Armed Liberal at Winds Of Change attended a conference call yesterday with Bill Carr, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy, about the recent smears against our military by a few news outlets on recruiting criminals. I noted in my own post that the numbers of those granted waivers equate to one half of one percent of all recruits, not a shocking number and definitely not deserving the hyperbole and spin by the MSM to somehow show that our military is so desperate they are scraping the bottom of the barrel. At least the NYT’s article did a decent job of showing what kind of crimes were talking about here that were granted waivers:
Lt. Col. Anne Edgecomb, an Army spokeswoman, said the waivers had been carefully vetted and were not as serious as they appeared on paper. The kidnapping charge involved a divorced woman who moved out of state with her child without the permission of her former husband, she said. One terroristic threat charge involved a 14-year-old who called in a bomb threat to his school, and the other also involved a minor.
And here is Armed Liberals notes on the conference:
Went from 816 waivers in ’06 to 1077 waivers (assume this is total for all services?)
each is reviewed by general officer – fairly robust review process(RAND?) did study tracking cohort – retention % is the same
tracking effort outside this study? – no DoD tracking, but tracking at service level
army loosened by saying tats that show don’t dq you
historically – tats that show propensity to misbehave were a dq
now there are checks for gang tats (there’s a book…) before tats declaring gang affils was not a dq – when did that change? in past year
Lowering aptitude would have bigger impact
180K recruits last year – 1077 waivers total
60% of recruits from top 50% of aptitude – that’s not been lowered
not relaxing key standard – aptitude, which would be easy dial to change to up recruit #’s
That gang tattoo change is a biggie in my opinion. I’ve run across a few gangsters in the area I patrol who are on active duty and still hanging with the homies while on leave. I had to shake my head on that one. In the vast majority of cases, if your jumped into a gang you WILL have a tattoo showing your hood. Get rid of those guys and do not lower the aptitude research on each recruit and I see no problem with granting these waivers. A great comment at Blackfive illustrated the point that the military can take those who were messing up as a kid, but had great potential, and turn them into productive pillars of our society:
about a friend: long time ago… different war… a 17-yr old punk — smart and a smart a$$ — cigarettes rolled in the sleeve of his t-shirt… petty theft, boosting tires… appearing before a judge on Chicago’s west side for “borrowing” a car for a joy ride… the judge says to the kid with major attitude, “juvi hall or the Corps…” with a nod to the “resident” recruiter at the back of the court room… chose the Corps… a tour in Vietnam… survived a bloody ambush… shot in the knee… stayed in the reserves for a few decades and retired with serious “O” rank — a beloved and trusted leader of men… with a year in a cast and multiple surgeries he used his “down” time after Vietnam to get his college degree… joined a major Midwestern state PD… worked his way through the ranks… headed the security detail for 3 or 4 governors… youngest ever to command his own state police district… just retired. a good man who contributed much to our society.
Hard core guys with hard core records definitely need to be dumped, but those with potential with a little bit of direction thrown their way should not be abandoned because of a minor record.
See author page