from cadet to Senior Officer(member)

[jb512]

Holy crap.

I too was a Mitchell cadet when I rejoined and I waited until my paperwork cleared before I put on my gold bars...

I know that you worked for what you got when you were a cadet, but to lead as an officer you know you should follow regs and wear the appropriate grade.  I was a SMWOG for two months before mine cleared and I wore the cutouts on the blues and BDUs till then...

Suck it up.

[Short Field]

Oh, and I may not be a 2nd Lt. according to Nationals but I earned my Mitchell; therefore, I'm going to wear the rank I worked very hard to earn according to the advanced promotion guidelines.  Screw the red tape.

Leaders lead by example.  According to National you may not be a 2nd Lt but you are going to wear the rank anyway. 

Guess I missed where you were going to follow the rules and regulations and was doing the right things.

[SarDragon]

OK, let's go over it once more - Level I = three things:

1. Orientation/Foundations

2. CPPT

3. OPSEC

The Mitchell only relieves you from item 1. Former cadets are still required to do #2 and #3. Number 2 should have already been done if over 18 when leaving the cadet program.

By wearing rank w/o accompanying documentation, you are violating the integrity you signed on for on your CAPF 12.

I voluntarily subscribe to the objectives and purposes of Civil Air Patrol and agree to be guided by the CAP constitution and Bylaws and comply with CAP rules and regulations as from time to time may be amended or promulgated.

I agree to abide by the decisions of those in authority of Civil Air Patrol.

Better take another look at the core values, don'tcha think?

I grew up on the Academy most of my life, so don't tell me about taking another look at our 'core values'.  I've met the requirements and my unit has signed off and sent the paper work to Montgomery.  I never said I wouldn't play by the rules. I only meant to voice an opinion about an issue.  I didn't think it would cause people to pull out the regulations and start quoting them at me. 

That's the issue with message boards like this everyone has to one up the last guy.  It's a Pandora's box.

This isn't a oneupmanship contest.

Oh, and I may not be a 2nd Lt. according to Nationals but I earned my Mitchell; therefore, I'm going to wear the rank I worked very hard to earn according to the advanced promotion guidelines.  Screw the red tape.

Compare the red highlighted text with the above quote. Tell me (and the rest of our readers) that the quote doesn't contradict the red text. Also, reread my info on the composition of Level I. You don't need to redo all of it.

Now, had you not gotten all huffy and up in our faces about this, you might have gotten a little information that would help solve your problem. If you think my information might be worth  a little humble pie, PM me, and we'll talk.

As for the integrity issue, we have rules because we need rules. Are all of our popular? No. Are they all well written? No. Do some of them need big fixes? Yes.But, in spite of all that, I still follow them, because they are the rules. I don't circumvent them, or find ways around them. I try to work within the system to get them changed.

Remember - Integrity is doing the right thing, even when nobody's looking.

[Cecil DP]

When I was a Wing DP, and all SM promotions went through Wing, we had a similar situation. The Commander and I were at a Squadron function and met the members and presented some awards. We met a 2Lt. A week later his CAPF2 came to Wing. It was promptly returned to the Squadron Commander on the grounds that there must be some mistake as we had not only seen the member wearing the grade insignia, we had some PA's going back several months identifying him as such. The Squadron Commander got a personal message from the Wing/CC and the SM waited until the next Commander's call (2 months) before the promotion would be processed.

[AlphaSigOU]

I think it's absolutely bogus for former cadets who come back into the program to have to go all the way through Level I training.  It's an absolute waste of time...

Sorry, L-T, but the regs are the regs. I was a former cadink and senior member that took a 17-year break from CAP. While waiting for my 1st Lt grade to be reinstated (took about 3-1/2 months) I put up with being a slick-shouldered SMWOG, and took Level I/CPPT (OPSEC wasn't a requirement back then) without a complaint.  I can understand taking the Orientation Course (now the Foundations Course) waiver if it's been less than two years break between cadink and dark side minion. But there are no waivers granted for CPPT or OPSEC. You don't take 'em, you don't play.

P.S. You one of the PDK Mintons? I was one of Ron Bradford's cadets many moons ago when I first joined CAP over 30 years ago. Still have my DEKALB patch.

[MIKE]

Believe me, CAPTalk is nowhere near the worst.  If you go on the Military.com forum for CAP and post the same things there that you have in this CAPTalk thread, then GeneSchubeck, LRSDRanger, and all the other self-absorbed members of that forum will eat you alive.

However, if the moderators were SarDragon, PHall, shorning, Lordmonar, Nick Critelli, and Chief Chiafos, then yes, it would definitely be pandora's box. 

This some kind of personal attack?

However, I highly recommend you don't become active on the Military.com forum for CAP.  If you do, it will rot your brain and kill your soul.

ROTFLMAO. 

Sorry, L-T, but the regs are the regs.

I think you mean S-M. 

[Eagle400]

You did not progress rapidly as stated in the cadet program guidelines.  I can't stand Cadets that get their Mitchell and then just halt to a slow grind.  It is a waste of your time and mine.

I know of a former CAP cadet who was in for 5 years and made it only to C/TSgt, but went on to graduate from West Point and earn the Silver Star in combat.  Do you think he was a waste of time, too?  Had he been 2b'd for failure to progress, he may have lost the will to pursue a commission through West Point and may never have even joined the military.    

I also know what CAPR 52-16, paragraph 2-3, item c says, and in my opinion it is a total crock.  I mean, if someone speeds through phases I and II, and then parks themselves at the Earhart Award, they have still made it to the top 5% of all CAP cadets and have therefore established themselves as a valuable asset.  For example, would a group commander be willing to 2b the C/Capt who was voted in as group CAC rep to wing, just because he failed to progress satisfactorily according to CAPR 52-16?  Or how about a squadron commander whose squadron has a cadet who is unable to progress satisfactorily in CAP due to school, sports and work commitments because he wants to maintain a 4.0 GPA with the hope of gaining admission to a service academy? 

It is pointless and wrong to require unpaid volunteers to "move up or move out", especially when they are the ones who are paying out of their own pockets to be able to serve in CAP.  It is also wrong that cadets are required to "move up or move out", but a CAP officer can never promote and spend the rest of their life in CAP without the fear of being 2b'd.  Talk about a double standard!

If CAP must keep the satisfactory progression rule, then there should be waivers for those cadets who are unable to progress at the rate of 2 achievements per year because of more important commitments such as school and work.  There needs to be a differentiation made (in CAPR 52-16) between those cadets who don't progress satisfactorily due to more important commitments, and those who don't progress satisfactorily because they are lazy.  There is a huge difference between the two, so it is not right to lump them into the same category.    

Whats stopping you from joining now anyway??

College.  I'm a full-time student, but will have my degree in 2009.  CAPTalk is how I stay up to date on things so that I am not totally clueless about what has changed since I left in 2006.   

[mikeylikey]

I know of a former CAP cadet who was in for 5 years and made it only to C/TSgt, but went on to graduate from West Point and earn the Silver Star in combat.  Do you think he was a waste of time, too?  Had he been 2b'd for failure to progress, he may have lost the will to pursue a commission through West Point and may never have even joined the military.    

In CAP.....yes a waste of time, his later achievements maybe not.  I bet he used his CAP time as a way into West Point.  I propose that Academies only look at a prospective Cadets CAP experiences if they received the Mitchell.  I see too many Cadet Airman and Cadet Sergent's getting appointments to academies.  I think they only join CAP and sit around so they can say "Ya CAP was my extracurricular activity". 

I am on the local Academy entrance board, and have convinced the other members to exclude anyones curricular or extracurricular activities if they are less than 2 years and if they show no advancement in whatever program they were in, be it Boy Scouts or CAP.  Is that right.....I think it is and the Congressman agrees.   

[Short Field]

Gee you are cold!  What are those poor resume inflaters going to do now?   

[mikeylikey]

Gee you are cold!  What are those poor resume inflaters going to do now?   

Get them $1.50 extra at BK or McDonalds

[Eagle400]

Believe me, CAPTalk is nowhere near the worst.  If you go on the Military.com forum for CAP and post the same things there that you have in this CAPTalk thread, then GeneSchubeck, LRSDRanger, and all the other self-absorbed members of that forum will eat you alive.

However, if the moderators were SarDragon, PHall, shorning, Lordmonar, Nick Critelli, and Chief Chiafos, then yes, it would definitely be pandora's box. 

This some kind of personal attack?

No it is not, sir.  Every one of the individuals I listed above posted personal attacks directed at me on this public forum, when they could have easily sent me a PM (which would have been more appropriate).  However, it is important to realize that I am not the only one who has been on the receiving end of such attacks.  I said what I said based on my own experiences with these individuals on this forum/

Also, please note that I only referred to them by their usernames, not their actual names.  However, those members whose usernames are their actual names and those who include their actual names in their signature lines have the right to do so.  If someone wants to keep their actual name off the internet (or a particular site), that is their right as well.  I respect that both rights. 

A person's name is their property unless they make it public, such as having their username be their actual name or including their actual name in their signature line.  When someone posts a person's actual name on a public forum, knowing beyond the shadow of a doubt that the person wants to keep their actual name private, they are using their property without their consent (which is especially inappropriate when the person's name is being used in an effort to smear their character).

The Constitution makes it clear that free speech is not protected when someone makes false accusations.  Free speech also does not prevent people from voicing their own opinions in response to outrageous statements and unpopular opinions.  However, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution clearly states the following:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Anyone on a site such as a public internet forum, which allows for the use of usernames in place of actual names, has the right to not have their actual name used in public correspondence (posts) without their approval.  For example, if someone wants to address me by my actual name, then they may do so in a PM, but not in a post.  It's that simple.

There are some internet forums that actually warn their members to either keep their actual names private, or make those names public at their own risk.  Why?  Because there are people out there who actually want to use someone else's name to either commit a crime, or present to the public a fraudulent representation of someone's character.  I have avoided those dangers by not displaying my actual name on any forum I am a member of, though some people want to make it public without my approval.

About the personal attacks directed at me, I do not wish to dig up dirt on people and present said dirt in public, but if you want specific examples, please PM me and I will provide them to you via PM as appropriate.

However, I highly recommend you don't become active on the Military.com forum for CAP.  If you do, it will rot your brain and kill your soul.

ROTFLMAO. 

I'm glad you enjoyed that, sir.  I wish I was the one who originally said it, but the credit goes to a member of the Military.com forums.

Now, back to the thread.

[DeputyDog]

College.  I'm a full-time student...  

So am I. It is possible to do both. Three of the five senior members that are under 30 in my squadron are full time college students. Why is that stopping you?

[RiverAux]

This is too much.  All I did was state an opinion.  I did what I was supposed to and that's all that matters.

This board is all about stating your opinions -- just expect that others will challenge them.

[JayT]

This reminds me of that scene from The Big Lebowski where Walter argues with the waitress about his first amendment rights in a diner.

[MIKE]

Topic.

[SAR-EMT1]

This thread is eating me alive. If I continue reading, it shall rise up to rot my brain and consume my soul.

[BlackKnight]

^ 

Let me weigh in here and set the record straight.  I wish I'd seen this thread sooner but it's been a busy week...  My apologies.

SM Minton is in my squadron.  We welcome his experience, dedication, and enthusiasm, and we look forward to great things from him. He has much to offer. He has been informed of the procedures and requirements to earn the right to call himself a CAP 2nd Lt and wear the accompanying grade insignia. He understands that in addition to completing Level 1 and OPSEC, the waiver of 6-months time-in-grade for Mitchell Award recipients constitutes a "special promotion".  It must first be approved by the unit commander, and all echelons all the way up to CAP NHQ.  It's by no means automatic. This is not a process we are unfamiliar with. We have had several Mitchell and Earhart cadets transition to senior membership and receive advanced grade.

Bottom line. There will be no wearing of gold butterbars or any other advanced grade until NHQ confirms his promotion.   And that's the end of that.   

[ßτε]

First and Second Lieutenant. The squadron commander is the promoting authority for all members assigned to his/her unit for all promotions except professional appointment promotions.

Promotion to 2d Lt for former Mitchell cadets are approved by the Squadron CC. If Level I, CPPT,  OPSEC, and Mitchell show on eServices, the approved CAPF2 should be sent directly to NHQ. If the Mitchell doesn't show, attach proof of Mitchell Award. It is not a waiver of TIG. TIG applies only to duty performance promotions and professional promotions after initial appointment.

[mile_high1218]

  I apologize for using a poor sense of judgment in my original post.  It was not my intention to cause controversy.  I was only attempting to blow some steam and in the process I stuck my foot in my mouth.  As I have stated before I will respect the rules and regulations set out by CAP.  I recognize that I cannot, nor will I ever, put a rank on that I have not rightfully earned.  I have waited eight years to rejoin the program and I can wait a little longer to reach this achievement.  I apologize to anyone that I may have offended.   

[SAR-EMT1]

^ Danke