It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
> > > jail.
>
> > > But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
> > > Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.
>
> > > "In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
> > > have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
> > > says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.
>
> > >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml
>
> > > ***
>
> > > From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
> > > "moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
> > > percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
> > > no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
> > > were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
> > > service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
> > > gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.
>
> > > "How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
> > > County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
> > > from his county.
>
> > > That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
> > > invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
> > > legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
> > > sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
> > > battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.
>
> > *Once convicted of a felony, a crime which _could result_ in a one
> > year prison sentence even if a misdemeanor, or a domestic violence
> > violation of any kind, a person is Federally prohibited from owning
> > any Title 1 firearm, which is a handgun, rifle or shotgun not covered
> > under Title II (short barreled rifles and shotguns, fully automatic
> > firearms and firearms with silencers). This can ONLY be waivered by
> > Presidential (not state, even if the State was the convicting agency)
> > pardon, by reversal of conviction, or in specifically notated cases by
> > administrative restoration of firearm rights by the BATFE.
>
> > *However, law enforcement and military persons convicted of nonfelony
> > Domestic Violence *may be allowed to carry and possess firearms on
> > duty even though as a civilian they cannot possess that same weapon
> > off duty unless their agency has a policy requiring agents to carry at
> > all times. That includes a secret but known considerable number of
> > NYPD and Port Authority (NY/NJ) police officers and military policemen-
> > including Air Force personnel subject to Personnel Reliability Program
> > monitoring. For the retarded or liberal (but I repeat myself) that
> > means PEOPLE GUARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
>
> I am not aware of a military exception to Lautenberg:
>
> https://www.marines.usmc.mil/RS/CRSC/Conference%20Power%20Point%20Pre...
>
> > *My own grandfather did four months for beating the hell out of his
> > uncle, who was abusing the family. He was released from jail in
> > Maryland to join the Navy during WWII and wound up becoming a Navy
> > Captain shortly after the end of the Korean conflict. He bought
> > firearms and used them recreationally (hunting and trap and skeet
> > shooting) *in a legal manner all his life. Technically he was in
> > violation of the Lautenberg law the last few years of his life, but no
> > one bothered him about it.
>
> I recall having to annually sign a Lutenberg statement when I was in
> the millitary.
>
> I found this:
>
> E. Command Responsibilities. Commanders requesting guidance concerning
> the Lautenberg Amendment should contact their Trial Counsel or the
> Administrative Law Division at 239-2717. DOD and Army policy requires
> the following to implement and enforce the Lautenberg Amendment:
>
> 1. Notify soldiers that it is unlawful to possess firearms and
> ammunition if they have qualifying domestic violence convictions;
>
> 2. Check local unit files to determine whether soldiers have
> qualifying convic*tions and report soldiers known to have such
> convictions through command channels to HQDA;
>
> 3. Detail soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> to duties not requiring the bearing of weapons or ammunition;
>
> 4. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from deploy*ments for missions requiring possession of firearms or
> ammunition;
>
> 5. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from attending military schools where instruction in weapons or
> ammunition is part of the curriculum;
>
> 6. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from receiving OCONUS assignments;
>
> 7. Transfer – where possible – soldiers having or believed to have
> qualifying convictions from TOE to TDA units and organizations; and
>
> 8. Prohibit soldiers having or believed to have qualifying convictions
> from re-enlisting.
>
> http://www.riley.army.mil/view/article.aspx?articleId=827-2002-08-09-....-

Looks like beating up your wife is the soldiers' new version of
shooting yourself in the foot.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 16, 12:21*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted
> under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems,
> including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight
> increase from last year, the Army said.
>
> Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral"
> reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for
> medical reasons and 7% were drug and alcohol problems, including those
> who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs.
>
> The Army said the waiver process recognizes that people can overcome
> past mistakes and become law abiding citizens.
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm
>
> (i.e. And to that last point: can people overcome past mistakes? Or
> should they all be banned from military service? What if William Ayers
> wanted to join? LoL.)
>
> ***
>
> The number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or
> convictions has more than tripled in the past five years. This year
> alone, the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with rap sheets,
> reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.
>
> Most are guilty of misdemeanors, but around 100 in the past year had
> felony convictions.
>
> "Burglaries and narcotics are probably our two top categories,"
> according to Col. Sheila Hickman.
>
> In the Dallas recruiting office, Staff Sgt. Anthony Garcia says he
> enlists only those who are ready to leave that past behind.
>
> "DUI, drug paraphernalia charges, more than three curfew violations,"
> Garcia says. "It could be anything minor or some stuff major."
>
> No violent crimes, but for "major stuff" like breaking and entering or
> arson, the military grants what's called a "moral waiver."
>
> It's an old formula judges used to pronounce: Join the Army or go to
> jail.
>
> But today, recruits are going from boot camp to a hot war in Iraq.
> Some former Pentagon officials call it a recipe for chaos.
>
> "In order for the Army to meet its quota, which is going up … they
> have to resort to giving, taking more and more chances on people,"
> says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress.
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml
>
> ***
>
> From 2003 to 2007, the percentage of Army recruits receiving so-called
> "moral conduct" waivers more than doubled, from 4.6 percent to 11.2
> percent. Others, The Bee found, were able to enlist because they had
> no official criminal record of arrests or convictions, their records
> were overlooked or prosecutors suspended charges in lieu of military
> service — akin to a now-defunct Vietnam-era practice in which judges
> gave defendants a choice between prison and the military.
>
> "How in the hell can they legally possess a gun?" asked Montgomery
> County, Ala., Sheriff D.T. Marshall, when questioned about a soldier
> from his county.
>
> That soldier, Eli C. Gregory, was convicted in an attempted home
> invasion and of felony theft in Alabama, making him ineligible to
> legally possess a firearm there. Yet the military gave him a rifle and
> sent him to Iraq, where he was convicted by the Army of assault and
> battery on a fellow soldier and discharged.
>
> http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/43999.html
>
> ***
>
> The Army is lowering recruitment standards to levels not seen in at
> least two decades, and the implications are severe—not only for the
> future of the Army, but also for the direction of U.S. foreign policy.
>
> The latest statistics—compiled by the Defense Department. and obtained
> through the Freedom of Information Act by the Boston-based National
> Priorities Project—are grim. They show that the percentage of new Army
> recruits with high-school diplomas has plunged from 94 percent in 2003
> to 83.5 percent in 2005 to 70.7 percent in 2007. (The Pentagon's
> longstanding goal is 90 percent.)
>
> http://www.slate.com/id/2182752/
>
> Shall we now 'discuss' a broken military, 2pid?
>
> You truly are an imbecile. LoL.

No comment from our resident military 'genius'?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 19, 4:34*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Nov 19, 1:42*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

> > wrote:
>
> > > The Army is lowering recruitment standards to levels not seen in at
> > > least two decades, and the implications are severe—not only for the
> > > future of the Army, but also for the direction of U.S. foreign policy..
>
> > > The latest statistics—compiled by the Defense Department. and obtained
> > > through the Freedom of Information Act by the Boston-based National
> > > Priorities Project—are grim. They show that the percentage of new Army
> > > recruits with high-school diplomas has plunged from 94 percent in 2003
> > > to 83.5 percent in 2005 to 70.7 percent in 2007. (The Pentagon's
> > > longstanding goal is 90 percent.)
>
> > >http://www.slate.com/id/2182752/
>
> > > Shall we now 'discuss' a broken military, 2pid?
>
> > > You truly are an imbecile. LoL.
>
> > No comment from our resident military 'genius'?
>
> *Sure, Why should the Pentagon's goal be higher than what the
> Ca. State Board of Education can provide?
>
> We know your artillery rattled brain would like us to believe
> the Army is all rocket scientists and engineers but
> you've proven by example that isn't true.

I'd say, 2pid, that you have no idea what you're talking about. If you
don't think that in a combat zone you have to understand the
situation, rapidly process information and orders and make the proper
call, know how to operate complex equipment, know what possibilities
exist 360 degrees (an infantry term. The FA would say 6400 mils), and
be able to multi-task as well as have competence in basic soldier
skills like first aid, radio procedures, calls for fire, and a whole
host of other things, why, you'd be an imbecile.

And yes, you have "proven that by example". And example. And example.
And...

LoL.

The military needs smart people, 2pid. That's probably why you
couldn't get in.

> Personally, I think sending all the high school dropouts
> to the Army might not be a bad idea.

That's a really, really good way to keep it broken for a long time,
2pid. As it is it will take 10-20 years for the military to recover,

> Especially since Obama won't have much for
> them to do.

Oh, they'll have plenty to do. Afghanistan for starters, and then
whatever else comes along...

> Jenn, what do you think? Useful student motivation?

2pid, when I joined in 1984 the military was just coming out of the
aftermath of Vietnam. In fact I remember soldiers had the feeling that
the military had finally shed that ghost after the first Gulf War.

As usual, you'd be better served keeping your mouth shut regarding
military matters.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > Especially since Obama won't have much for
> > them to do.
>
> Oh, they'll have plenty to do. Afghanistan for starters, and then
> whatever else comes along...

You went by this pearl by Witless without pausing. I'm wondering how he
thinks Obama will be able to pacify all our enemies to the extent we won't
need to do battle with anybody. Is Obama a witch doctor with actual magic
powers? I'd like Scottie to explain what he meant.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 19, 6:43*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Shhhh! said:
>
> > > Especially since Obama won't have much for
> > > them to do.
>
> > Oh, they'll have plenty to do. Afghanistan for starters, and then
> > whatever else comes along...
>
> You went by this pearl by Witless without pausing. I'm wondering how he
> thinks Obama will be able to pacify all our enemies to the extent we won't
> need to do battle with anybody. Is Obama a witch doctor with actual magic
> powers? I'd like Scottie to explain what he meant.

Why, that's a totally different read from mine. I assumed that 2pid
meant that we'd no longer have the military used as our first-line
foreign policy. You know, shoot first and ask questions later. I'd
imagine that would disappoint 2pid and the other military genii on the
right.

But now I see that you are right: 2pid is indeed placing great faith
in our new President.