Rank insignia on the service coat

[NorCal21]

Anecdotal reports are not "documented evidence" in the way this infers, which would be a systemic or endemic issue, which it isn't.
Every organization has bozos, including our beloved parent service.  Trying to extrapolate their behavior into trends serves nothing except agendas.

And in at least a few of the cases I've been either involved in or peripherally aware, >all< parties were at fault, because everyone involved decided they were going to "give somebody some learning", to the detriment of all involved.

I didn't say anecdotal now did I? I said reports from the media (newspapers for example) and from even CAP's own press releases to members in eServices aren't considered documented evidence in your mind? Alright Bill... do I have to specifically give you a legal definition of "is" while we're at it?

I also never inferred that this is a systemic or endemic issue. You just implied that was my point.

[NorCal21]

How long ago was that? In my 23+ plus years of service I've never seen an Army instructor wear anything but the issued patrol cap or beret... except Drill Sergeants on the trail... who of course wear a Campaign Cover. 

Well my only experience with the Army has been after I joined the Marines in 1994 and more so in 2010 to present. I've routinely seen instructors at Ft Riley wear black patrol caps.

[NorCal21]

CAP isn't even the AF Auxiliary except when under official mission orders.

And US Code disagrees

(a)Volunteer Civilian Auxiliary.— The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the Civil Air Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.

Already just replied to this but I will do so again...

Current through Pub. L. 113-9. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

(a) Status.—
(1) The Civil Air Patrol is a nonprofit corporation that is federally chartered under section 40301 of title 36.
(2) Except as provided in section 9442 (b)(2) of this title, the Civil Air Patrol is not an instrumentality of the Federal Government for any purpose.
(b) Purposes.— The purposes of the Civil Air Patrol are set forth in section 40302 of title 36.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/9441

(a) Volunteer Civilian Auxiliary.— The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the Civil Air Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.
(b) Use by Air Force.—
(1) The Secretary of the Air Force may use the services of the Civil Air Patrol to fulfill the noncombat programs and missions of the Department of the Air Force.
(2) The Civil Air Patrol shall be deemed to be an instrumentality of the United States with respect to any act or omission of the Civil Air Patrol, including any member of the Civil Air Patrol, in carrying out a mission assigned by the Secretary of the Air Force.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/9442


THEREFORE again... when not serving on a mission such as squadron meetings CAP is NOT serving as an auxiliary but as a nonprofit corporation. Even CLC materials provided by CAP state as much.

[NorCal21]

Why can't people get it into their thick skulls that we are CIVILIANS who are afforded the PRIVILEGE of wearing a military-style uniform?

Because it is either not taught or not taught well enough.   In my experience, C&C and compliance with 39-1 is simply not considered important/enforced amongst the SM corps, and I've seen units where it extends to Cadets as well.

Yeah I'll agree with that. One example is a guy on another thread who says he only wears the polo because he feels uncomfortable with being saluted by military. People say we're not AF so our uniforms aren't as important to maintain. BS. Our uniforms aren't AF. They are CAP. They should be maintained in accordance with our regs; although, I'll admit 39-1 doesn't make it easy to do that!

[NorCal21]

Ok this leads me to believe you are not a member.  Corporations controls Corp uniforms and the AF controls AF style uniforms.

While it is true he admitted after this post that he's not in CAP I think its wrong to assume someone's not because they don't know this point. I was a cadet for a couple of years in the 80's and 90's, and now as a SM since 08. I didn't have a clue about this point until I took CLC. You would have incorrectly assumed I wasn't a member even though I had been for about four years with not knowing this.

[NorCal21]

I came here to get an answer to a question (see my first post in the education forum), got my answer but decided to stick around for the debate.

As an outsider looking in, I guess my opinions and observations are "worthless" to you? You don't care how a non-member perceives the CAP on face value? How a career military officer from a sister Service perceives the CAP means nothing? 

I brought up the fact in a previous thread that I thought the grey epaulet slides just looked "off", that is to say wrong and was trying to understand why you wear that godawful looking piece of uniform accessory in the first place. That lead to a debate of how to fix it.

If that makes me a troll, where do I find my bridge to live under?

Well I like your posts. They seem to be asking honest questions. I wouldn't worry that some are butt hurt that you're not a member. Funny how some comment on what civilians think of us but then when a non-member comments they get upset.

[Eclipse]

The CGAUX members all just received an email with expanded Exchange privileges for shopping online.

Would someone please tell me how base exchange privileges are somehow a barometer of the relationship to the respective parent service?

CAP members already have all the privileges they need as members, privileges which are also "enhanced" if you have a billet or activity on base, beyond that, and by far,
the vast majority of members have no access nor need for access to a base exchange or commissary, and anyone who does routinely shop at a base exchange knows that
their prices are the same or higher then local retail stores because either by policy or in some cases law, they have to keep things on an equal footing with local businesses.

[NorCal21]

Why not?  Because it's been discussed to death.  Literally.  To. Death.  Generally by new, well-intentioned members or outsiders seeking to "fix" CAP.

It doesn't matter if we like them, they are the best choice, or what the color is.  They are what has been authorized by the USAF.  So "discussing" it, just annoys the monkey.

For some fun, light-heartedness....

Literally? To quote one of my favorite movies... "You keep using that word but I do not think it means what you think it means."

[NorCal21]

Dead horse, fight lost years ago (and possibly re-lost due to HWSRN's unilateral actions in creating a "corporate service uniform").

There's no change to be made, no debate to be had.  Word is an updated uniform manual is in the final draft stages, and that
may bring a new field uniform (I still don't think it's going to happen), but beyond that, we don't need to change anything else.

Yes but that's your opinion. Saying its been debated before to death and we shouldn't debate it anymore is incorrect in my opinion. We debated the Constitution for years, should we stop debating the meaning of it because we've come down on what it means? A new generation has new ideas, desires, and wants. Same thing with CAP. We always have new people with new ideas. Change is the only constant. Older folks like you who want to cut off debate because you're tired of it are frankly... dinosaurs not long for the pasteur. I don't mean that in any way to be offensive. I've just seen it in every organization and group I'm part of. The old school guys are tired of debate, don't see a purpose and get angry over it. The new guys are looking for ways to bring in fresh ideas.

Basically I'm saying you're Windows and us younger folks are more Google. Nothing wrong with Windows really, but not fresh idea oriented like Google.

[Eclipse]

Basically I'm saying you're Windows and us younger folks are more Google. Nothing wrong with Windows really, but not fresh idea oriented like Google.

Younger folks?

Nothing wrong with Windows really, but not fresh idea oriented like Google.

Point me at one "new" idea in this thread and we can talk.

[NorCal21]

As to effecting change, this isn't an "official" forum of the CAP, is it? It is "a discussion board for the Civil Air Patrol community", this was a discussion that started in one thread, was brought out into this thread, and here we are going thru a point - counterpoint, which truly is the purpose of a discussion forum.

I agree with you. Seems rather absurd to poo poo Military.com for what it is but stand firm on the quality of this board which is essentially the same thing in theory.

[NorCal21]

You assert salute trolling is a well documented problem in CAP, yet I have NEVER witnessed a single problem. 

I think I've discovered the problem here.

I should have said well-documented. The "well" was a modifier of the word documented. It was not meant to imply a common occurrence.

Also, saying something isn't simply because you've not seen it is rather naive isn't it?

[NorCal21]

SDF's and other organizations can do whatever they want - only CAP is under the command of the USAF.  This seems to be lost on a lot of people.

Well no they can't. An SDF can only do what the state commander of military forces (who generally is a Army Guard general) says they can wear. The USCG Auxiliary can only do what the Commandant of the USCG says we can. No different than what CAP can do based on what the USAF says it can.

[NorCal21]

Also grooming as in hair and beards.

Haha I will say one thing I'm not used to is the fact that a member of the CGAUX may have a full mustache and beard. Old seagoing tradition I guess but wow.

[NorCal21]

Plus the USCG seems to, for the most part, let a slightly overweight Auxie or thicker than normal authorized beard slide by, which I guess the USAF doesn't for CAP.

I think this is partly due to us in the CGAUX having way more Navy and Coasties in our ranks with the Chief's belly!

[NorCal21]

Discriminate much?  There are plenty of documented medical conditions that cause a person to be overweight, as well as medications.  Civil Air Patrol as well as the DoD which you are a commissioned officer of has non discrimination policies.  There are members here who can not actively PT to be within height/weight due to said conditions and members who have family who fall into this category.  You sir seriously lack tact and common sense.

I think that's an overreaction to what he said. Clearly it was a generality. Generalities, by their nature, do not include everyone as they allow for exceptions. I'm sure he's full well aware of those exceptions such as thyroid issues and so on. Geez, lighten up and don't be so critical and read everything literally as a 100% statement.

[Eclipse]

Salute trolling isn't documented on any level.  Message boards don't count, nor do urban legends.

Also, saying something isn't simply because you've not seen it is rather naive isn't it?

So is believing that just because you have seen something it's endemic and not an anomaly.

Some of us "older folks" have scope beyond the typical unit meeting, some of us even do things on a Regional
and National level, things that would be severely impacted by goobers trolling salutes, and so are on the constant watch,
and yet, have little of the issue to speak of.

[NorCal21]

BTW, you do know that failure to meet height and weight standards are still grounds to be discharged from all Branches of the Armed Services. Again not discrimination, but a fact.

Your argument in this regard holds no weight when discussing the issue in the CAP context.

But it absolutely has context when it taken with his previous post and then the following post attacking his statement. He was providing an example. Examples need not be of the same content matter to be contextual.

[SarDragon]

The CGAUX members all just received an email with expanded Exchange privileges for shopping online.

Would someone please tell me how base exchange privileges are somehow a barometer of the relationship to the respective parent service?

CAP members already have all the privileges they need as members, privileges which are also "enhanced" if you have a billet or activity on base, beyond that, and by far, the vast majority of members have no access nor need for access to a base exchange or commissary, and anyone who does routinely shop at a base exchange knows that their prices are the same or higher then local retail stores because either by policy or in some cases law, they have to keep things on an equal footing with local businesses.

Bob, I wouldn't to buy that with Bill Gates' money. Ever.

I have shopped on base since I've been old enough to shop. I've done comparisons over the years, and with few exceptions, brand for brand, item for item, the exchange and commissary have lower prices. If nothing else, there's no sales tax.

There is one notable exception, and that's gasoline. They can only go below the average local price by a certain amount. That's been a rule since the late '70s or early '80s. The local stations complained so much about being undersold that they made the change.

[Eclipse]

I have shopped on base since I've been old enough to shop. I've done comparisons over the years, and with few exceptions, brand for brand, item for item, the exchange and commissary have lower prices. If nothing else, there's no sales tax.

I agree on the sales tax, but everything I've ever seen at the NEX is overpriced with little selection. If you need it in a pinch, fine, but no way I'd
shop there first if there was a Walmart or Target in the area.