Posted on May 10, 2015
Do you think military service members should be prosecuted under UCMJ for disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief? I say absolutely, YES!
214K
1.12K
648
95
84
11
Disrespect
Office of the President (POTUS)
UCMJ
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 239
0
0
0
This boils down to AR 670-1, out of uniform you can do any of these things.
Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian
employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except
as authorized by the first O–5 in the chain of command.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army, as determined by the commander.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.
Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian
employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except
as authorized by the first O–5 in the chain of command.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army, as determined by the commander.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Define disrespect. If I question things like his politics or whether he adheres to the Constitution in making his decisions, that is not disrespectful, but is normal political discussion. However, if I call him names or attack him personally, then yes, that is a UCMJ offense.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
The question is poorly written and is open ended. I was a Medical Corpsman , not a Corpsemen, and I carried a bayonet while serving these %) not 57 states, is it disrespect to point out the inept unintelligble comment reflected poorly on the C in C military awareness.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
CW5 Roy Rucker Sr., just so I'm clear you are referring to all CINC's and not just the current one? I.e., would you still feel the same way if hypothetically our next CINC is a member of the opposite political party?
I do not mean to communicate any disrespect to you Sir I just want to make sure that this isn't a biased discussion.
With that said, I agree with you. While I may not support the current CINC (and as a veteran/retiree I have that right) and even speak out against the majority of his decisions (I will also say that I have supported some of his decisions) blatant disrespect to any CINC regardless of their political affiliation can and should be punished.
I do not mean to communicate any disrespect to you Sir I just want to make sure that this isn't a biased discussion.
With that said, I agree with you. While I may not support the current CINC (and as a veteran/retiree I have that right) and even speak out against the majority of his decisions (I will also say that I have supported some of his decisions) blatant disrespect to any CINC regardless of their political affiliation can and should be punished.
(0)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
I was told the same thing, and I agree with you. When I was active duty, I wouldn't have posted anything (or otherwise make public comments) that could be construed as disrespectful of the CINC or any commissioned officer.
Even now as a retiree, I may strongly disagree with our CINC (current and/or previous ones) and I may make posts on why exactly I disagree with him/them, but I try to avoid personal attacks and stick with issues.
Even now as a retiree, I may strongly disagree with our CINC (current and/or previous ones) and I may make posts on why exactly I disagree with him/them, but I try to avoid personal attacks and stick with issues.
(0)
(0)
CH (CPT) Heather Davis
Article 134 – General Article
Article 134 includes an extensive list of additional offenses that can lead to punishment under the UCMJ. Article 134-12 covers disloyal statements, and Soldier posts and Tweets can potentially fall under this article.
ART. 134 – General Article Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court. ART. 134-12 (1) That the accused made a certain statement; (2) That the statement was communicated to another person; (3) That the statement was disloyal to the United States; (4) That the statement was made with the intent to promote disloyalty or disaffection toward the United States by any member of the armed forces or to interfere with or impair the loyalty to the United States or good order and discipline of any member of the armed forces; and (5) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
Article 134 includes an extensive list of additional offenses that can lead to punishment under the UCMJ. Article 134-12 covers disloyal statements, and Soldier posts and Tweets can potentially fall under this article.
ART. 134 – General Article Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court. ART. 134-12 (1) That the accused made a certain statement; (2) That the statement was communicated to another person; (3) That the statement was disloyal to the United States; (4) That the statement was made with the intent to promote disloyalty or disaffection toward the United States by any member of the armed forces or to interfere with or impair the loyalty to the United States or good order and discipline of any member of the armed forces; and (5) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
(1)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
Text.
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element
(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element
(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory
(0)
(0)
0
-1
1
1SG Larry Cole, EMBA/MBA/MS
You are silly. I meant to vote you down. Anyone who has ever served knows you are not suppose to say negative stuff read, read it is fundamental.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
1SG Larry Cole, EMBA/MBA/MS - Sgt Richard Buckner That idiot comes here, to start a firestorm and he did it.
(0)
(0)
0
-1
1
What a sorry and prejdudice person you are. How were you ever allowed to serve in the American Military, Disgusting idiot.
(0)
(1)
CW3 Amel Smith
At whom is this directed? I don't know who you were saying this too, but it seems anyone on this forum is a military or retired military member who has earned the right to speak their mind freely. The only idiot would be one who feels his opionion is more important than any one else. If you were anything other than a mechanic I would have expected more from a brother warrant officer....
(0)
(0)
0
-1
1
Absolutely yes. The President is the Commander and Chief. If you don’t or think you can’t, you need to resign immediately.
(0)
(1)
0
-1
1
Absolutely!!! I feel it should be the same as if the service member disrespected his chain of command.
(0)
(1)
0
-1
1
I say they, and their leaders should be prosecuted for not placing him under military custody for treason!
(0)
(1)
LTC (Join to see)
So if an otherwise stellar young troop is overheard in the barracks lamenting how he thinks the president is handling a given issue poorly, the chain of command should be prosecuted if they give him a verbal reprimand or a written counseling statement?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google