Senior Member can't wear his NRA Marksman award?

[Shuman 14]

LST,

Is not that which Shuman stated?

By Shuman ...until it is superceded by the next qualification.

By LST
...if you fail your next grenade qualification, your badge is revoked.

Failing and the ensuing disqualification... is superceding a qualification...

From the Free Dictionary...

su•per•sede (ˌsu pərˈsid)

v.t. -sed•ed, -sed•ing.
1. to replace in power, authority, effectiveness, acceptance, use, etc., as by another person or thing.
2. to set aside or cause to be set aside as void, useless, or obsolete, usu. in favor of something mentioned; make obsolete.
3. to succeed to the position, function, office, etc., of; supplant.

Thank you.

[Shuman 14]

In 18 years in the Air Force (including AD, Guard and Reserve), I've never seen former Army Soldiers wearing this particular badge on an Air Force uniform.

They wear the Air Force Small Arms Expert Markmanship Ribbon instead. They get to put a bronze star on it if they qualify "expert" on two or more weapons.

And like you sir, in over 31-1/2 years in the Air Force/Air National Guard/Air Force Reserve, I never ever saw any former Soldier or Marine wearing their former service markmanship badges.

But our friend who posts from the Guard Shack because he's bored and likes to "stir things up" probably won't accept this answer.
meh...

Again the "new" Instruction has only been out about 6 months so that would explain the previous 31 years when it wasn't authorized... it is now.

And you know this because you're in the Air Force...? Right.

Does he have to be? Is an officer in the US Army not capable of reading and interpreting a sister services regulations?

An Army officer shouldn't have to.

Incorrect, in today's Military, Joint Commands are quite common, in fact every National Guard Headquarters is now a Joint Command.

So is very likely that an Army Officer will be in command over USAF personnel and themselves be commanded by a USAF Officer at least once in their careers.

This would require at least a working knowledge of the sister Services regulations. 

[Storm Chaser]

In 18 years in the Air Force (including AD, Guard and Reserve), I've never seen former Army Soldiers wearing this particular badge on an Air Force uniform.

They wear the Air Force Small Arms Expert Markmanship Ribbon instead. They get to put a bronze star on it if they qualify "expert" on two or more weapons.

And like you sir, in over 31-1/2 years in the Air Force/Air National Guard/Air Force Reserve, I never ever saw any former Soldier or Marine wearing their former service markmanship badges.

But our friend who posts from the Guard Shack because he's bored and likes to "stir things up" probably won't accept this answer.
meh...

Again the "new" Instruction has only been out about 6 months so that would explain the previous 31 years when it wasn't authorized... it is now.

And you know this because you're in the Air Force...? Right.

Does he have to be? Is an officer in the US Army not capable of reading and interpreting a sister services regulations?

An Army officer shouldn't have to.

Incorrect, in today's Military, Joint Commands are quite common, in fact every National Guard Headquarters is now a Joint Command.

So is very likely that an Army Officer will be in command over USAF personnel and themselves be commanded by a USAF Officer at least once in their careers.

This would require at least a working knowledge of the sister Services regulations. 

I understand and agree (not that that's the current situation being discussed). The bottom line is that we have an Army officer interpreting the AFI a certain way and an Air Force officer interpreting it a different way. So, who's right? I propose that, instead of continuing this argument where either one of us could be wrong, guidance be sought from those who can actually provide an authoritative interpretation of the AFI in question. 

[Shuman 14]

An Army officer shouldn't have to.

Uh, Goldwater-Nichols Act?

Officers of different branches are frequently familiar with sister service's regulations, especially when serving a joint tour.

Is Shuman serving in a joint tour with the Air Force? Is this tour one where he needs to be familiar with all aspects of the Air Force uniform. He read an AFI, one that other Air Force officers have read as well, and came with a different interpretation on it. Yet, he made an "authoritative" statement about an area that, at best, is open ended.

While the AFI covers most Army badges and it's clear that the list is not inclusive, it leaves out one of the most frequently worn badges in the Army. Again, I admit that the way the AFI is written is a bit open ended in that regards. However, when there's a doubt on an Air Force instruction, the appropriate action would be to seek clarification with the OPR or the appropriate CoC. An Army major, who happens to have read the AFI which was just revised a few months ago, is hardly the officer to give authoritative interpretation on it. Reading the text of a law does not make me a lawyer.

And just to clarify, none of my comments were meant as a disrespect to officers in the Army or other services. My issue is that Shuman does this sort of thing all the time, usually when it comes to CAP regulations, standards and procedures. Yet, unless that's changed recently, he's not even an active CAP member nor made any significant contribution to the organization. Anyone can read regulations; that doesn't make someone an expert on the organization.

No I am not currently assigned to a Joint billet. Last time I was when I was in Korea when I was assigned to the EUSA Provost Marshal's Office and was attached to USFK Joint Provost for several exercises.

Respectfully, I am an expert on regulations.

I stand on my experience, (24 plus years of Military Service), education [Bachelors (Indiana University) and Masters (Purdue University) Degrees], Military education (Officer Basic Course, Captains Career Course, Command and General Staff College) and civilian skills [POST certified as a police officer in Illinois, Indiana and Federally (VA Police)] , to allow me to read, interpret and enforce regulations, instructions and laws.

Are there those who have a better grasp on a single regulation then me... of course there are; but to insist I don't know what I'm talking about is absurd.

BTW, no offense was taken. This is a friendly discussion board and I enjoy our debates, exercises for the mind. 

[Shuman 14]

I understand and agree (not that that's the current situation being discussed). The bottom line is that we have an Army officer interpreting the AFI a certain way and an Air Force officer interpreting it a different way. So, who's right? I propose that, instead of continuing this argument where either one of us could be wrong, guidance be sought from those who can actually provide an authoritative interpretation of the AFI in question.

With that I concur as well. I would think the USAF needs to clarify the instruction and make a complete list of what is and what is not authorized.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

With that I concur as well. I would think the USAF needs to clarify the instruction and make a complete list of what is and what is not authorized.

And clarify just what under the sun, moon and stars they mean by "low-light/at-a-distance."  As it stands, it is unclear, undefined and unenforceable.

[lordmonar]

With that I concur as well. I would think the USAF needs to clarify the instruction and make a complete list of what is and what is not authorized.

And clarify just what under the sun, moon and stars they mean by "low-light/at-a-distance."  As it stands, it is unclear, undefined and unenforceable.

It seems to be enforceable to me.   The USAF does not have to answer to you....that is....YOU don't need to know the standards for low-light and at-a-distance.....unless you are at CAP-USAF or the A-Staff working a request from CAP on a uniform issue.

As for the "USAF needs to clarify ....what is and what is not authorized"......no they don't.  If you are in the USAF and you want to wear your "Driver's and Mechanics  Badge".....you would run it up your chain of command.   "Is this one of the those "non-inclusive badges not listed on attachment 5?"

Probably take a whole week or two.

My guess is that the answer is going to be NO....but who knows.

In a CAP context......same deal.   If it is not in 39-1 ask NHQ per 39-1 and see if they bite.

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

[Eclipse]

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

Perhaps you, and many others, forget where the debt lies in regards to the relationship.

Hint:  It ain't with the USAF.

[lordmonar]

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

Perhaps you, and many others, forget where the debt lies in regards to the relationship.

Hint:  It ain't with the USAF.

Please explain.  What debt?   

[Storm Chaser]

This particular issue (wear of other services badges on the Air Force uniform) is not really a CAP issue (although CAP is affected... somewhat), but an Air Force issue (if it can be called an issue at all). Frankly, I don't think many Airmen would get bent out of shape if they couldn't wear their previously earned Army (or Navy, Marines, etc.) 'XYZ' badge. For whatever reasons, it seems that we, in CAP, tend to sometimes make mountains out of molehills, especially when it comes to the uniform. Does it really affect us that much if certain (or all for that matter) military badges can't be worn on the CAP uniform? I think the mission would continue even if that was the case...

[Eclipse]

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

Perhaps you, and many others, forget where the debt lies in regards to the relationship.

Hint:  It ain't with the USAF.

Please explain.  What debt?

What debt?

You really don't get how the whole "volunteer" thing works, do you?

The USAF, and this country, owes an uncountable debt to CAP and specifically its membership.

No request of the USAF is too small to be addressed, nor unreasonable in that light.

Perhaps that is what is broken in the paradigm - members are so anxious to just get in the game, any game,
that they are willing to be treated as if they owe the USAF something or are obligated to service.

Without the membership, there is no CAP.  It seems many people, and even NHQ, forget that sometimes.

[Shuman 14]

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

I'll re-phrase for you MSgt:

"I would think the USAF should clarify the instruction and it would be most helpful if they made a complete list of what is and what is not authorized."

Better?

[lordmonar]

Dude....that is just too funny!

We can waste our member's time with worthless safety briefings, mandatory weigh ins, lamenting about the "empty shirts", making rude comments about the "You're lucky I showed up" attitudes.........but the USAF needs to drop everything to "fix" issues because we are volunteers?

I'm going to go away now....because I don't think I can keep this conversation civil any more. 

I will restate......if you want to wear a badge not listed in 39-1 ping NHQ.

[Storm Chaser]

I think the Air Force leadership (at least those who work directly with CAP) recognizes and appreciates what CAP's membership does for the USAF and our country. The difference might be on what we, the membership, consider important and what they consider important. In the big scheme of things, blue epaulets, metal insignias, a black fleece jacket, etc. is not as important as new aircraft, vehicles, comm equipment, training, etc. Unlike many other volunteer organizations, I think (some) CAP members seem to place too much emphasis in what we wear. And I'm not just talking about the AF-style vs. Corporate-style and H/W dilemma; I'm talking about all the 'bling'... grade insignias, ribbons, badges, patches, etc. IMHO, there's more to a volunteer organization than that.

[lordmonar]

No need for us CAPers to be telling what the USAF "NEEDS" to do in their AFI.

I'll re-phrase for you MSgt:

"I would think the USAF should clarify the instruction and it would be most helpful if they made a complete list of what is and what is not authorized."

Better?

No....because since it is sister service badges....10 seconds after the list is updated.......the Navy adds a new badge and now it is not up to date.

The writers of the AFI anticipated this......that is why they said "not all inclusive" knowing that it would change...and so as to stay ahead of the game......if your badge of choice is not on the list....ask AFMPC and they will work it out.

For CAP...we did the same thing,

10.8. Additional Badge Information
10.8.1. US Military badges may be worn on USAF-style uniforms in accordance with authorizations and instructions found in AFI 36-2903 when appropriate orders granted by competent military authority are present in the member's CAP personnel record.

So we said "we do what the USAF does".....ergo if your badge is not there ask for guidance.

It is not rocket science.....all it takes is an E-mail.

[Eclipse]

See below...

[Eclipse]

I agree the conversation is stupid - if it says it's OK to wear it, fine.  If not, ask NHQ.

Next problem.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

It seems to be enforceable to me.   The USAF does not have to answer to you....that is....YOU don't need to know the standards for low-light and at-a-distance.....unless you are at CAP-USAF or the A-Staff working a request from CAP on a uniform issue.

As for the "USAF needs to clarify ....what is and what is not authorized"......no they don't.

Master Sergeant, I respect you, your service and your efforts in CAP.

However, it seems very often as if you lurk, waiting to talk down to me and to others who do not share your opinions and general worldview.

If I wanted to be pedantic I would say that you are way out of line talking to a senior officer.  You choose to serve as an NCO.  Great.  However, and you can say "rank means nothing in CAP" all you like, I would never address a Major, Lieutenant Colonel or up (really, any CAP colleague) in the condescending way you have addressed me and others on this board.  I have had differences with other members, Eclipse and Storm Chaser among them, but they have never been as sometimes outright nasty as the way you have been, to me and to others.  Sometimes I did not like what those two gentlemen had to say...but I have to admit that it has, in the vast majority of times, in a respectful manner.

Just because you did long service in the Air Force (which I respect) and in CAP, or because you serve a squadron that is on a large USAF base, does not mean you know everything about the AF or CAP, nor does it give you licence to condescend to those who dare to disagree with you, question your judgement or request clarification.  As with my uniform proposal - in response to your saying "develop your own white paper," I posted it here in several threads for you and anyone else to read.  Some gave constructive criticism, which is fine with me.  YOU said NOTHING.  For the record, I would have appreciated your opinion and critique.  Really.

I was in the Air Force (ANG) too.  No, I did not serve as long as you.  Unfortunately, I have medical issues that made me have to get out.  However, I did have a Senior Master Sergeant for a supervisor, and he was one to tell it like it is.  But he never came off with the "I know everything because I am a SMSgt and you know nothing because you're just an Amn/A1C/SrA."

I have also spent 20 years off-and-on in and out of CAP.  I refuse to get into a contest with you over whose service is longer/more valuable/more distinguished.  This is rare for me to do, but I am going to say straight out that while I do not claim to know everything about CAP, and I'm by no means a candidate for MENSA, I do know how to think and I believe I know a fair bit about CAP.  I will go as far as to say I know at least as much as you about many aspects of the organisation.

I never said that the USAF had to "answer to me."  Yes, as a whole they probably do not concern themselves with what a lowly CAP Captain worker-bee thinks, especially the few outside of CAP-USAF who know about us/care who we are.

However, and this is probably my background as a former IT/programmer/logician speaking, I like to know absolutes.  "Low light/at-a-distance" applies to the ENTIRE CAP, not just the ones "working on uniform issues" at CAP-USAF.  The regulation, as it stands, is unenforceable logically, because it depends entirely on WHO is seeing the CAP member in question, and how familiar they are with CAP, and if they can read or not.

Asking for clarification on this, or any other issue, is not a bad thing.  If you want to feel that I, or any other CAP member, do not have the right to question the Air Force on something, that is only you speaking for yourself - Master Sergeant Patrick Harris, CAP.  You do not speak for CAP or for the USAF, any more than I do.

I am not trying to be hurtful with what I said here.  However, I hope it will help you to see how you sometimes come across (and I am not angelic in that regard, nor do I claim to be) and modify your behaviour accordingly - if you choose to.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I think the Air Force leadership (at least those who work directly with CAP) recognizes and appreciates what CAP's membership does for the USAF and our country. The difference might be on what we, the membership, consider important and what they consider important. In the big scheme of things, blue epaulets, metal insignias, a black fleece jacket, etc. is not as important as new aircraft, vehicles, comm equipment, training, etc. Unlike many other volunteer organizations, I think (some) CAP members seem to place too much emphasis in what we wear. And I'm not just talking about the AF-style vs. Corporate-style and H/W dilemma; I'm talking about all the 'bling'... grade insignias, ribbons, badges, patches, etc. IMHO, there's more to a volunteer organization than that.

You make valid points, and you make them well.

However, as someone who serves in both CAP and the Air Force, I am quite certain you are familiar with esprit de corps.

I think that the uniform issues, especially about pre-1990s uniforms, come largely from members who served then and immediately after and were punished for something they didn't do.  That's only based on my personal experience as someone who joined in the aftermath of that.

The "bling" factor...I remember from my earliest days in CAP having that explained to me as part of our "pay," since we don't get remunerated financially.

I'm going to guess that you are familiar with Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs.  I learnt about it in my college Psych courses.

http://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

I believe that the promotions, ribbons, etc., fit under Needs 3 and 4.  Basically, it's human nature to need a "pat on the back" or an "attaboy/attagirl" now and then.

"Bling" isn't the only way to do it, but I believe it is probably the most tangible way.

[lordmonar]

I choose not to sir.