Customs/courteousies and the State Guard

[Hawk200]

A curiousity question for everyone. Got my own personal opininon on the matter, but was wondering what other folks might think.

Should CAP officers salute State Guard, State Defense Force, or State Militia officers?

Please note that I'm not talking about National Guard officers, I know where they stand.

[Major Carrales]

Hawk,

I don't know where you will stand on this, but I don't think it is out of line to even salute fire and law enforcement out of respect for the job they do.  It is along those lines that I was told by Active Duty folks that they choose to salute CAP Officers.  It is a modus of respect to what we do.

Don't know if that contributes...but that is my story and I'm stickin' to it. 

[Short Field]

Salutes are free - and we don't run out of them.   

[RiverAux]

I would salute SDF officers and would hope they would show the courtesy of returning it.  Like with other RealMilitary forces I wouldn't expect their folks to initiate a salute to CAP, but if they did, it should be properly returned.

I probably wouldn't salute firemen and police officers since in general that isn't part of their "culture" and would put them in the position of "do I return it or not" and if they've never been taught to salute might end up being embarrassed about doing it.

[RiverAux]

One could make the case (though a very weak case) that saluting SDF officers is required.  From CAPP-151 requires CAP members to salute "commissioned officers and warrant officers of the Armed Forces." 

The pamphlet does not actually define "Armed Forces" so there is some wiggle room to play with.   Federal law pretty strictly defines Armed Forces and SDFs are definetely not included in that definition and you could make an argument that a salute to them is not required.  However, as part of the organized militia of the states that have them, you could assume that "Armed Forces" meant anybody's armed forces and stretch "Armed Forces" to include them and come to the conclusion that a salute would be required.

If you stretched Armed Forces that far, would we also need to stretch it further to include a requirement to salute officers from Armed Forces of other countries?

Of course if you want to play this definition game, you could just as easily say that since "Armed Forces" wasn't defined that if an AF officer didn't have a weapon he wasn't part of the "Armed Forces" and a salute wouldn't be required.

Just a reminder, I'm not really arguing that saluting SDFs is required (I think they meant Armed Forces as defined by federal law), just pointing out that it wouldn't be hard to come to that conclusion.

[SDF_Specialist]

I don't see where it would be inappropriate to salute them. They have the same purpose as any other military branch. Protect and serve their country.

[Dad2-4]

I don't see where it would be inappropriate to salute them. They have the same purpose as any other military branch. Protect and serve their country.

+1

[mikeylikey]

Does it matter??  Salute them and drive on.  Big deal.  Now if you want them to salute you......perhaps we are just "salute crazy". 

[Stonewall]

Heck, I was in my AF uniforma and saluted a State Guard officer. 

I remember when I was a cadet NCO in CAP and marching in the MLK Jr. parade when I saw a Marine Corps JROTC cadet officer and saluted.  For some reason, I thought it was cool.

[AlphaSigOU]

And if you happen to recognize an officer of the armed services of a friendly foreign country, pop one off! Not that we see 'em that often in this neck o' the woods...

Brits got pips, crowns or stripes if you're dealing with the Army, Navy or Air Force.

Canadian officers wear stripes regardless of service.

The Mexicans... well here's a Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_ranks_and_insignia_of_Mexico

[Fireball]

      As a former NC State Defense Militia officer, I would render / return the salute without a second thought. As I recall back in my NCSDM days, we were strongly encouraged to salute CAP officers if we encountered them. I don't remember a SDF reg on it, but it probably came about because a lot of the NCSDM leadership were in or had been in CAP. After the NCSDM was disbanded, a lot of us joined CAP.

[KFreeman]

State Guard officers are commissioned by their respective state government's Military Department.

CAP officers are not commissioned.

I serve in ALSDF and ALWG CAP as a LTC (LtCol) in each organization. I hold both in high esteem and would be offended if the courtesy of a salute was not rendered/returned by either.

One salutes the uniform, not the person. I do not view it as a matter of opinion.

Regards,
Ken

[JohnKachenmeister]

And if you happen to recognize an officer of the armed services of a friendly foreign country, pop one off! Not that we see 'em that often in this neck o' the woods...

Brits got pips, crowns or stripes if you're dealing with the Army, Navy or Air Force.

Canadian officers wear stripes regardless of service.

The Mexicans... well here's a Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_ranks_and_insignia_of_Mexico

Mexico is "Friendly?"

[AlphaSigOU]

Mexico is "Friendly?"

Last I checked, we're not at war with 'em...  unless ya count the invasion of illegals!

[mikeylikey]

Mexico is "Friendly?"

Last I checked, we're not at war with 'em...  unless ya count the invasion of illegals!

What is an illegal?  hahahahhahahah

Seriously, what is the consensus......should CAP members salute SDF Officers.  My vote, YES.  They still have that piece of paper from a Governor.

[Tubacap]

When in doubt.... whip it out.  Of course, there is no harm here, and it can only build bridges for mutual respect between the organizations.  It also doesn't hurt our senior membership to exercise their right arms some more.

[Flying Pig]

by River Aux
I probably wouldn't salute firemen and police officers since in general that isn't part of their "culture" and would put them in the position of "do I return it or not" and if they've never been taught to salute might end up being embarrassed about doing it.

Id agree.  The only time Ive ever saluted as a cop is at a funeral during taps.   We as a culutre dont salute each other.  It wouldnt be inappropriate by any means, but most cops really wouldnt know how to respond.   You going to catch the guy/gal off guard and you going to have passed each other by the time they realize what you just did.   Then the next day in briefing hes going to tell everyone how this dude in a blue uniform saluted him.
A simple sincere greeting goes a long way.

As far as the SDF or Coast Guard Aux.....if they are wearing a military style uniform with a US military officer rank structure I say why not salute.  We probably have an idea what eachother are.  If a foreign military officer is in the US they almost always wear the US equivalant rank on their uniform in an obvious place.  Ive never met a foreign military member who expected you to know what they were.

[Grumpy]

What is an illegal?  hahahahhahahah

A sick bird?

[mikeylikey]

^

[Hawk200]

For the most part I was looking for whether or not it's required. The general concensus doesn't really seem to be that it is required, but that it won't hurt to do so.

I was curious as to whether or not people felt it was. I'm thinking that it pretty much falls under the "Why not?" category.

I'm not going to lock the voting at this time, I'd still like to see a few more people weight in. I think a total of a hundred votes would give me an excellent overall sampling.

[mikeylikey]

These SDF Officers do get a commission from their governor, making them state military Officers.  That was good enough for over 200 years, I would say they are due the proper customs and courtesies.  I wonder are the National Guard required to salute SDF Officers in their respective states.  The National Guard was more like the SDF forces until the reorganization early last century.  Also, can these SDF Officers give orders to NG personnel?  They are playing on the same team in their respective states right?

[JohnKachenmeister]

These SDF Officers do get a commission from their governor, making them state military Officers.  That was good enough for over 200 years, I would say they are due the proper customs and courtesies.  I wonder are the National Guard required to salute SDF Officers in their respective states.  The National Guard was more like the SDF forces until the reorganization early last century.  Also, can these SDF Officers give orders to NG personnel?  They are playing on the same team in their respective states right?

Yes.

NG personnel ARE required to render military courtesy to SDF officers.

I do not beleive that WE are, but failing to render military courtesy to a person in military uniform wearing officer rank is generally viewed as an act of DIScourtesy.  I render the appropriate courtesy to all.  One is NEVER wrong is doing so.

[Cecil DP]

These SDF Officers do get a commission from their governor, making them state military Officers.  That was good enough for over 200 years, I would say they are due the proper customs and courtesies.  I wonder are the National Guard required to salute SDF Officers in their respective states.  The National Guard was more like the SDF forces until the reorganization early last century.  Also, can these SDF Officers give orders to NG personnel?  They are playing on the same team in their respective states right?

When you enlist in the National Guard, its actually a dual enlistment. You are joining both the Federally recognized Guard and the Armed Forces of that state. So yes they are saluted. Giving orders to NG personnel depends on the mission.

[CAP_truth]

For over 40 years I have always render the proper military customs and courtesies to any officer who is senior in grade to myself and I have always received the same courtesies in return. I have felt that they have earned this courtesy.

[ddelaney103]

For the most part I was looking for whether or not it's required. The general concensus doesn't really seem to be that it is required, but that it won't hurt to do so.

I was curious as to whether or not people felt it was. I'm thinking that it pretty much falls under the "Why not?" category.

I'm not going to lock the voting at this time, I'd still like to see a few more people weight in. I think a total of a hundred votes would give me an excellent overall sampling.

If that was your goal it was a badly worded question - "should" can imply "is it required" or "is it a good idea" equally well.  Looking at the question I would vote "yes" because it doesn't hurt anyone to do so, but that doesn't seem to be your implied question.

[Hawk200]

For the most part I was looking for whether or not it's required. The general concensus doesn't really seem to be that it is required, but that it won't hurt to do so.

I was curious as to whether or not people felt it was. I'm thinking that it pretty much falls under the "Why not?" category.

I'm not going to lock the voting at this time, I'd still like to see a few more people weight in. I think a total of a hundred votes would give me an excellent overall sampling.

If that was your goal it was a badly worded question - "should" can imply "is it required" or "is it a good idea" equally well.  Looking at the question I would vote "yes" because it doesn't hurt anyone to do so, but that doesn't seem to be your implied question.

Point taken. I was interested in both answers. But the way I worded it kind of skews the sample. I could amend the question to a few different answers, but everyone would probably have to vote again, and I have a feeling that many folks just voted, and moved on. Probably wouldn't get the same responses.

[topsecret]

I will salute federally recognized U.S. commissioned and warrant officers, holders of the Medal of Honor, and officers of foreign friendly nations.

State guard officers aren't federally recognized, and thus I would neither initiate nor expect a salute.  I would of course return one if rendered.

Call me a wild man, but if USAF or CAP wanted me busting off salutes to State Guard officers...they'd mandate it.

Bill J., Major, CAP
MSgt, USAF (Retired)

[Ned]

State guard officers aren't federally recognized, and thus I would neither initiate nor expect a salute.  I would of course return one if rendered.

Bill,

As others have pointed out, CAP directives (in this case CAPP 151) do not make any sort of distinction about whether or not someone is "federally recognized".  Where did you see something along those lines?

It appears that CAP directives in the area of saluting are a little broader than those of the USAF or the other services.  For example, we are required to salute all Medal of Honor recipients, which is not a requirment for USAF folks (unless junior in rank.)  So it makes sense that we apparently are required to salute SDF officers even if our USAF brothers might not be.

But perhaps more importantly, SDFs are "federally recognized" in the sense that the Constitution specifically provides for state militias and allows Congress to set their training standards as well as the mechanism to call them into active Federal service.  If something was written into the Constitution by the Founders, I'd call that a pretty good example of being "recognized."

Call me a wild man, but if USAF or CAP wanted me busting off salutes to State Guard officers...they'd mandate it.

I think they did, Wild Man.   

Thank you for your service.

Peace.

Ned Lee

[mikeylikey]

I will salute federally recognized U.S. commissioned and warrant officers, holders of the Medal of Honor, and officers of foreign friendly nations.

BUT you never really know if a National Guard Officer has a Federally recognized Commission.  I have run into my fair share that are only Commissioned by the Governor.  In fact, Most states have a Brigadier General (usually the deputy AG) appointed and commissioned by the Governor only.  For over 200 years the National guard (of course in different title) were only Commissioned Officers of their State.  We seem to have moved away from that since WW1.  Heck, up until WWII, most Officers were state Officers and never received Federal Recognition.  I do not know what the hold up is on not saluting the SDF Officers. 

They are Commissioned Military Officers of a STATE or Commonwealth which we may be a citizen of.  Don't forget your loyalty should lie with your state first and formost (different discussion, would be happy to share my ideas on it though).  They rate a salute because their Governor has appointed them to State Office.  In fact, Federal Forces should salute them out of respect for the State and that States's Governor.

Am I wrong, maybe, Does it matter........no?  You salute the rank, not the person.

[Cecil DP]

I will salute federally recognized U.S. commissioned and warrant officers, holders of the Medal of Honor, and officers of foreign friendly nations.

BUT you never really know if a National Guard Officer has a Federally recognized Commission.  I have run into my fair share that are only Commissioned by the Governor.  In fact, Most states have a Brigadier General (usually the deputy AG) appointed and commissioned by the Governor only.  For over 200 years the National guard (of course in different title) were only Commissioned Officers of their State.  We seem to have moved away from that since WW1.  Heck, up until WWII, most Officers were state Officers and never received Federal Recognition.  I do not know what the hold up is on not saluting the SDF Officers. 

They are Commissioned Military Officers of a STATE or Commonwealth which we may be a citizen of.  Don't forget your loyalty should lie with your state first and formost (different discussion, would be happy to share my ideas on it though).  They rate a salute because their Governor has appointed them to State Office.  In fact, Federal Forces should salute them out of respect for the State and that States's Governor.

Am I wrong, maybe, Does it matter........no?  You salute the rank, not the person.

If the individual hasn't received his/her federal recognition they will wear the state on the lapel rather than the US cutouts.  The AG and Deputy AG are commissioned by the Governor because these positions are constitutional offices within the state government. Generally following his/her appointments to AG the appointment to BG and subsequently MG are sent to the DoD for recognition and if they qualify will be appointed to the appropriate grade, if they don't already hold it. Historically many of the more famous Army officers prior to 1917 were state appointed including Stonewall Jackson, William H. Harrison, Teddy  Roosevelt, Joshua Chamberlain, R.E. Lee, and U.S. Grant. I suppose some wouldn't salute them either.

BTW if you won't salute an officer legally appointed by the State's Governor, why would we salute CAP officers who are promoted by a school teacher, an engineer, or a police officer, who is himself appointed by fiat from the Wing, Region, or National Commander?

[Ned]

If the individual hasn't received his/her federal recognition they will wear the state on the lapel rather than the US cutouts. 

Just a slight addition to a good post.

Many, if not most, SDF officers are federally commissioned officers. 

(Usually retired.)

As a retired federally commissioned officer, they are entitled to salutes from CAP members.

But it is worth noting that even federally commissioned officers serving in the SDF wear the state thing on their lapel, rather than "U.S."  So one just can't tell the type of commission held by an SDF officer by their uniform.

Similarly, CAP members wear the "U.S." on their lapels, but clearly are not federally commissioned officers.

So the presence or absence of "U.S." on the lapel is probably not a good way to decide who to salute.

Ned Lee

[jb512]

I can't believe this thread has gone on into this much detail, and with as many "dissenters", especially prior RM.

If your organization wears a military style uniform, wears military style insignia, and performs its duties by military style regulations, then render military style customs and courtesies.

Next...

[ZigZag911]

Both my mom (now deceased) and pop served in WW2 (she was an Army nurse, he was a buck private in the infantry....no, they didn't meet in the service!)

When we were kids they used to tell stories about their military training; Pop had one real "old timer" (a 23 year old Corporal with a combat tour seems ancient when you're 18!) put it very simply for his recruit platoon:

If it moves, salute it; if it doesn't move, paint it!

I'm pretty sure Pop's DI didn't originate that statement!

[O-Rex]

Would I salute a State Guard Officer?

I am reminded of the phrase "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Besides, sometimes it only takes a second to make someone's day.

[mikeylikey]

If it moves, salute it; if it doesn't move, paint it!

Cool......I like that!   

[SarDragon]

If it moves, salute it; if it doesn't move, paint it!

Cool......I like that!   

And if you can't paint it, polish it.

[ddelaney103]

Or, as the man sung:

After Johnny got through basic training, he
Was a soldier through and through when he was done.
Its effects were so well rooted,
That the next day he saluted
A Good Humor man, an usher, and a nun.

[Becks]

If the individual hasn't received his/her federal recognition they will wear the state on the lapel rather than the US cutouts. 

Which is, at least in SC, exactly what the SDF officers wear with with crossed saber and muskets on the other side.  Enlisted are the same but in disk form.

[Hawk200]

Which is, at least in SC, exactly what the SDF officers wear with with crossed saber and muskets on the other side.  Enlisted are the same but in disk form.

I believe all SDF's have adopted that design. Don't know about the heraldry, but those are available from a variety of sources. I believe all personnel wear them and that SDF's don't use any other type of branch insignia.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Hawk:

The design of the "Branch brass" was adopted by the State Guard Association of the United States to standardize insignia.  A state is not required to use it, but most do.  They also standardize the state 2-letter abbreviations for the lapel, and the use of a red nametag rather than Army-standard black. 

The heraldry is published somewhere, but basically refers to the Civil War, which is the last time most State Guard units saw combat.

Federal recognition is a fairly new innovation.  Most officers were commissioned only by their governors until, I think, 1916.  Units were designated "The 54th Massachusetts Infantry," or the "43rd Ohio Cavalry," while regular forces were designated as "7th U.S. Cavalry."

Interestingly, most Negro militia units were made federal troops, with the designation of "U.S.C.T." for "United States Colored Troops," and placed under the command of regular officers.  I don't know why this happened.  (i.e., "22nd Infantry, U.S.C.T.").

[Cecil DP]

If the individual hasn't received his/her federal recognition they will wear the state on the lapel rather than the US cutouts. 

Just a slight addition to a good post.

Many, if not most, SDF officers are federally commissioned officers. 

(Usually retired.)

As a retired federally commissioned officer, they are entitled to salutes from CAP members.

But it is worth noting that even federally commissioned officers serving in the SDF wear the state thing on their lapel, rather than "U.S."  So one just can't tell the type of commission held by an SDF officer by their uniform.

Similarly, CAP members wear the "U.S." on their lapels, but clearly are not federally commissioned officers.

So the presence or absence of "U.S." on the lapel is probably not a good way to decide who to salute.

Ned Lee

I was refering to the National Guard Officer who wears the state rank, while awaiting the Federal Recognition.

[Hawk200]

Many, if not most, SDF officers are federally commissioned officers. 

(Usually retired.)

As a retired federally commissioned officer, they are entitled to salutes from CAP members.

Just noted this. By this reasoning, any retired military officer that wears a CAP uniform is "entitled" to a salute. I don't think the logic is valid. I don't think having held a comission equates to always having it. At least not in the manner we're currently discussing.

If the general concencus is that SDF officers should receive salutes, I don't have any problem with it. But I don't think rationalizing in the way we've had here is accurate, or even necessary.

[mikeylikey]

^  Umm....being retired is only a form of service in the military.  Unless the appointment and commission is revoked and the officer is dishonorably discharged, once an Officer always an Officer.  Now.....we could get into semantics, as even a 2LT who is discharged but served one year on AD during a declared or undeclared (IRAQ) war can always write his title on correspondence even after leaving the military.  That is why you see things like;

John R Doe
CPT(r) USAR, LTCOL NYSG

or

Jane T Doe
1stLt USAF, Major USACC

[JohnKachenmeister]

Mikey:

I remember hearing that, but I thought that practice had fallen into disuse.

[Ned]

Just noted this. By this reasoning, any retired military officer that wears a CAP uniform is "entitled" to a salute.  [. . .] I don't think having held a comission equates to always having it.

I mentioned it because CAPP 151 directs CAP members to extend the same customs and courtesies to retired military members as they would to active duty folks (para 2(c)).

So yes, any retired officer wearing a CAP uniform is entitled to a salute from a CAP member while both are wearing a military style uniform and the retired officer holds a federal or CAP grade higher than that of the other CAP member.

And yes, once you get a federal commission you hold it until it is revoked.

FWIW, I am still in the USAR (retired reserve), subject to recall (right after the women and children, hopefully  ), and my federal commission is still hanging on the wall in my den.

[Smokey]

Why is this an issue?

Why are those so opposed to rendering a simple courtesy to others??

It seems those against it are:

Poorly trained by mom and dad as to manners

or

Have issues with our association with the military

or

Have issues with State Defense Forces

For crying out loud, it's a salute, A simple greeting.   No one is asking you to get on your knees and kiss their feet, give up your first born, or even demanding money.   

IT'S A SIMPLE SALUTE.

Carry on.

BTW....I will quickly and sharply render a salute to any service member , even if he is in his bathrobe, should he be a Medal of Honor recipient. He not only deserves my salute but my most sincere thanks and appreciation. (He can also have my first born)

[jb512]

Why is this an issue?

Why are those so opposed to rendering a simple courtesy to others??

It seems those against it are:

Poorly trained by mom and dad as to manners

or

Have issues with our association with the military

or

Have issues with State Defense Forces

For crying out loud, it's a salute, A simple greeting.   No one is asking you to get on your knees and kiss their feet, give up your first born, or even demanding money.   

IT'S A SIMPLE SALUTE.

Carry on.

BTW....I will quickly and sharply render a salute to any service member , even if he is in his bathrobe, should he be a Medal of Honor recipient. He not only deserves my salute but my most sincere thanks and appreciation. (He can also have my first born)

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call BS on this thread...

[JohnKachenmeister]

Just noted this. By this reasoning, any retired military officer that wears a CAP uniform is "entitled" to a salute.  [. . .] I don't think having held a comission equates to always having it.

I mentioned it because CAPP 151 directs CAP members to extend the same customs and courtesies to retired military members as they would to active duty folks (para 2(c)).

So yes, any retired officer wearing a CAP uniform is entitled to a salute from a CAP member while both are wearing a military style uniform and the retired officer holds a federal or CAP grade higher than that of the other CAP member.

And yes, once you get a federal commission you hold it until it is revoked.

FWIW, I am still in the USAR (retired reserve), subject to recall (right after the women and children, hopefully  ), and my federal commission is still hanging on the wall in my den.

You and me both, Ned.

I have my commission and my degree on my wall.  I was the first person in my family to graduate from college, and the second to hold a commission.  (My dad was a World War II bombardier).  I also have all my medals in a wooden case with a glass front, but that's just to impress the hot young chicks.

[AlphaSigOU]

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call BS on this thread...

It ain't complete until someone raises the B.S. flag!



HAND....SALUTE! 

Enough with the kvetching over who is or who isn't entitled to a salute, people... when in doubt, pop one off!

[topsecret]

State guard officers aren't federally recognized, and thus I would neither initiate nor expect a salute.  I would of course return one if rendered.

Bill,

As others have pointed out, CAP directives (in this case CAPP 151) do not make any sort of distinction about whether or not someone is "federally recognized".  Where did you see something along those lines?

It appears that CAP directives in the area of saluting are a little broader than those of the USAF or the other services.  For example, we are required to salute all Medal of Honor recipients, which is not a requirment for USAF folks (unless junior in rank.)  So it makes sense that we apparently are required to salute SDF officers even if our USAF brothers might not be.

But perhaps more importantly, SDFs are "federally recognized" in the sense that the Constitution specifically provides for state militias and allows Congress to set their training standards as well as the mechanism to call them into active Federal service.  If something was written into the Constitution by the Founders, I'd call that a pretty good example of being "recognized."

Call me a wild man, but if USAF or CAP wanted me busting off salutes to State Guard officers...they'd mandate it.

I think they did, Wild Man.   

Thank you for your service.

Peace.

Ned Lee

Well, sir, I guess this is better than the jumping on me about my un-American proposal for CAP in the "if you were national commander..." hypo.

Alrighty.  CAPP 151 lists as salutables the "the President of the United States, and commissioned officers and warrant officers of the Armed Forces who are senior in rank to you." 

Let's not forget that pamphlets are not directive in nature.  Those of you playing along at home may kindly turn to CAPR 5-4, para 1i., which states that pamphlets "are nondirective, informative, 'how-to' type publications that may include suggested methods and techniques for implementing CAP policies."

But I'll play along and operate within your framework.

The term "armed forces," as defined by Title 10, United States Code, Section 101(a)(4), means "the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard."

State defense forces are not members of the Armed Forces.

Where did I get "federal recognition" from?  Again, our old friend the United States Code (Title 32 USC 101).  The Army National Guard of the United States (NGUS) and Air National Guard of the United States (ANGUS) are "part of the organized militia" which are trained, have their officers appointed under Article I, Section 8, clause 16 of the U.S. Constitution, are organized, armed, and equipped wholly or partly at Federal expense, and are (Drumroll) federally recognized.  They are reserve components of the Army and Air Force, respectively.  One cannot be a member of the NGUS or ANGUS without federal recognition, as 32 USC 101(5) and 32 USC 101(7) state.

If you take a look at 32 USC Chapter 3, you will see various statutes regarding federal recognition of Guard officers.  No Federal recognition, no NGUS or ANGUS membership.  No NGUS or ANGUS membership, no Armed Forces membership. 

Our federal Constitution only allows Congress to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States..."  See U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, clause 16.  32 USC 109 outright forbids state defense forces from being called, ordered or drafted into the armed forces.  SDFs are STATE TROOPS ONLY.

No Armed Forces membership, no mandate to salute under the provisions (of a nondirective pamphlet) designated for members of the Armed Forces.  Seems fairly simple to me.

Bill Johnson, MSgt, USAF (Ret), Major, CAP
Paralegal Craftsman
USAF Judge Advocate General's Corps

[md132]

Really I don't see a problem with rendering a salute to any officer, whether they are AD, Res, NG, Ret, SDF, and it's Aux (CAP and USCG Aux).  It's common courtesy.  It's a sign of respect to the uniform.  No matter who wears it.  If I see a CAP officer senior to me, will I render a salute?  Of Course.  Will I render a salute to a USCG Aux or SDF officer?  Of Course.  No matter what uniform I wear. 

Yes, NG is part of an organized militia.  So are SDF's.  Some SDF's work hand in hand with their NG counterparts. 

As long as a person is wearing an officer military uniform, I will salute that person.

[Smokey]

OH MY GAWD,

This is still going on!!!!

Now we have lawyers parsing the issue.

You don't want to salute....don't wear a uniform.

GET OVER IT.

[SAR-EMT1]

Wow... just wow. 

[Hawk200]

Alright, in the interest of getting the thread back on track, can we limit to the question? A simple "Yes, we should salute State Guard officers" or a simple "No, we shouldn't salute them".

From what I see from the simple consensus is that we should. No problem. But all this "Yeah, they're Federal officers" and the "No they're not" isn't really what I'm looking for.

Please, limit to yeses and no's from now on, folks. Or should I lock the voting, and request a moderator to lock the thread?

[arajca]

Not to ignore your request, but I'm going to anyway.

Not all states have state guard/sdf's/etc. CO is on the doesn't. There is an outfit that calls themselves COSDF Provisional, however, they have ZERO official (state or federal) recognition. And there other examples of this across the country. Would you salute them? I won't.

[topsecret]

I'm done.  Enjoy your board, folks.

[NAYBOR]

Title 32 USC Section 109 establishes that states may establish a military defense force in their states, which does state that these forces 'may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.'  However, Title 10 USC allows for federal ACTIVATION of SDF troops:

"Federal activation [of SDFs]:

The U.S. Constitution, coupled with several statutory and case laws, details the relationship of the State Defense Forces to the federal government. Outside 32 USC 109, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled: "It is true that the state defense forces 'may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.' 32 U.S.C. 109(c). It is nonetheless possible that they are subject to call under 10 U.S.C. 331-333, which distinguish the 'militia' from the 'armed forces,' and which appear to subject all portions of the 'militia' - organized or not - to call if needed for the purposes specified in the Militia Clauses" Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334 (1990). The following is an extract of the laws which the U.S. Supreme Court cited giving the federal government authority to activate the State Defense Forces.

10 USC 331 - "Federal aid for State governments"

Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.

10 USC 332 – "Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority"

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State or Territory by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

10 USC 333 – "Interference with State and Federal law"

The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it -

(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution."

Many SDF officers and SDF enlisted take the same oaths as the National Guardpersons in their respective states [I know that Maryland Defense Force officers and enlisted soldiers take oaths to obey the President of the United States and the Governor of MD, and to defend the Consitution of the US and Consitution of MD].  SDFs are also considered part of the "organized militia" of the state they are in, along with the National Guard troops.  Yes, the SDFs are first and foremost STATE SOLDIERS/AIRMAN.  But anyone thinking that SDFs can't be "federalized" are fooling themselves, IMHO.  Apparently case law, and the USC supports this notion.  And with the recent law being passed allowing Congress to take direct control of National Guard troops in any state with or without the consent of the Governor(s), I see SDFs playing an increasing role in America's defense.  The SDFs of today are much like what the US had prior to the formation of the National Guard.  Many states sent their troops/naval militias to fight in the Civil War, Spanish-American War, etc.   The Maryland Defense Force's 10MEDRGT deployed to Katrina for many weeks, deployed to Bosnia on a humanitarian medical relief mission with the MDANG for 3-4 weeks, and this past summer went with the MDANG to South Dakota for a little over 2 weeks to help the medically underserved on Indian Reservations there.  This was all done WITHOUT PAY!!! 

Our current president is from Texas, and TX has quite a robust SDF--Naval, Air, and Army.  The SDF soldiers in Texas work right along side their NG counterparts, driving tanks, etc.  You don't think our president doesn't know about SDFs?  I'll bet your rear end he does!

Yes, SDF officers/warrant officers deserve salutes, in my opinion.  They volunteer their time, with less benefits than CAP gets, to defend their state and country if need be.  They deserve respect.  In the same vein, I believe SDF officers and enlisted should give the courtesy of a salute to CAP officers that outrank them.  They don't have to, but I belive they should too.

[Becks]

Many SDF officers and SDF enlisted take the same oaths as the National Guardpersons in their respective states ...

Youre correct, I took the exact oath that the NG takes, swearing to follow both the president and the governor.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Same in Ohio.

But... Under Title 10, the funding goes to re-imburse states that use their militia for Federal purposes.  I don't think the President can directly mobilize SDF's.  This tradition goes back to the Civil War when governors kept a state force in reserve, even though most militia units were serving under Federal command.

[mikeylikey]

And with the recent law being passed allowing Congress to take direct control of National Guard troops in any state with or without the consent of the Governor(s), I see SDFs playing an increasing role in America's defense. 

Wait, wait.......that's news to me.  I must have been living in a box?  Can you link that for me.  I searched but nothing came up.

I hope that does not pass.  States are separate and sovereign to the Federal Government.  This is one more "take power from the states" by big FED.  If you look at 1820 and today, when did the individual State have more rights and power?  Today or then.  

I am not a separatist wacko, I am just shocked how no one really thinks of themselves as a Virginian or a Floridian, but as an "American".  Loyalty should be with your State first, the country second.  Then again if the FED allowed that mindset, there may have been other "civil wars".  

Wouldn't it be nice to live in a country where the individual actually elects their President, not some "backroom" gang who votes how their governor tells them to.  Or when Senators and Representatives actually went to session everyday.  Or when a military enlistment was up, it really was up (stop-loss).  Or......

YES Salute SDF Officers.  Hell I just saluted my CAT, because, it didn't throw-up after eating the new food I bought for it.  (Man cats can be so freaking picky when it comes to what they will eat.  I bought it new cat treats yesterday, it actually pushed them into a pile in the middle of the kitchen floor to tell me it doesn't like them).

I also just watched an episode of JAG too.....(best show ever!) Harm, says to Mac "Mac why is Bud (the FAT ENSIGN) eating another donut"?, Mac says "he decided that since he can't drop the pounds, he will just add to them".  Freaking Awesome writing!

BTW the episode of House, MD on tonight was rather good.  The Fake Doc gets kicked off (for those of you tivo'ing it, now you don't have to watch it, your welcome).  

I also am in the process of firing an officer because he decided to use the Office GSA card to buy gas for his POV.  He failed to let anyone know what he did, thinking he could do that since he drives to work everyday and drives off campus to go work-out at lunch that it is a qualified expense.  So for those of you who may use the company credit card or take from petty cash because gas prices are on the rise......Don't do it!  It will bite you in the rear.

Leads me to a good story.  With a Moral!  Here goes........."A 2Lt was working in the Pentagon late one night making copies when his boss, a Major General walks out from his Office carrying a piece of paper.  He walks over to the shredder and asks the Lt to join him.  The General says to the LT "my secretary went home this evening before she could finish this".  The LT snatches the piece of paper from the Generals hand and says "Not a problem Sir, I would be happy to help, and feeds the paper into the shredder.  The paper gets shredded.  Happy with himself the LT looks to the General who says to the LT "thanks LT, I need about 35 copies made".  MORAL of the story......don't assume you know what others want from you!  BTW that story is called "The Shredder"

Anyone living in the Northeast notice that like 2 days ago the temp was near 75, and today its like 45?  I like how we went straight from summer temps and weather right into "winterish" weather OVERNIGHT!

Oh ya.....So is the consensus that we should salute SDF Officers?  Seriously?  Who does it hurt?  It may actually brighten someones day.  Like the song goes......BE HAPPY!

DONE.....peace out!  

[NAYBOR]

Mikey, here's the link to an article on it:

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=170453

[mikeylikey]

Mikey, here's the link to an article on it:

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=170453

Thank you.  It is a good read!

[JohnKachenmeister]

That article had NOTHING to do with State Guard organizations.  The National Guard is subject to Federal recall.  Under the Insurrection Act, the President could not federalize the Guard within a state without the Governor's consent.

Due to the Katrina debacle, the governors have demonstrated that they can't handle that authority, so it has been taken away.

State Guard organizations always remain under the governor, and are not subject to federal call up.  IF they perform a federal mission, they still perform it as state troops on the state's dime.  The Feds can re-imburse the state under Title 10, but that still does not make them federalized Guardsmen.

[RiverAux]

State Guard organizations always remain under the governor, and are not subject to federal call up.  IF they perform a federal mission, they still perform it as state troops on the state's dime.  The Feds can re-imburse the state under Title 10, but that still does not make them federalized Guardsmen.

Only because Congress has currently exempted SDFs from being federalized as units -- an exemption which may or may not be valid depending on how you want to read some footnotes in a Supreme Court case involving federalization of the National Guard. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

The "Current" exemption from Federal call-up goes back to the Civil War.

The whole concept of State Guard units is to allow the governor to retain military forces in a state to respond to disasters and state emergencies when the NG is called into Federal service.  This concept is negated if the Feds can call up SG units, too.

Also, SG units are comprised of persons who may not meet the physical and age standards of the active forces, and are not always trained to federal standards.  They have no US-owned equipment, weapons or vehicles, and the Federal government is specifically forbidden to expend funds to train them.

But... they CAN be assigned a Federal mission within the state (guarding airports, for example) and in that case, they would be directed to perform the mission by the governor, paid out of state funds, but the Feds would re-imburse the state for money spent on such a mission under Title 10.

[Hawk200]

That article had NOTHING to do with State Guard organizations.  The National Guard is subject to Federal recall.  Under the Insurrection Act, the President could not federalize the Guard within a state without the Governor's consent....

State Guard organizations always remain under the governor, and are not subject to federal call up.  IF they perform a federal mission, they still perform it as state troops on the state's dime.  The Feds can re-imburse the state under Title 10, but that still does not make them federalized Guardsmen.

I think part of the confusion is the verbage. I've noticed that for some reason, National Guard units are referred to as "State Guard" when not on Federal status. Considering there are also State Guards, or SDF's, or militia, or whatever people choose to call them, there tends to be some confusion as to which are being referred to.

Also, SG units are comprised of persons who may not meet the physical and age standards of the active forces, and are not always trained to federal standards.  They have no US-owned equipment, weapons or vehicles, and the Federal government is specifically forbidden to expend funds to train them.

That's an interesting point. It would be difficult for the Federal government to call up an SDF if they won't pay them, and the SDF may not meet the same standards that the military requires. After doing some reading into the USC, it looks like equipment may be transferred to the State Guard, but only if it can't be used by the DOD. Which means you know the quality of the equipment that those SDF's are getting.

But... they CAN be assigned a Federal mission within the state (guarding airports, for example) and in that case, they would be directed to perform the mission by the governor, paid out of state funds, but the Feds would re-imburse the state for money spent on such a mission under Title 10.

Another interesting scenario. How would this work? Would the Feds direct a governor to call up an SDF? Or would that governor volunteer his SDF with the condition that the Feds would reimburse? Would it be a contract arrangement?

[RiverAux]

[The "Current" exemption from Federal call-up goes back to the Civil War.

Wrong again.  Below is all the federal legislation that applies directly to state defense forces. 

TITLE 32 > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 109
Sec. 109. - Maintenance of other troops

(a)  In time of peace, a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia may maintain no troops other than those of its National Guard and defense forces authorized by subsection (c).

(b) Nothing in this title limits the right of a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia to use its National Guard or its defense forces authorized by subsection (c) within its borders in time of peace, or prevents it from organizing and maintaining police or constabulary.

(c) In addition to its National Guard, if any, a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia may, as provided by its laws, organize and maintain defense forces. A defense force established under this section may be used within the jurisdiction concerned, as its chief executive (or commanding general in the case of the District of Columbia) considers necessary, but it may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.

(d) A member of a defense force established under subsection (c) is not, because of that membership, exempt from service in the armed forces, nor is he entitled to pay, allowances, subsistence, transportation, or medical care or treatment, from funds of the United States.

(e) A person may not become a member of a defense force established under subsection (c) if he is a member of a reserve component of the armed forces

The Supreme Court has indicated that they would probably find that the last part of (c) is invalid should it ever be challenged (not that anyone would).

You might want to read "The American Home Guard" by Barry Stentiford which goes into explicit detail about state defense forces (and their WWI predecessors) and the state-federal relationship. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

OK, I HAVE read "The American Home Guard," and I read your post.  I am not convinced that the laws established under Perpich vs US in any way apply to the State Guard under subsection c of the law you posted.

Perpich's suit involved an attempt to block NG troops who were subject to callup by the president from training outside the United States.  it was a stupid, political suit because the Democrats got their noses out of joint when Reagan decided to support Honduras and El Salvador against the Communists in Nicaragua.  The Democrats supported the Communists.

I am not even certain if Minnesota has a state guard.

[jimmydeanno]

The Democrats supported the Communists.

*Jimmy bites his tongue...*

[pixelwonk]

*serious drifting*

[RiverAux]

Then how in the world could you make this statement?  The "Current" exemption from Federal call-up goes back to the Civil War.
There was no equivalent to what are now known as state defense forces until the creation of the current National Guard system.  Until then all state militias were potentially subject to federal call up.  

However, congress when it created legislation specifically authorizing state defense forces chose to exempt them from federal call up.  The Supreme Court noted in Perpich:

The Governor contends that the state defense forces are irrelevant to this case because they are not subject to being called forth by the National Government and therefore cannot be militia within the meaning of the Constitution. We are not, however, satisfied that this argument is persuasive. First, the immunity of those forces from impressment into the national service appears - if indeed they have any such immunity - to be the consequence of a purely statutory choice, and it is not obvious why that choice should alter the constitutional status of the forces allowed the States. Second, although we do not believe it necessary to resolve the [496 U.S. 334, 353] issue, the Governor's construction of the relevant statute is subject to question. It is true that the state defense forces "may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces." 32 U.S.C. 109(c). It is nonetheless possible that they are subject to call under 10 U.S.C. 331-333, which distinguish the "militia" from the "armed forces," and which appear to subject all portions of the "militia" - organized or not - to call if needed for the purposes specified in the Militia Clauses. See n. 21, supra.

So, the Supreme Court says that SDFs may be exempt from federal call-up only because of current federal law and even that "immunity" may not be complete since they could possibly be called up under provisions of a different law.  

[Becks]

I am not even certain if Minnesota has a state guard.

They do not..at least not one sanctioned by the state, in which case it would be what is known as a "Rump Militia".

[Falshrmjgr]

From http://www.calguard.ca.gov/oc/casmr/faqs.htm

Q. ARE THE CSMR RANKS THE SAME AS FEDERAL RANKS?
CSMR ranks are State and not Federal ranks. All appointments, commissions, warrants, and enlistments are recognized and authorized by the Governor of the State of California through the Adjutant General of the State of California. When on State Active Duty, and if pay is authorized, the pay rate is generally the same as Federal pay for the equivalent rank and time in grade etc. CSMR soldiers render to all members of the military community, and receive from them, all courtesies common to all such members, such as saluting, forms of address etc.

(Emphasis mine)

Are we done here?

[RiverAux]

I'm not sure that a CSMR faq list has any meaning in context of what CAP is required to do, but I am among the majority that says that CAP should salute them even though it is not required by CAP regulations.

[ddelaney103]

From http://www.calguard.ca.gov/oc/casmr/faqs.htm

Q. ARE THE CSMR RANKS THE SAME AS FEDERAL RANKS?
CSMR ranks are State and not Federal ranks. All appointments, commissions, warrants, and enlistments are recognized and authorized by the Governor of the State of California through the Adjutant General of the State of California. When on State Active Duty, and if pay is authorized, the pay rate is generally the same as Federal pay for the equivalent rank and time in grade etc. CSMR soldiers render to all members of the military community, and receive from them, all courtesies common to all such members, such as saluting, forms of address etc.

(Emphasis mine)

Are we done here?

Um, no?

As often as CA tells the federal gov't where to go, they cannot in fact issue instructions to federal organizations such as the military.

Any salutes given by federal military given to state militias is a matter of courtesy and politeness, not the result of directives.  You can (and maybe should) offer: they cannot compel.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Then how in the world could you make this statement?  The "Current" exemption from Federal call-up goes back to the Civil War.
There was no equivalent to what are now known as state defense forces until the creation of the current National Guard system.  Until then all state militias were potentially subject to federal call up.  

However, congress when it created legislation specifically authorizing state defense forces chose to exempt them from federal call up.  The Supreme Court noted in Perpich:

The Governor contends that the state defense forces are irrelevant to this case because they are not subject to being called forth by the National Government and therefore cannot be militia within the meaning of the Constitution. We are not, however, satisfied that this argument is persuasive. First, the immunity of those forces from impressment into the national service appears - if indeed they have any such immunity - to be the consequence of a purely statutory choice, and it is not obvious why that choice should alter the constitutional status of the forces allowed the States. Second, although we do not believe it necessary to resolve the [496 U.S. 334, 353] issue, the Governor's construction of the relevant statute is subject to question. It is true that the state defense forces "may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces." 32 U.S.C. 109(c). It is nonetheless possible that they are subject to call under 10 U.S.C. 331-333, which distinguish the "militia" from the "armed forces," and which appear to subject all portions of the "militia" - organized or not - to call if needed for the purposes specified in the Militia Clauses. See n. 21, supra.

So, the Supreme Court says that SDFs may be exempt from federal call-up only because of current federal law and even that "immunity" may not be complete since they could possibly be called up under provisions of a different law.  

The current legislation recognized the tradition of state guard units.  They have gone under different names, but the principle of having an exclusively-state force that the governor can call upon when the federal govt called out the militia has been present since the Civil War.

I did some research into the battle history of the Ohio Military Reserve, and discovered that many of the units engaged against Morgan's Raid were what were then called "Home Guard Militia," and that some of the current OHMR units trace their lineage to those units.

[JohnKachenmeister]

The Court's reference to Title 10's authority to call out the militia "Organized or not" is the government's authority to DRAFT, not to call out second-line and ill-equipped troops from the state.

[Falshrmjgr]

From http://www.calguard.ca.gov/oc/casmr/faqs.htm

Q. ARE THE CSMR RANKS THE SAME AS FEDERAL RANKS?
CSMR ranks are State and not Federal ranks. All appointments, commissions, warrants, and enlistments are recognized and authorized by the Governor of the State of California through the Adjutant General of the State of California. When on State Active Duty, and if pay is authorized, the pay rate is generally the same as Federal pay for the equivalent rank and time in grade etc. CSMR soldiers render to all members of the military community, and receive from them, all courtesies common to all such members, such as saluting, forms of address etc.

(Emphasis mine)

Are we done here?

Um, no?

As often as CA tells the federal gov't where to go, they cannot in fact issue instructions to federal organizations such as the military.

Any salutes given by federal military given to state militias is a matter of courtesy and politeness, not the result of directives.  You can (and maybe should) offer: they cannot compel.

Seems to me that you are confusing "CUSTOMS" with Law.  Bottom line:  "Customs and Coutesies" are exactly that, CUSTOMS and COURTESIES.

So, as a "paramilitary" organization, we have Customs to render proper greetings (salutes) as Courtesies to those who also belong to similar organizations.  How hard is that?

My point was not to reference a source law or regulation, but merely to point to a fairly authoritative source for guidance.  Seems to me that if the CSMR trains its members to expect courtesies from the Active Component, they probably have a pretty good leg to stand on, or I imagine that the stink would get pretty smelly pretty quick otherwise.

Look, if you feel awkward rendering a hand salute, then just wear the stupid golf shirt.  Only one who might salute then is your Caddy.

As a complete aside, we had Militias with elected officers long before we had a standing army.  Militia Officers  are no less officers than any officer. And in fact, I would argue, legal pretense aside, CAP is a militia as well.  Just an odd-ball sort of hybrid militia, but a militia nonetheless.

[Falshrmjgr]

The Court's reference to Title 10's authority to call out the militia "Organized or not" is the government's authority to DRAFT, not to call out second-line and ill-equipped troops from the state.

Seems to me, the Founding Fathers considered all able bodied males as members of the unorganized militia.  See the Second Amendment.   :angel:

[RiverAux]

Any state militia has always been potentially subject to "federalization".  Yes, even during the Civil War there were state militia units that operated under state control even during combat operations.  However, that wasn't because of any legal requirements that prevented the feds from taking them --- the feds didn't want them.  It just served their purpose to let the states control those particular units.  They had enough problems on their hands without worrying about manning small scattered garrisons. 

[NAYBOR]

John K:  Major, for the record, I do know the article I referenced was not specific to the SDFs.  My point for referencing the article was to show that, now that a president can call up the National Guard in a state WITHOUT the governor's consent, the SDFs may see more active service if/when this presidential call-up happens.

I will say, however, that I agree that any/all SDFs could be federalized if the US governement chose to do so.  While I don't know if this is through "draft" or not (I don't interpret it as being through draft--the act speaks of "state organized militias" in my mind, but I ain't a lawyer), if this is through draft of all "able bodied men" in the unit, that's how they'd do it.

SDFs, I feel, are basically the same type of troops that were around prior to the National Guard.  None had the same standards of training, but all fought honorably for their states and country.

An act that keeps going before Congress, the State Defense Force Improvement Act, would allow states to purchase DOD equipment, and DOD to to train SDF troops at DOD installations (at the states expense and states protection--no DOD liability), etc. so that there are standards and equipment for SDFs across the US.  I would ask people to look into this act, and write there US congress men and women to support this act.  I think it would be good to have SDFs with good equipment and similar standards across all of the states.  DOD training would be very good for the home defense of America too, IMHO.  Look into it and write your congressperson if you feel the urge.

[Smokey]

Isn't this horse dead yet???

[Hawk200]

OK, folks, I'm just as guilty on the thread drift as anyone, but can we get it back on track? Does anyone else want to cast a vote that hasn't yet? I'll give this thread a few more days, then I'll lock the voting down. Speak up while you can.

[pixelwonk]

I'd say you've got an unmistakably good answer already.  At 86% in favor of, it's not exactly close.

[Hawk200]

I'd say you've got an unmistakably good answer already.  At 86% in favor of, it's not exactly close.

I guess 81 voters are a good cross evaluation. Seems like the general concensus is that we should render salutes to SDF officers. Pretty much satisfies my curiousity.

[MIKE]

And with that...