(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-03 06:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] larabeaton.livejournal.com
That should help with that whole "female soldiers getting raped" problem tremendously.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-03 07:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] torrain.livejournal.com
...hrm. Well, you know, there's a long and fine tradition of forgiving socially unacceptable behaviour in exchange for enlistment in a morally justified military campaign.

Really.

(The US fiscal year is from October to September? That's just weird.)

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-06 12:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] corruptedjasper.livejournal.com
"And the judge said to me: 'It's the Marines for you, Nicholls! And don't let me catch you back in my court again.'"

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 01:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] paoconnell.livejournal.com
When I went into the Army in the Vietnam era, many of the basic trainees were there beause they were given a choice between jail with a record (typically for a relatively minor offense like pot posession, but still a felony), and doing a hitch in the Army. Some people washed out and went back to jail, but many others did their hitch and got out of there with a clean record.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 10:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jchance.livejournal.com
Personally, it made me think of the French Foreign Legion.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 04:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] paoconnell.livejournal.com
That choice (of jail or the military) was offered by a civilian judge, not by the military itself. If the guy joined and served honorably, there was no conviction on his record. If he didn't serve his hitch with honor, the judge would be notified.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 10:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jchance.livejournal.com
I'd actually forgotten how that worked. At any rate, while trying to cover up criminal records is just plain asinine, I can't help being for people having _some_ opportunities once they've served their sentence.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-05 04:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] paoconnell.livejournal.com
Remember, these were different times, and judges had a lot more leeway in sentencing then. The "join the military" option was something that a judge could do instead of making a dumb kid a felon. Generally the ones that got a break had committed minor offenses that probably shouldn't have been felonies in the first place. It wasn't a coverup--the felony apparently wasn't recorded as long as the kid did his hitch.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-05 04:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jchance.livejournal.com
I meant modernly, as the article summary apparently indicated, in contrast to both that time's practice and the old French one.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 02:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] texas-tiger.livejournal.com
They recruit felons but keep gays out.

I don't know whether to laugh or weep.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-02-04 12:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catlin.livejournal.com
Gotta remembe, Butt Sexx is icky, but shooting someones tires out of ther car when drunk, naw, that's just cool...

*groans* Sorry, but sadly it is true. The good old boys are more afraid somone will think they are gay, or that they will find out they really are, that they will do anything to stay away from gays. On the other hand, most of them have some small skeleton,or are convinced Boys will be Boys.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 5th, 2026 08:43 pm