# Franck Gervais - Why is everyone crucifying him?



## Krelf (Jul 3, 2012)

Alright, the guy is in the wrong and should get a $100 fine or something. Impersonating a peace officer is a crime, albeit not as bad as most. This causes me to wonder why have I seen his picture in nearly every paper and Canadian online news sites? Why is there a lengthy stream of reporters knocking at his door and going to his place of work to talk to his boss? 


Some experts believe that Gervais has an ego or identity problem, yet the media is giving this guy more jabs than most murderers, and he is not likely the kind of guy with the resilience to take it. 

The media should lay off and let the courts look after it.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I understand why you would feel that way, but this sort of thing happens far too often.

Go on youtube and you'll find dozens of clips about people impersonating navy seals et cetera.

These guys do terrible tasks for us collectively and deserve respect.

No, it's not murder, but a strong dose of public shaming seems appropriate to me.


----------



## Krelf (Jul 3, 2012)

Milkman said:


> I understand why you would feel that way, but this sort of thing happens far too often.
> 
> Go on youtube and you'll find dozens of clips about people impersonating navy seals et cetera.
> 
> ...



A man can beat his wife to a pulp and a story may appear on page 12 of the local paper and then be forgotten. But in most cases the press will ignore it altogether. The fact is, this man didn't really hurt anyone but himself. Policemen, soldiers and other people of authority need to be protected from imposters. But the media feeding frenzy that occurred seems over the top to me.


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

while I think the guy is a total loser & deserves to be shamed, it is a little apalling to me that this is getting more publicity than other more serious crimes, that physically harm other people


have we become complacent to all the other serious crimes, because they are far more common?


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

sounds like an american thing to do, doesn't it? i dunno, i get the fine thing, but the sensationalism is rather heavy-handed, imo


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> sounds like an american thing to do, doesn't it? i dunno, i get the fine thing, but the sensationalism is rather heavy-handed, imo


The reaction?
Ya, it's overblown and has that American "we take our military a little too seriously" vibe to it.
but it's felt like a little more American style pro-war propaganda has been injected into our lives every year for about a decade now. I guess it has the effect of uniting some ppl under a common cause against a common enemy, but it feels politicized to me.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

He was stupid enough to have done what he did, not at a Canadian legion, or a Halloween party, or even as a male stripper, but at the War Memorial, on a Remembrance Day when they had a huge turnout, when it was the day of rededication of the cenotaph, the centennial of the start of WWI, a few weeks after several soldiers were felled on Canadian soil simply for being in a uniform. Basically, as small a crime as it was, he picked the worst, most sensitive and offensive time to do it. The guy could have shied away from interviewers that day, and hung around the back _in uniform_, but he didn't. I think that's what burns up so many people: that he had the balls to put himself in the spotlight. I'm not one of these rah-rah-for-our-soldiers types, but I know bad taste when I see it, and this was exceptionally bad taste.

That said, it doesn't deserve a week's coverage..


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

Guys, I have 10 years in the Navy now and let me tell ya most sailors I know think he's a moron but the public humiliation is enough punishment. It probably would never have been blow so far out of proportion had it not been for recent events in Ottawa and the day of the year he chose to be a moron. Personally I had a good laugh at it and would have forgotten about it by now if not for the media coverage, I can think of many other issues that deserve more attention that a grown man playing dress up.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Krelf said:


> A man can beat his wife to a pulp and a story may appear on page 12 of the local paper and then be forgotten. But in most cases the press will ignore it altogether. The fact is, this man didn't really hurt anyone but himself. Policemen, soldiers and other people of authority need to be protected from imposters. But the media feeding frenzy that occurred seems over the top to me.


Point taken.

I agree it doesn't warrant the amount of attention it's getting, but I can understand why those who do serve would consider it pretty disrespectful.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Daaamn though - to get married in that uniform? Fvcker needs a tank just to cart his balls around.


----------



## pattste (Dec 30, 2007)

I think what Franck Gervais did is shameful. On the other hand, he's not the only one to proudly display military decorations that he hasn't earned. Political appointees do that too.










I doubt that our esteemed Governor Generals fought the nazis at Dieppe or chased Talibans in the caves of Afghanistan.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Obviously they didn't, and there haven't been many GGs within our lifetime that have seen military service. _BUT_, the office is called Governor-*General* because that person stands in for the Queen, who is, technically, the head of the armed forces. Whether one believes in that sort of thing is a separate matter. But they have certain medals that they are officially obliged to wear. I have no idea what they stand for, only that they have to wear them. If you look at what is on Mr. Johnson's chest, and what is on Mme. Clarkson's chest, four of the medals are identical and in the identical order. Again, I have no idea what they stand for, only that they are a ceremonial aspect of the job.

When the Queen was younger, she would wear a surfeit of medals when "trooping the colours", and clearly she didn't fight in anything.








More recently, it seems like she gets "the boys" to wear them for the event.


----------



## pattste (Dec 30, 2007)

@mhammer I know why they wear the medals. I just think it's silly and insulting to real vets who risked their lives. At least the queen's sons and grandsons served in the military so they're not total posers.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

http://www.cracked.com/article_20191_6-military-fakes-you-wont-believe-fooled-world.html

at least he's in good company.


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

pattste said:


> I think what Franck Gervais did is shameful. On the other hand, he's not the only one to proudly display military decorations that he hasn't earned. Political appointees do that too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you go here http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddhr/chc-tdh/index-eng.asp it give a break down of honors and awards in Canada, there are some specifically for military, some for RCMP some for civilians and some that all can wear. The medal she is wearing with the red ribbon for example is just a medal for 12 years of good conduct and dedicated service call the Canadain Forces Decoration, next to that is the queens diamond jubilee which if you remember The Beebs got from Harper while dressed as a retarded *******. 







(that one deserves another thread, haha) 
Contrary to popular belief, medals are hard to come by in the military. As I said before I have 10 years of service and only have 3, I know guys with 20 or more years and only have the medals that are given to them based of meeting a requirement for time in. The same is true for the American military, however they award ribbons for a lots of meaningless achievements, which is why when you see high ranking US officers wearing ribbons they look like some kinda war hero. But there system treats ribbons like a day care would treat stars on a board for pottie training! Just to clarify %99.9 of the military has no issue with civies, MPs, the Queen, ect... wearing medals that they have been awarded for various reasons. Sometimes they do have a problem with the people chosen to receive them however. The Queens diamond Jubilee is now affectionately know as the Beeber and there are guys that refuse to wear it just because he was given one, haha.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

The man is a fraud, and not just your common every day over-exagerating braggart, but a pathological fraud. He even got married in uniform. What kind of lies has his wife and family been told? How exactly does one live that down? How do people trust their previous faith and love in the man after such a revelation? What else is involved in his charade? What's on his resume? 

He's not Mr. Dressup, a clown, or a caricature, he's a nut job who needs a big head shrinker. Either that or he's the biggest arsehole on the planet. I don't know where to draw that line. His fantasies kind of got out of control, I think.

As for the shaming, I wonder if he comprehends that, or if he sees himself as a victim

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Mooh said:


> The man is a fraud, and not just your common every day over-exagerating braggart, but a pathological fraud. He even got married in uniform. What kind of lies has his wife and family been told? How exactly does one live that down? How do people trust their previous faith and love in the man after such a revelation? What else is involved in his charade? What's on his resume?
> 
> He's not Mr. Dressup, a clown, or a caricature, he's a nut job who needs a big head shrinker. Either that or he's the biggest arsehole on the planet. I don't know where to draw that line. His fantasies kind of got out of control, I think.
> 
> ...


That's brings up another question then...if we assume he is crazy, what does that say about us if we go about public shaming and ridiculing mentally ill people (who really didn't do any harm to anyone and where the crime committed was fairly minor) in the media?


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Chitmo said:


> View attachment 11044


Is that the incident where Harper was overheard to mutter "I guess I’ll shake your hand but I have only one thing to say to you: you need to get out of the music business”?


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

mhammer said:


> Is that the incident where Harper was overheard to mutter "I guess I’ll shake your hand but I have only one thing to say to you: you need to get out of the music business”?


No, harper would never stand up to someone as powerful as Bieber 
Social media power trumps political power these days.


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

I grew up in a military family, a base brat, so go ahead and count me in as one of those "rah-rah" types. I don't believe the shaming and exposure should have gone on as long or as deeply as it did. A one time retraction by the media with a follow up with charges being leveled is enough, but to show up on his doorstep and let his wife field questions, disclose where he lives, and then to show up at his work and interview his boss is going far over the line. I would like to see him prosecuted to the full extent of the law and I don't give a rats ass about comparisons to more serious crimes being put on the so called "back burner". Life isn't fair, the legal system is a joke, and if you don't like it get out and vote! Where I think the public outcry and fascination comes from is twofold. Firstly, our veterans deserve the respect and honor accorded to them, however modest they may be in saying it's just a job and anyone would do it....it's not....and no other "job" would put you in harms way or expose you to the horrors of what man is capable of to one another, let alone one where you could be wounded, tortured, or killed. We the public understand the sacrifice and the woefully inept amount of support or recognition own government has in place for these heroes, so it is up to us as a nation to do what we can...don't f*ck with our heroes or their memory! Secondly, with social media and instant internet connection, it's far easier for the communities to rally and dole out opinion and mob justice and the news media both fuels and feeds on that. A case of communal governing and social acceptance gone wrong...mob mentality. He had the gall to stand in front of a camera and smile at the cenotaph after the recent tragedy.....I won't give him a break...but I hope the witch hunt ends.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Chitmo, you cracked me up with "...that is the queens diamond jubilee which if you remember The Beebs got from Harper while dressed as a retarded *******."

I'm still chuckling when I look at the accompanying pic and I seem to have a big grin imprinted on my face now. Thanks for a good start to my morning! :sSig_goodjob2:


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

DrHook said:


> I grew up in a military family, a base brat, so go ahead and count me in as one of those "rah-rah" types. I don't believe the shaming and exposure should have gone on as long or as deeply as it did. A one time retraction by the media with a follow up with charges being leveled is enough, but to show up on his doorstep and let his wife field questions, disclose where he lives, and then to show up at his work and interview his boss is going far over the line. I would like to see him prosecuted to the full extent of the law and I don't give a rats ass about comparisons to more serious crimes being put on the so called "back burner". Life isn't fair, the legal system is a joke, and if you don't like it get out and vote! Where I think the public outcry and fascination comes from is twofold. Firstly, our veterans deserve the respect and honor accorded to them, however modest they may be in saying it's just a job and anyone would do it....it's not....and no other "job" would put you in harms way or expose you to the horrors of what man is capable of to one another, let alone one where you could be wounded, tortured, or killed. We the public understand the sacrifice and the woefully inept amount of support or recognition own government has in place for these heroes, so it is up to us as a nation to do what we can...don't f*ck with our heroes or their memory! Secondly, with social media and instant internet connection, it's far easier for the communities to rally and dole out opinion and mob justice and the news media both fuels and feeds on that. A case of communal governing and social acceptance gone wrong...mob mentality. He had the gall to stand in front of a camera and smile at the cenotaph after the recent tragedy.....I won't give him a break...but I hope the witch hunt ends.


There was an interesting interview with a lawyer on local CBC radio this morning, concerning the Gervais case. The focus was primarily on the legal aspects, what is/isn't/should/shouldn't be a criminal offense. He noted a number of circumstances where medals and uniforms are worn by those who did not serve. You may recall a recent case of a widow who wished to wear her late husband's medals, in his memory, and was prohibited from doing so. The lawyer also noted instances where adult children may seek to wear their parent's uniform in tribute. Interesting and worth a listen.

The segment can be heard here: http://www.cbc.ca/ottawamorning/ You need to look over on the right-hand side and scroll down to find the particular segment.


----------



## Krelf (Jul 3, 2012)

Thanks for leading me to that interview. Based on what the lawyer said, I believe Franck will get off lightly. Defense will use all the shame and negative publicity coupled with his mental state to counter the charges. In a way, the media's retribution is working against due process. He's already been punished severely and the courts will definitely take that into consideration. Our system allows the media to mete out punishment before the accused is found guilty and with little opportunity to defend himself or to reveal extenuating circumstances, especially those of a private or personal nature.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

DrHook said:


> Life isn't fair, the legal system is a joke, and if you don't like it get out and vote!


:smiley-faces-75:


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Krelf said:


> Thanks for leading me to that interview. Based on what the lawyer said, I believe Franck will get off lightly. Defense will use all the shame and negative publicity coupled with his mental state to counter the charges. In a way, the media's retribution is working against due process. He's already been punished severely and the courts will definitely take that into consideration. Our system allows the media to mete out punishment before the accused is found guilty and with little opportunity to defend himself or to reveal extenuating circumstances, especially those of a private or personal nature.


My hunch is that the maximum fine is probably less than the pay he will lose.

Which leads to another interesting question: If the employer says "WE sure as hell don't want him working here!", does that fall within the legal grounds for dismissal, or would it be unlawful dismissal?


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

DrHook said:


> I grew up in a military family, a base brat, so go ahead and count me in as one of those "rah-rah" types. I don't believe the shaming and exposure should have gone on as long or as deeply as it did. A one time retraction by the media with a follow up with charges being leveled is enough, but to show up on his doorstep and let his wife field questions, disclose where he lives, and then to show up at his work and interview his boss is going far over the line. I would like to see him prosecuted to the full extent of the law and I don't give a rats ass about comparisons to more serious crimes being put on the so called "back burner". Life isn't fair, the legal system is a joke, and if you don't like it get out and vote! Where I think the public outcry and fascination comes from is twofold. Firstly, our veterans deserve the respect and honor accorded to them, however modest they may be in saying it's just a job and anyone would do it....it's not....and no other "job" would put you in harms way or expose you to the horrors of what man is capable of to one another, let alone one where you could be wounded, tortured, or killed. We the public understand the sacrifice and the woefully inept amount of support or recognition own government has in place for these heroes, so it is up to us as a nation to do what we can...don't f*ck with our heroes or their memory! Secondly, with social media and instant internet connection, it's far easier for the communities to rally and dole out opinion and mob justice and the news media both fuels and feeds on that. A case of communal governing and social acceptance gone wrong...mob mentality. He had the gall to stand in front of a camera and smile at the cenotaph after the recent tragedy.....I won't give him a break...but I hope the witch hunt ends.


Appreciate the support, and agree with you. But I think the media is taking out their fury from recent tragedies on a meaningless loser who deserves no attention from anyone other than he RCMP.


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

cheezyridr said:


> :smiley-faces-75:


Clearly...I didn't think that one through did I? :sSig_busted:


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

Regarding the wearing of medals and or uniforms by family or those appointed an honorary position...those should be the only exceptions. Someone purporting to be an actual veteran or current member of the armed forces is another. It bothers me that he could get off lightly and I'll tell you why. When we play things down...they lose their value, their reverence, and soon it becomes the social acceptable norm. In this case, that's a lack of respect for what we enjoy and for those who served and died to give it to us.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

This was in the news this morning:

"Police in the Outaouais remember pulling him (Gervais) over. Other cops there remember the day in March 2013 when they were called to deal with him on what's known as a P-38 -- a person in crisis. Gervais tangled with officers *and was taken to hospital by force."

*Dave


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

As I mentioned in an earlier post, this sort of thing is happening all too often.

There have been cases in the states where people have impersonated Navy Seals and give speeches to yputh groups and high school assemblies.

I say clamp down. I agree with Dr Hook. We should not allow such idiots to devalueor at least reduce the perceived value of those who serve in our military.


----------



## Tarbender (Apr 7, 2006)

As part of his punishment he should have to go to boot camp for a couple of weeks. See if still wants to be soldier after that (if he makes it).


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

A military uniform is not a costume, which is what it would become if taken lightly. It not only represents a soldier's personal achievement to a high standard that should never be diminished, but it also represents the pride of an entire country. To wear it is a well earned privilege. Pretenders and those who disrespect the value of a military uniform, even out of ignorance, should not be tolerated.

Anyone who knows me knows that I am about as far from being a right wing hawk as one can get. But I have a deep respect for those who volunteer to put their lives on the line so I don't have to.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

bluzfish said:


> A military uniform is not a costume, which is what it would become if taken lightly. It not only represents a soldier's personal achievement to a high standard that should never be diminished, but it also represents the pride of an entire country. To wear it is a well earned privilege. Pretenders and those who disrespect the value of a military uniform, even out of ignorance, should not be tolerated.
> 
> Anyone who knows me knows that I am about as far from being a right wing hawk as one can get. But I have a deep respect for those who volunteer to put their lives on the line so I don't have to.


You have to understand, that for some of, us, this represents a dated view, that has little relevance since WW2, and there aren't many of those guys left.

I don't personally see Canadas military as keeping us safe from external threats in any meaningful way. TBH, if any of the true major powers ie US, Russia, China wanted to attack us, our only true defense is to either surrender or cozy up to one of those other superpowers and hope they would see it in their own best interest to protect us.
So im sorry to say, but this "lay down their lives so I don't have to.." stuff just seems overly dramatic. Our own military doesn't keep us safe. In actuality, its our shared border with the US that does...so long as they respect our independence. But god forbid if it was a country like Russia that was our neighbor instead of the US. 

if anything, our recent activities against ISIS, while perhaps the "right thing to do", puts all of us in more danger than if we didn't have a military presence at all.

At some point, we may have to ask ourselves, what is the real point in having a military, if any? maybe it would make more sense to go the route of Japan (a security force primarily for internal purposes) or Iceland (basically, a Coast Guard).

Again, I don't mean any disrespect to anyone...just a different perspective.


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

Diablo said:


> You have to understand, that for some of, us, this represents a dated view, that has little relevance since WW2, and there aren't many of those guys left.
> 
> I don't personally see Canadas military as keeping us safe from external threats in any meaningful way. TBH, if any of the true major powers ie US, Russia, China wanted to attack us, our only true defense is to either surrender or cozy up to one of those other superpowers and hope they would see it in their own best interest to protect us.
> So im sorry to say, but this "lay down their lives so I don't have to.." stuff just seems overly dramatic. Our own military doesn't keep us safe. In actuality, its our shared border with the US that does...so long as they respect our independence. But god forbid if it was a country like Russia that was our neighbor instead of the US.
> ...


I don't really agree with you statement but you are entitled to your opinion, after all 1000s of soldiers died so you could have rights like freedom of speech. But to answer your question as to why we have a military, there are a 100 various reasons but one off the top of my head is to maintain our status as a NATO country. Article 5 of the NATO treaty says that if you attack one of us you attack all of us. So if someone where to attack Canada all NATO countries are obligated to respond. A lot of the other reasons are political in nature and I am not a politician or a subject matter expert so if you would like to chat a little more you can shoot me a PM and will share what I do know. Lastly if you think our military is useless think again, Canadian forces took out more high value targets in Afghanistan than all other countries involved and if you ever have the opportunity to chat with members of foreign militaries ask them what they think of our soldiers and I guarantee they place them in high regard.


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

Diablo said:


> You have to understand, that for some of, us, this represents a dated view, that has little relevance since WW2, and there aren't many of those guys left.
> 
> I don't personally see Canadas military as keeping us safe from external threats in any meaningful way. TBH, if any of the true major powers ie US, Russia, China wanted to attack us, our only true defense is to either surrender or cozy up to one of those other superpowers and hope they would see it in their own best interest to protect us.
> So im sorry to say, but this "lay down their lives so I don't have to.." stuff just seems overly dramatic. Our own military doesn't keep us safe. In actuality, its our shared border with the US that does...so long as they respect our independence. But god forbid if it was a country like Russia that was our neighbor instead of the US.
> ...


If we all shared the exact same opinion, conversations like this would be moot. I respect people that can say they have a different opinion and then explain why they believe what they believe instead of just saying "because".

As for Japan's internal security force, they are indeed a professional military however they are limited by their own constitution. Japan signed a treaty with the United States in 1960 that allows the Japanese military to assist the United States anywhere in the world except on U.S. soil. Their military also takes part in global peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts. In 2001 the Japanese navy assisted in supply distribution when U.N. forces were deployed to Afghanistan. Japan wants to be an equal partner in it's participation of U.N. sanctioned activities but still struggles with it's past and highly condemns war as outlined in it's constitution.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

DrHook said:


> If we all shared the exact same opinion, conversations like this would be moot. I respect people that can say they have a different opinion and then explain why they believe what they believe instead of just saying "because".
> 
> As for Japan's internal security force, they are indeed a professional military however they are limited by their own constitution. Japan signed a treaty with the United States in 1960 that allows the Japanese military to assist the United States anywhere in the world except on U.S. soil. Their military also takes part in global peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts. In 2001 the Japanese navy assisted in supply distribution when U.N. forces were deployed to Afghanistan. Japan wants to be an equal partner in it's participation of U.N. sanctioned activities but still struggles with it's past and highly condemns war as outlined in it's constitution.


That's exactly my point though...Japan is doing quite well without a true military, and theyre even a in a far more volatile part of the world than Canada is.
In terms of supply distribution, and other such missions, you don't really need a military to do that.
so I often think the real reason why Canada has a military is the same why Metro Toronto Police keep horses- tradition. But it might be time to move on.
Even if a lot of ppl here "support the troops", if you took a referendum , I suspect a large population don't support the missions in the past decade or so.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Yes, they're in a very dangerous part of the world and if anyone needs a strong military force it's Japan.

As for supporting the mission, that's politics. Soldiers don't get to pick the mission. They go where they're sent and risk their lives in the process.

Sayng we don't need a military is similar to saying we don't need auto insurance or an umbrella.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Milkman said:


> As for supporting the mission, that's politics. Soldiers don't get to pick the mission. They go where they're sent and risk their lives in the process.
> 
> Sayng we don't need a military is similar to saying we don't need auto insurance or an umbrella.


i see it more like buying a product protection plan at an electronics store, which I never do and don't believe offers good value. 

based on recent history, they should consider who they might be really serving and what it is they're laying down their lives for and decide if that's still something they want to do and has intrinsic value.
i don't personally think it's that separate.if someone doesn't agree with the ethics of the tobacco industry, for instance, they don't go and work for Phillip Morris.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Diablo said:


> i see it more like buying a product protection plan at an electronics store, which I never do and don't believe offers good value.
> 
> based on recent history, they should consider who they might be really serving and what it is they're laying down their lives for and decide if that's still something they want to do and has intrinsic value.
> i don't personally think it's that separate.if someone doesn't agree with the ethics of the tobacco industry, for instance, they don't go and work for Phillip Morris.


Yes, but once you commit to serve, knowing full well what the job is, you have given up the right to make judgement calls about where and why you're deployed.
An armed force that allows its soldiers to decide for themselves would be less effective IMO.

In your army I think we'd have a few too many generals and not enough soldiers.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Yes, but once you commit to serve, knowing full well what the job is, you have given up the right to make judgement calls about where and why you're deployed.
> An armed force that allows its soldiers to decide for themselves would be less effective IMO.
> 
> In your army I think we'd have a few too many generals and not enough soldiers.


 Well, actually in "my army", we'd have mostly medics and emergency aid workers, along with a coast guard to protect our border, fishing and environmental rights, and a small national paramilitary/police force in case of emergency internal strife. 
So, no not many generals. But of course, this is a Utopia scenario.

Obviously soldiers don't get to choose their missions. But they do get to decide to enlist or re-enlist. So if you do either, it implies that you support the current missions, and thats a personal choice that not everyone will agree with or feel indebted for. so, for example, if you enlist now, theres a good chance you could wind up in the middle east. If that's something you believe in, best of luck to you. But don't expect me to think youre protecting my life in doing so. That was my only point on that topic.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Diablo said:


> Well, actually in "my army", we'd have mostly medics and emergency aid workers, along with a coast guard to protect our border, fishing and environmental rights, and a small national paramilitary/police force in case of emergency internal strife.
> So, no not many generals. But of course, this is a Utopia scenario.
> 
> Obviously soldiers don't get to choose their missions. But they do get to decide to enlist or re-enlist. So if you do either, it implies that you support the current missions, and thats a personal choice that not everyone will agree with or feel indebted for. so, for example, if you enlist now, theres a good chance you could wind up in the middle east. If that's something you believe in, best of luck to you. But don't expect me to think youre protecting my life in doing so. That was my only point on that topic.



I'm a bit of a peacenik so I dig where you're coming from. I wish to hell we didn't need an armed force at all. I also wish we didn't have to lock our doors at night.

Sadly that's the way things should be, not the way they are.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Let's not forget this guy. Not an RCMP Officer but wearing the uniform AND carrying a gun!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-s-elliott-slammed-for-wearing-uniform-1.887737


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Stratin2traynor said:


> Let's not forget this guy. Not an RCMP Officer but wearing the uniform AND carrying a gun!
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-s-elliott-slammed-for-wearing-uniform-1.887737


not sure how I feel about that one. The article does make some interesting counterpoints.

Im less concerned with the wearing of the uniform as what they may have been doing while wearing it.
An RCMP commissioner wearing a uniform he hasn't been issued, for a photo op =less concerning than a guy wearing a police uniform and pulling women drivers over.
And im not freaked out that that RCMP commissioner may have actually touched a firearm, although I don't see why hes wearing it.


----------

