Clinton pardon for a guy to become a CAP pilot?

[RiverAux]

Okay, here is a link to a web page http://journals.aol.com/sazzylilsmartazz/TheConscientiousObjector/entries/2008/03/18/list-of-clinton-criminal-pardons-1998---2001/2436 that claims that a Mr. Kevin Lester Teker got a pardon from Clinton in 2001 for a 1989 conviction for buying and detonating explosives.  It has this:

"This is something that completes my greatest goal," Teker, 33, said in a telephone interview from Seattle after a reporter informed him of the pardon. With it, he said, he can now pass the background checks to become an active pilot for the Washington State Civil Air Patrol.

Is this true or internet rumor?  Anyone ever heard of it in relation to CAP before? 

[Gunner C]

Okay, here is a link to a web page http://journals.aol.com/sazzylilsmartazz/TheConscientiousObjector/entries/2008/03/18/list-of-clinton-criminal-pardons-1998---2001/2436 that claims that a Mr. Kevin Lester Teker got a pardon from Clinton in 2001 for a 1989 conviction for buying and detonating explosives.  It has this:

"This is something that completes my greatest goal," Teker, 33, said in a telephone interview from Seattle after a reporter informed him of the pardon. With it, he said, he can now pass the background checks to become an active pilot for the Washington State Civil Air Patrol.

Is this true or internet rumor?  Anyone ever heard of it in relation to CAP before? 

I've never heard of this before, but if true, a pardon from the sovereign whether governor for state offenses or the president for federal is absolute.  Nothing to be done, unless the unit membership review board finds something else that they don't like.  Doubtful - most units will stick a mirror under someone's nose to qualify them for membership.  I've gotta confess that I did when I was a squadron commander.  I'm not proud of it, it's just the way it was done.  I wasn't the brightest bulb in the circuit.

GC

[DrJbdm]

we have some pretty lack standards.... we take anybody and everybody...breathing is optional. Can I start a squadron over in cell block C at the State Pen?


  Anybody for having tougher standards?

[RiverAux]

How are our current standards for joining lax in regards to felony convictions? 

[Gunner C]

How are our current standards for joining lax in regards to felony convictions? 

They're not.  AAMOF, I had two SMs who had to get all sorts of permission to join after receiving UCMJ in the military.  They were straight with me so I went to bat for them.  But it wasn't easy.

I don't think CAP is lax on these standards.  BTW, those UCMJ convictions were felony convictions - they received Special Courts Martial for stupid stuff (Their fault, not the military's:  they demanded court martial rather than accepting an Article 15).  They were still working on getting their civil rights restored.

GC

[DrJbdm]

I'm just talking in general, yes we do have some standards as for felony convictions and a few other stuff but otherwise we will accept anybody else. I'm for having tougher standards and a "hiring" process to include an oral board with set in stone guidelines & qualifications.

   just because you have a pulse and you haven't committed a felony or molested someone's kid, shouldn't make you fully qualified to be a member. We need to be a bit more choosy in whom we select.

  I know this issue has been debated on here before and can make some people's temper fly off the handle. I'm only saying what I feel.  now, I'll get back on topic.

[Cecil DP]

I'm just talking in general, yes we do have some standards as for felony convictions and a few other stuff but otherwise we will accept anybody else. I'm for having tougher standards and a "hiring" process to include an oral board with set in stone guidelines & qualifications.

   just because you have a pulse and you haven't committed a felony or molested someone's kid, shouldn't make you fully qualified to be a member. We need to be a bit more choosy in whom we select.

  I know this issue has been debated on here before and can make some people's temper fly off the handle. I'm only saying what I feel.  now, I'll get back on topic.

You have a standard. It's called the "Unit Membership Committee" and it's job is to screen prospective and renewing members and to recommend to the Squadron Commander whether or not to accept them as members or to retain them if already members.

[DNall]

You have a standard. It's called the "Unit Membership Committee" and it's job is to screen prospective and renewing members and to recommend to the Squadron Commander whether or not to accept them as members or to retain them if already members.

Assuming you have such a cmte, which is not at all common, and also assuming you aren't hurting so bad for people to do all the jobs we need done that you don't have a lot of choice, which is an almost universal problem. Plus, you renew online now, the unit isn't in any way involved. The only way to do anything after they're in is a 2b, and that won't fly unless there's cause. That means they have to be bad, not just not good enough. Our standards (on average) really are somewhere between non-existent & crap. Whatever standards we do have are worthless unless they are universally enforced.

[smj58501]

Okay, here is a link to a web page http://journals.aol.com/sazzylilsmartazz/TheConscientiousObjector/entries/2008/03/18/list-of-clinton-criminal-pardons-1998---2001/2436 that claims that a Mr. Kevin Lester Teker got a pardon from Clinton in 2001 for a 1989 conviction for buying and detonating explosives.  It has this:

"This is something that completes my greatest goal," Teker, 33, said in a telephone interview from Seattle after a reporter informed him of the pardon. With it, he said, he can now pass the background checks to become an active pilot for the Washington State Civil Air Patrol.

Is this true or internet rumor?  Anyone ever heard of it in relation to CAP before? 

I guess it all depends on what was in it for Bill

[mynetdude]

Yeah while I agree and somewhat disagree on the standards I don't view anything wrong with setting membership boards, it becomes a fine line of discrimination vs other reasons and I wouldn't want the prospective member that was turned down to try to challenge it in court based on a discrimination if there were any.

When I first joined, I had no idea what I wanted to do or what I could do I just found my place naturally and after long reading and thoughts and I am still shaping what I want/can do for my unit and I have done a tremendous amount in less than 2 years I am starting to feel like my head isn't catching up with the rest of my body wearing 3 hats.

When the adviser to the commander mentioned that someone who had a mental handicap wanted to join and he wasn't sure how he could be a benefit to CAP nor how this person could benefit from CAP while giving benefit to CAP at the same time.  He wasn't in objection to him joining, he just didn't see how he could fit into any roles and if he didn't fit in any roles there was no point in accepting him as a member.

And so after that discussion I had asked if there is a membership committee and he said yes and I asked if there was a membership committee about when I joined and he said yes and then I asked him why I didn't have to be reviewed by the membership committee which bewilders me as to there is really a committee...

Anyway... I think membership committees are great especially if you aren't doing your job or being a benefit to CAP you might as well get the 2B dropped in your lap, not our fault only your own fault as an individual.

[Pylon]

You have a standard. It's called the "Unit Membership Committee" and it's job is to screen prospective and renewing members and to recommend to the Squadron Commander whether or not to accept them as members or to retain them if already members.

Assuming you have such a cmte, which is not at all common...

I believe units are required to have such a committee.  Whether or not they use it properly is a local problem.

[Camas]

I believe units are required to have such a committee. 

Units should have such a committee.  Re: CAPR 39-2 Chapter 1, Section A, Para 1-5

[mynetdude]

I believe units are required to have such a committee. 

Units should have such a committee.  Re: CAPR 39-2 Chapter 1, Section A, Para 1-5

should and required are TWO different meanings. I haven't read the regulation myself, however assuming the regulation does say "should" then that doesn't mean units are required to have it.

That being said, who is responsible for implementing/managing a membership committee? Personnel Officer?

[jimmydeanno]

I believe units are required to have such a committee. 

Units should have such a committee.  Re: CAPR 39-2 Chapter 1, Section A, Para 1-5

should and required are TWO different meanings. I haven't read the regulation myself, however assuming the regulation does say "should" then that doesn't mean units are required to have it.

That being said, who is responsible for implementing/managing a membership committee? Personnel Officer?

1-5. Unit Membership Board (Applicable to cadets, cadet sponsors, and senior members only). All unit commanders should appoint a unit membership board comprised of a minimum of three members to assist the commander in determining the eligibility of new applicants and membership renewals...


1) The unit commander or the commander's representative will review the application for accuracy, completeness, and eligibility of the applicant. Commanders may request assistance from the unit membership board in determining eligibility if they feel it necessary before approving the application.

[mynetdude]

1-5. Unit Membership Board (Applicable to cadets, cadet sponsors, and senior members only). All unit commanders should appoint a unit membership board comprised of a minimum of three members to assist the commander in determining the eligibility of new applicants and membership renewals.

It says the unit commander should appoint this. And it must contain 3 members. And it only applies to cadets, cadet sponsors and senior members only.  I would be hard pressed to not see my own commander on the comittee itself as it doesn't state that he can't be on the committee.

[mynetdude]

I believe units are required to have such a committee. 

Units should have such a committee.  Re: CAPR 39-2 Chapter 1, Section A, Para 1-5

should and required are TWO different meanings. I haven't read the regulation myself, however assuming the regulation does say "should" then that doesn't mean units are required to have it.

That being said, who is responsible for implementing/managing a membership committee? Personnel Officer?

1-5. Unit Membership Board (Applicable to cadets, cadet sponsors, and senior members only). All unit commanders should appoint a unit membership board comprised of a minimum of three members to assist the commander in determining the eligibility of new applicants and membership renewals...


1) The unit commander or the commander's representative will review the application for accuracy, completeness, and eligibility of the applicant. Commanders may request assistance from the unit membership board in determining eligibility if they feel it necessary before approving the application.

Oops you and I posted the same thing, ok so my question is "unit commander's representative".   It is my understanding that Personnel Officer's job is to help the prospective member get the application filled out, answer questions and then verify the application's accuracy and make sure that everything that is needed is there and then electronically enter this data into our local database (yes our squadron maintains an electronic version of the application for the member(s) as well as we enter them into a database so we are able to put them on our attendance roster.

So would the commander's representative be the Personnel Officer? In theory the Personnel Officer is supposed sign after the new member signs his app, then the commander signs it signifying he approves.

[jimmydeanno]

So would the commander's representative be the Personnel Officer? In theory the Personnel Officer is supposed sign after the new member signs his app, then the commander signs it signifying he approves.

Not unless the commander said the personnel officer can sign for him.  Typically the "representative" is whoever the commander says.  Most cases it is the Deputy. 

Take transportation for instance, most wings have the wing transportation officer sign off the CAP DL as the Wing Commander's designee...

[mynetdude]

So would the commander's representative be the Personnel Officer? In theory the Personnel Officer is supposed sign after the new member signs his app, then the commander signs it signifying he approves.

Not unless the commander said the personnel officer can sign for him.  Typically the "representative" is whoever the commander says.  Most cases it is the Deputy. 

Take transportation for instance, most wings have the wing transportation officer sign off the CAP DL as the Wing Commander's designee...

Agh my bad, yeah all we do as a Personnel Officer is prepare the forms to be signed, and can be either the commander himself or the Deputy Commander.  Its really up to the commander, I wouldn't be surprised if the commander designated a Personnel Officer to sign off on membership approvals but then again if you have a unit membership board then that is moot because someone on the board "could" sign it if the commander says so.

[Larry Mangum]

The person mentioned in the article is in fact a member of CAP now, PCR-WA-069.  Not sure what the issue is; while I would question signing up someone who was convicted in regards to explosives, if he was pardoned and both the unit, wing and NHQ, chose to accept his application is there an issue.  Don't people deserve a second chance?

[SJFedor]

It depends on the offense. The article doesn't go too deep into his "explosives" conviction. Maybe he liked to make reactive targets for shooting and blew up a truck? Maybe he just had more then the legal limit of explosives. Who knows. But it sounds like it was for possession of explosives, not that he used them in a criminal manner.

There's worse things.