Desperate Military Filling It’s Ranks With Criminals!

Oh no!

WASHINGTON – The Army and Marine Corps are letting in more recruits with criminal records, including some with felony convictions, reflecting the increased pressure of five years of war and its mounting casualties.
According to data compiled by the Defense Department, the number of Army and Marine recruits needing waivers for felonies and serious misdemeanors, including minor drug offenses, has grown since 2003. The Army granted more than double the number of waivers for felonies and misdemeanors in 2006 than it did in 2003. Some recruits may get more than one waiver.

So we have a military full of pot heads and thieves now? I mean, double the number of waivers. That must be a lot, right?
Except, wait a minute…what’s this buried down in the middle of the article…

The number of felony waivers granted by the Army grew from 411 in 2003 to 901 in 2006, according to the Pentagon, or about one in 10 of the moral waivers approved that year. Other misdemeanors, which could be petty theft, writing a bad check or some assaults, jumped from about 2,700 to more than 6,000 in 2006.

So 901 recruits got waivers for felonies. About 6,000 got waivers for misdemeanors. In fiscal year 2006 the military recruited 317,866 people. These recruits that got waivers represent about 2.2% of overall recruits. But do we even really care about the recruits that had misdemeanor waivers? I mean, we’re talking about things like maybe shoplifting. Loud partying. Maybe a bar fight or something. Hardly troubling, no?
If we just include those recruits that got waivers for felonies we’re at about .28%. Or about 3 tenths of one percent of all recruits in 2006.
Hardly a staggering number. Plus, consider the military’s explanation for these waivers:

Army and Defense Department officials defended the waiver program as a way to admit young people who may have made a mistake early in life but have overcome past behavior. And they said about two-thirds of the waivers granted by the Marines are for drug use, because they — unlike the other services — require a waiver if someone has been convicted once for marijuana use.

Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? Well that didn’t get in the way of Democrats making some political hay out of the whole non-issue:

“The data is crystal clear. Our Armed Forces are under incredible strain and the only way that they can fill their recruiting quotas is by lowering their standards,” said Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., who requested the information from the Pentagon. “By lowering standards, we are endangering the rest of our armed forces and sending the wrong message to potential recruits across the country.”

Lowering standards? I think the men and women who were recruited by the military in 2006 would be surprised to learn that they’re sub-standard. I also fail to see how letting in a few recruits with minor criminal records hurts anything. There was a time in this country when the military was a place for the shiftless or the troublemakers. The military straightened ‘em out.
My father, in fact, was one who joined the military after a brief career as a juvenile delinquent. I won’t get into the nature of his petty crimes, but suffice it to say that the military did indeed straighten him out. He served in Vietnam as a Sergent in charge of a long range reconnaissance platoon, and he ended his military service with a silver star, three bronze stars, three purple hearts and a myriad of other lesser commendations.
I think folks like my father who were “straightened out” by the military might be surprised that they’re substandard as well.
It is pathetic – detestably pathetic – that the left and their allies in the media would try to make political hay out of this.

Tags: , , , , ,


«
»
  • Neiman

    gen. Chesty Puller (a Marine Corps legend) told Eleanor Roosevelt, and this is a loose paraphrase: Give me all the Marines that have been in trouble and in the brig, one case of whiskey each and I'll take Russia in a week."

    The point is a little bad boy in a Marine or combat soldier is not a bad thing, of course in the Marines they beat the crap out of a guy until they channel their bad boy stuff towards the enemy.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    political hay?

    No, I think just another excuse for the party of John "I'm not sure whose medals I threw over the fence" Kerry to impugn the military.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Holy Schmokes!

    This is exactly the tripe we heard out of Izvestia and the like!

    Sherman, set the WABAC machine for summer 1979, Camp Upshur, MCDEC, Quantico, Virginia, parade deck.

    Senior Drill Instructor Staff Sergeant Hawkins, reading aloud to us with a rare grin on his face, a translation from a Soviet Journal 'Krasnya Zvezda' or their version of Stars and Stripes.

    He read the propaganda piece verbatim, saying that the U.S. Marines were criminals, whose heads had been shaved (as all convicts are) and who murderous bloodlust is channeled into being the cutting edge of the sword of Imperialism.

    When the MSM has been completely overrun by the Left, when so much of the upper echelons of government have been overrun by the Left so as to defeat any chance of rooting out treason…

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  • Neiman

    Move_zig: By the way, in Mainland China until about 20 years ago, most of the peasants there believed to be a Marine the guy had to kill his mother and father first to prove he was a murderer.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Move_zig: By the way, in Mainland China until about 20 years ago, most of the peasants there believed to be a Marine the guy had to kill his mother and father first to prove he was a murderer.

    [nervously fidgeting and looking side to side]

    Ummmm…

    You mean, you didn't???

  • 2Hotel9

    I'll take troops out of the stockade or brig before the church choir any day of the week. Fuckin' A.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    You mean, you didn't???

    The Marines (Specifically Sgt Carter) only took him because they felts sorry for him being an orphan and all.

  • ellinas

    "I mean, we're talking about things like maybe shoplifting……"
    By Rob on February 13, 2007 at 09:41 pm

    Oh well shoplifting…hardly a crime.
    The rest of the post is well presented.

  • 2Hotel9

    At least they did not falsify information in order to enter the country, that is a plus, wouldn't you say ellinas?

  • Bat One

    Proof,

    I have to take issue with you regarding the medals thrown over the White House fence by John Kerry. Those were HIS medals alright. He threw them because the awards of those medals had already been rescinded anyway, as required by regulation, as part of his bad conduct discharge for conduct unbecoming (at a minimum).

    It is the ONLY explanation for the Board of Review that authorized his later "Honorable" Discharge, after Jimmy Carter had pardoned all the draft dodgers, deserters, and other, such as Kerry, who were given less than honorable discharges for their actions opposing the Vietnam War. It also explains why the medals were re-issued, with authorizing signatures not contemporary to the actions for which those medals were originally awarded.

    It was also the likely reason that Kerry was turned down by Harvard Law, and had to settle for BC School of Law.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    quoth the Robster:

    It is pathetic – detestably pathetic – that the left and their allies in the media would try to make political hay out of this.

    Rob, it all goes to [w]hatever advances the communist cause is moral, whatever retards or impedes, it is not **: break the Power of the status quo. The Family, Religion, National Heros, the Military — all the nuclear bonds that bolster and strengthen the national self-concept and Will to Resist.

    The military is the very heart of the power of the Status Quo. Indeed, the military is the very embodiment of the nation, as the Prussians used to say: (the Officer Korps is Germany).

    Without a fighting military, there is nothing to carry out the will of, or defend, the nation — the US would be as ripe for the taking as a naked coed out cold on roofies.

    For that reason, weaken the military: witchhunt active-duty types with actions such as Tail-Hook, call them extremists , ram through gender-norming, regardless (or because) as to how much it degrades the fighting effectiveness of any unit or branch (Lt. Kara Hultgren, VMI, mixed-sex submarines, etc..), deny them training areas (Vieques), close their bases, sue them for environmental pollution… you get the picture.

    WEAKEN the enemy, and the enemy is us.

    ** [www blythe org/peru-pcp/misc/polemics/gay-pcp.htm]

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Oh well shoplifting…hardly a crime.

    Where did I say it wasn't a crime? Or even hardly a crime?

    It is a crime, just not a terribly serious one.

  • http://history-nerd.blogspot.com/ Daniel

    And then we have Dhimmocrats like the new governor of Massachusetts, who want to limit employer access to the criminal records of people applying for jobs.

  • Paulie B

    Your dad kicks ass.

    So, Democrats… should convicted felons be allowed to have jobs after serving their time? Would you rather have them teaching in school than joining the military?

    Are you just afraid that your voting base will learn something of responsibility and start voting for conservative candidates?

  • gavin brown

    why let criminals in if there are so many people to choose from? how many of the new recruits are not US citizens?

  • ellinas

    "I mean, we're talking about things like maybe shoplifting……"
    By Rob on February 13, 2007 at 09:41 pm

    Where did I say it wasn't a crime? Or even hardly a crime?

    It is a crime, just not a terribly serious one.

    Rob on February 14, 2007 at 12:33 am

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Here's a thought, tearing a page from the French Foreign Legion: if you have a criminal or otherwise unsavory history (not including murder) and want a clean start, and even a new identity, you serve five years in a frontline combat unit, mostly infantry. If you have kept your nose clean and served honorably, you are discharged with a new and clean identity.

    It's the deal that's brought many a foreigner to La Legion Etranger. (I still thrill to the strains of Le Boudin)

    Otherwise, assuming they pass a background investigation, what better way for a foreign national to earn his citizenship than to serve in a combat unit and at the end of five years, earn the title US Citizen?

  • ellinas

    At least they did not falsify information in order to enter the country, that is a plus, wouldn't you say ellinas?

    2Hotel9 on February 14, 2007 at 12:00 am

    Yes 2hotel9 whatever you say.

    Now how about the fresh egg breakfast this summer?

  • gavin brown

    foreign national to earn his citizenship than to serve in a combat unit and at the end of five years, earn the title US Citizen?

    nice thought pity it didnt happen

  • 2Hotel9

    Foriegn Nationals serve in the US military all the time. It is one of the legal immigration routes.

  • Mickey

    At least none of these soldiers with criminal records had serious enough charges to qualify for a career in congress.

  • Pilgrim

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    Who watches the watchers indeed?

    If it hadn't been for the Marine Corps accepting "lowered standards" for 17 year old idiots during the Vietnam war my life would have taken an entirely different and, I strongly suspect, probably disatrous course.

    These holier than thou elitists sicken me. The opportunity the Marine Corps offered me probably saved my life, if not in a literal sense, certainly in a qualitative sense.

    Why should the kids of this generation be denied the same oportunities?

  • 2Hotel9

    This is a question I asked in the '80s, when the standards for enlistment were being changed. Many are the troubled youth who have risen to prominence in the military. Check the biographies of top soldiers, Officers and Enlisted.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    I recall my share of NCO's (and Occifers) and two of the very best could be deemed by some to be 'problem children' I note for the record that there is a distinction to be made between a good bad record and a bad bad record. The bad record types, I would say, comes from getting in trouble but based on no higher principle, but showing moral turpitude in the sense of writing bad checks and the like.

    The good bad record is the NCO who stands up to stupid, people-wasting orders, like frontal assaults when a fire mission will do, or drawing a line when enough is enough of painting the rocks white instend of focusing on operational training.

    Martinettes, those so-called leaders who insist on straight creases and polished boots but wouldn't know how to conduct an ambush or break out of one well, if they were in one, are the ones most likely to 'pencil-fuck' principled subordinate leaders.

    Those two outstanding NCO's I alluded to had been to E-5 and back several times, but I would have no one else securing my flank. The service jackets don't always tell the whole story about troops. While they might have gotten drunk on Friday nights and spent the weekend in the Brig, they did love the Corps and considered it a home where otherwise they had none. There's something to be said for that.

    Perhaps War is really more an Art than a Science, so the simple fact someone has 'gotten in trouble' wouldn't send him away from selection of any of my units.

  • 2Hotel9

    MZ, I can hear the C and U when you say sir.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    H-9-er,

    "C and U" ?

    I'm sorry, not sure I follow. It can't be bad, coming from you.

  • 2Hotel9

    Yes cur, whatever you say, cur.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Yes cur, whatever you say, cur.

    LOL. Got it.

    Actually, rather than come right out and mess with 'sir' I would simply use their designated rank, with the clipped and forceful VOICE.

    "You're killin people with your fucked-up fire mission Lieutenant! "

  • 2Hotel9

    In those kind of situations I did not tend to use honorific titles. I did once rip the mic cord out of a radio. Being 5'6" and freckle faced the "voice" tended to freeze people up, they would look at me as if I was suddenly demonically possesed. That is why I liked working with foreign nationals. Once they understood I knew what the hell I was doing I rarely had to raise my voice. Usually hand and eye movements were all that was needed.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development