Cadet with Alcohol Misdemeanor

[Eclipse]

The decision whether or not to discharge a service member due to an alcohol violation is made on several criteria.  It truly is time dependent.  It can be dependent on the person, past history, needed AOC/MOS, needed MTOE strength, etc.   In some years, the DoD seems like they will never discharge a person on it, while on others it is all too often.  The same is true for drug violations.  the decision is up to the commander.  I have seen an E-6 retained after two drug violations, while I have seen an E-3 discharged over the same violation.  I have seen an O-3 discharged for an alcohol violation but an E-8 kept until 20 years.

Bottom line is these types of violations are all over the board.

Over the board or overboard?

You reap what you sow - underage drinking and DUI is / are never a mistake or an accident.  They are conscious decisions
made by people who know better, and there are many people who are tired of the excuses and allowances that keep
these offenders on the streets and killing people.

Unless you were out bird watching and someone came along and poured a bunch of beer down your throat,
you made that choice for instant gratification against everything you have been taught and told.

Uneven enforcement and disciplinary actions are certainly fair game for discussion in a separate thread,
but both an E-8 and an O-3 know well better about these issues, and neither was brought to the table
by accident.  whether it's Captain's Mast, or separation is likely determined by whether or not you
are a recidivist and your relative value in the hierarchy, two other factors well within your control.

Should young people get a second chance?  Of course.  But it should be treated with the severity it deserves.
and never ignored or treated as "boys will be boys".

[LSThiker]

Over the board or overboard?

Over the board.

Uneven enforcement and disciplinary actions are certainly fair game for discussion in a separate thread,
but both an E-8 and an O-3 know well better about these issues, and neither was brought to the table
by accident.

Agreed, well except that any one over E-5 should know better.  Nevertheless, these were not my decision, so I do not know all of the details.  Therefore, I cannot really say why.

Should young people get a second chance?  Of course.  But it should be treated with the severity it deserves.
and never ignored or treated as "boys will be boys".

No argument there.  Although, the E-8 was the only "non-punished" person as far as I could tell.  But again, not my call and I do not know all of the details.

[blackrain]

Well.....given the number of responsible senior leaders in the military today who committed the same infraction back when they were young (whether they were caught or not) I'd say this is whole incident is getting way more attention than it deserves. All my under 21 y/o troops know that drinking underage is one thing....driving under the influence is another and not tolerated matter entirely. I doubt we could field much of a military force if all who drank before 21 were kicked out.

Military hardly looks the other way.  Those caught are punished and right now with folks getting cut and more to come they will definitely be meeting a QFRB.  It is highly frowned upon.

The decision whether or not to discharge a service member due to an alcohol violation is made on several criteria.  It truly is time dependent.  It can be dependent on the person, past history, needed AOC/MOS, needed MTOE strength, etc.   In some years, the DoD seems like they will never discharge a person on it, while on others it is all too often.  The same is true for drug violations.  the decision is up to the commander.  I have seen an E-6 retained after two drug violations, while I have seen an E-3 discharged over the same violation.  I have seen an O-3 discharged for an alcohol violation but an E-8 kept until 20 years.

Bottom line is these types of violations are all over the board.

Well said.....the height of the war showed a LOT of serious infractions overlooked in the name of filling a battle roster...as for underage drinking I can't offhand think of an E-5 or above that hasn't passed 21 y/o so that shouldn't be an issue. I seem to recall the recent Army  bloodletting of Captains and Majors allowed the board to go back and see previously masked UCMJ action from the officers enlisted days as part of the decision on who went and who stayed. So they had no problem commissioning and promoting as an officer but it was suddenly relevant again when it came time for cuts. Commanders have a lot of discretion and if your the one on the hot seat it could come down to luck on whose holding the hammer.

I'd be interested on how many senior members consumed alchohol before turning 21

[Private Investigator]

The decision whether or not to discharge a service member due to an alcohol violation is made on several criteria.  It truly is time dependent.  It can be dependent on the person, past history, needed AOC/MOS, needed MTOE strength, etc.   In some years, the DoD seems like they will never discharge a person on it, while on others it is all too often.  The same is true for drug violations.  the decision is up to the commander.  I have seen an E-6 retained after two drug violations, while I have seen an E-3 discharged over the same violation.  I have seen an O-3 discharged for an alcohol violation but an E-8 kept until 20 years.

Bottom line is these types of violations are all over the board.

Exactly. But most troops do not understand apples and oranges. The E-6 may be making an afford at rehab where the E-3 is not. The O-3 has ten years to go to retirement so do you keep him/her or a O-3 who does not have a problem? An E-8 who has done 19+ years of honorable service, you would throw away those 19 good years he did? Because apprently he had never been called on his drinking problem.

Same thing with HYT. Troops do not get it. But you can not keep a slacker on forever. 

[Private Investigator]

Over the board or overboard?

Over the board.

Uneven enforcement and disciplinary actions are certainly fair game for discussion in a separate thread,
but both an E-8 and an O-3 know well better about these issues, and neither was brought to the table
by accident.

Agreed, well except that any one over E-5 should know better.  Nevertheless, these were not my decision, so I do not know all of the details.  Therefore, I cannot really say why.

Should young people get a second chance?  Of course.  But it should be treated with the severity it deserves.
and never ignored or treated as "boys will be boys".

No argument there.  Although, the E-8 was the only "non-punished" person as far as I could tell.  But again, not my call and I do not know all of the details.

Details = apples and oranges. The majority of troops do not know the whole story. Same thing in CAP. People never know why somebody got a Exceptional Service Award and someone else only got a Achievment Award. Big clue, very different activity.   

[PHall]

I'd be interested on how many senior members consumed alchohol before turning 21

I did, but the drinking age where I was stationed was 18 at the time.
Drank some in high school too, but we were at parties and nobody got out of control because we didn't want the cops to show up...
Of course this was in the 70's too!

[Eclipse]

MLDA in the US wasn't consistent until 1987, and wasn't even widespread as 21 until about 1984, so  anyone born before 1966
could have potentially tilted one legally before 21, not to mention those born or traveling overseas.

Our kids will speak of the era before Marijuana was universally legalized in the 2020s, but that doesn't change the fact
that you can still be arrested on the eve of your 21st birthday, or the day before pot is legalized.

Considering the seeming inability of a great percentage of Americans to understand the term "moderation",
especially in regards to intoxicants, there has to be >some< age and limits to being impaired in public, ignore those,
whatever they are, and suffer the consequences.

Depending on which channel you watch or rag you read, it seems beyond the comprehension of many young
people, and their parents, that people like myself somehow made it to 21 without drinking, never smoked up,
didn't have a first child until after marriage in my late 20s, and beyond dancing with the Chicago PD about fog lights and loud pipes,
was never incarcerated.

It's a struggle and a sacrifice, but by cracky, you can do it.

[blackrain]

Same for me concerning illegal drugs......most just have a hard time believing I never smoked anything...legal or illegal......though I guess I had a great fear of them (drugs) and they just didn't have an allure even though I knew a great many who did partake.

The patchwork of marijuana legalization seems to have caused an uptick in positive tests in the troops and more seems finds its way into the various baked goods.. (not that it hasn't before now).not to mention THC stays in the body longer than most drugs giving a greater chance of getting caught during a test. I can attest to the  stream of paperwork across my desk related to troops and positive drug tests.

Alcohol now was a different story.........but I never got too out of hand with it

[Brit_in_CAP]

Depending on which channel you watch or rag you read, it seems beyond the comprehension of many young
people, and their parents, that people like myself somehow made it to 21 without drinking, never smoked up,
didn't have a first child until after marriage in my late 20s, and beyond dancing with the Chicago PD about fog lights and loud pipes,
was never incarcerated.

It's a struggle and a sacrifice, but by cracky, you can do it.

+1 in all boxes!  Well, apart from the Chicago PD where you need to substitute Service Police and a dodgy exhaust...

[JeffDG]

MLDA in the US wasn't consistent until 1987, and wasn't even widespread as 21 until about 1984, so  anyone born before 1966
could have potentially tilted one legally before 21, not to mention those born or traveling overseas.

No need to go "overseas".  Provinces in the GWN are split between 18 and 19 as the age when you buy booze and drink in a public place (ie. bar).  However, it's left to the parents to police their own homes.

[Flying Pig]

OK.... so whatever happened to the cadet in question?

[NIN]

I'd be interested on how many senior members consumed alchohol before turning 21

I was similarly stationed in a foreign country that had no minimum drinking age when I was 19-22. And lets just say that I also, for a short time, benefited greatly from confusion over the "grandfathering clause" of Virginia's recently enacted 21-year old drinking age.  (Hey, its not my fault the server can't do math in her head, or wasn't sure what the law actually read as it pertained to 19 year olds! LOL)

And I grew up across the river from a foreign country that had a much lower legal drinking age than my own country.  That I was a cadet at this time was, essentially, immaterial. 

(I did attend an Air Cadet event in that county, in an official capacity and in uniform, and on my birthday, where libations were made available at the post-event luncheon. Since that country's Air Cadets were, by definition and regulation, not of age to consume, my OIC suggested that while I certainly *could* legally consume a beverage proffered by our hosts, since my cadet counterparts could not similarly partake, this was one of those times where the phrase "discretion is the better part of valor" applied.  Learning experience for a guy literally on his 19th birthday about what you "can" do, and what you "should" do in these circumstances...)

[NIN]

Depending on which channel you watch or rag you read, it seems beyond the comprehension of many young
people, and their parents, that people like myself somehow made it to 21 without drinking, never smoked up,
didn't have a first child until after marriage in my late 20s, and beyond dancing with the Chicago PD about fog lights and loud pipes,
was never incarcerated.

It's a struggle and a sacrifice, but by cracky, you can do it.

Oh boy, You scofflaw.

I had come home from three years on active duty and stepped back in my squadron as Leadership Officer back in the late 1980s. That fall, we had a wing conference on the other side of town where a number of cadets I knew (from our CLS over the summer, one was my cadet commander) got a hotel room at the conference hotel and took advantage of the "less than ideal" oversight policy that the conference had. (The conference was a 30-ish minute drive for me, there was no way I was spending that cash on  a room that I didn't need. And if the organizers didn't care about cadets getting rooms on their own, then by jimminy, neither did I...LOL)

I showed up on Friday night to meet some encampment buddies. I knew where my cadet commander's room was, so I parked outside and rapped on the outside door. He opens the door, I waltz in and note that he and his 3 buddies (all my CLS troops) have uniforms laid out on the bed with all kinds of crap hung on them (they later admitted that these were their "bimbo hunting uniforms"  They got a talking to about that one)

I walk up to one of the beds and flip the comforter back near the floor and look for their stash. Nope.

I walk into the bathroom, pull the tank cover off the back of the toilet and fish the 6 pack of beer out. I walk out of the bathroom with the six-pack in hand, past these cadets and their incredulous looks, and said "Thanks for keeping the beer cold for me, fellas" and walked out the door.

I got word the next day after the general assembly that the rumor among the cadets was that I could smell beer cans underwater...  LOL.

[Fubar]

I vote for a new blog: "NIN BITD"

[NIN]

I vote for a new blog: "NIN BITD"

Would be boring. The good stuff is still covered by statutes of limitations. (Not really)

[Keyboard Warrior]

If this cadet is frequently drinking alcohol, even at home with parental approval, that alone would be grounds for termination of membership for misconduct.

CAPR 52-16 is very clear that cadets will not possess or consume alcohol.  The clause prohibiting tobacco use at CAP activities specifically mentions this as well, hence it is my opinion that NHQ intends the ban on alcohol to be global, and not only be restricted to CAP activities.

Of course, that's just my opinion.  But if I were in OP's shoes, I would contact Wing Legal to make sure that a 2B would be supported on appeal, and then file the paperwork.  I don't want people who engage in frequent drinking being buddy/buddy with my cadets.  This is why we have rules on fraternization as well.

[LSThiker]

The clause prohibiting tobacco use at CAP activities specifically mentions this as well, hence it is my opinion that NHQ intends the ban on alcohol to be global, and not only be restricted to CAP activities.

NHQ is not required to say "specifically at CAP activities" for alcohol as any cadet in CAP is prohibited from drinking alcohol in the US or US bases due to age.  That very person would not be prohibited if they go to a country on personal vacation where drinking age is 18 years.  This is different for tobacco where a cadet can be of legal age to use tobacco and still be a CAP cadet.  So I doubt it is NHQ's intention that CAP cadets are always banned from alcohol even if they are legal age.  Otherwise, said cadet might have to make a decision between their religious faith and drinking the "blood of Christ" and cadet membership.   

[Eclipse]

The clause prohibiting tobacco use at CAP activities specifically mentions this as well, hence it is my opinion that NHQ intends the ban on alcohol to be global, and not only be restricted to CAP activities.

NHQ is not required to say "specifically at CAP activities" for alcohol as any cadet in CAP is prohibited from drinking alcohol in the US or US bases due to age.  That very person would not be prohibited if they go to a country on personal vacation where drinking age is 18 years.  This is different for tobacco where a cadet can be of legal age to use tobacco and still be a CAP cadet.  So I doubt it is NHQ's intention that CAP cadets are always banned from alcohol even if they are legal age.  Otherwise, said cadet might have to make a decision between their religious faith and drinking the "blood of Christ" and cadet membership. 

Actually, that's exactly what 52-16 says now:

c. Alcohol & Recreational Drugs. Cadets will not possess alcoholnor use any drugs that are
prohibited under federal law, even if local law permits their use. Further, tobacco products and ecigarettes
are prohibited for cadets at CAP activities.


The foreign travel and religious issues bring up an interesting academic point, but nowhere is there
a specific relief of the above.

The reality of course, is that in family and religious cases, discretion wins the day, which is a lot different then
getting busted with your buddies in an alley with a bottle of Brass Monkey in your hand.

[LSThiker]

The foreign travel and religious issues bring up an interesting academic point, but nowhere is there
a specific relief of the above.

The reality of course, is that in family and religious cases, discretion wins the day, which is a lot different then
getting busted with your buddies in an alley with a bottle of Brass Monkey in your hand.

Exactly, discretion is the ultimate answer.  For those reasons, I doubt it was NHQs intention to really ban all practices of drinking alcohol.  Otherwise, there are a lot of commanders that need to start 2B's on those Catholic cadets that went through communion:)  It is clear that their intention was to really ban those times where federal law prohibits a particular drug but state law says it is fine (like right now).

Also, federal law does not state that drinking age is 21, just that states that have drinking age less than 21 are punished through lower highway funds ( National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984).  States make drinking age determination.  So alcohol is not really banned under federal law

[PHall]

Actually, that's exactly what 52-16 says now:

c. Alcohol & Recreational Drugs. Cadets will not possess alcoholnor use any drugs that are
prohibited under federal law, even if local law permits their use.

This was added because of the States of Colorado and Washington legalizing marajuana.