7
7
0
What's everyone's thoughts on the attached photo? Are we worrying more about things like this and less on ensuring our force is a T on all tasks? Couldn't we spend some more time worrying about bigger issues and less on what type of footwear a Soldier is wearing?
Posted in these groups: 
Uniforms
Uniforms
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 57
14
14
0
I guess it's the MI in me, but I think it would be helpful to explain WHY each boot is unauthorized. I know side zip boots are a safety hazard because they create give in a direction your ankle shouldn't bend when additional support could prevent injury. If Soldiers understood that there was a performance, safety, or other reason, beyond just saying "unauthorized," it would help us to know what to look for in boots we purchase, and would help make the policy self-enforcing.
(14)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I can see why synthetic boots are not permitted: they are likely not going to meet the flash fire requirements and possibly could create larger issues in such a situation. This is the same as the gloves requirement.
(1)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
SFC Greg,
I'm with you here on this one, the issue is it's all about looking cool.. Thats why the USMC doesn't even have this issue in the first place. They keept one standard, and really don't care about pleasing everyone in their service. Second, we can't enforce something when higher echelons can't make up their mind's and disseminate clear information. I'll be honest I didn't like the black boot at times, but looking back I don't think it was such a bad thing, we looked crisp and sharp and really looked the part. That obviously went away with the "Living Room" Camo pattern, but that's an entirely diferent conversation
I'm with you here on this one, the issue is it's all about looking cool.. Thats why the USMC doesn't even have this issue in the first place. They keept one standard, and really don't care about pleasing everyone in their service. Second, we can't enforce something when higher echelons can't make up their mind's and disseminate clear information. I'll be honest I didn't like the black boot at times, but looking back I don't think it was such a bad thing, we looked crisp and sharp and really looked the part. That obviously went away with the "Living Room" Camo pattern, but that's an entirely diferent conversation
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SFC Greg,
I'm not sure what Army your speaking of because the Army I grew up in people wore black leather boots of all sorts as long as they didn't have zippers. There were flat soled, jungle boots, jump boots, etc... As long as they were black leather they were G2G.
Then they started issuing tan suede boots of multiple designs, then the useless Danner mountain boots from RFI.
It's all about money and contracts.
I'm not sure what Army your speaking of because the Army I grew up in people wore black leather boots of all sorts as long as they didn't have zippers. There were flat soled, jungle boots, jump boots, etc... As long as they were black leather they were G2G.
Then they started issuing tan suede boots of multiple designs, then the useless Danner mountain boots from RFI.
It's all about money and contracts.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I was thinking along those lines SFC Grudzinski, no one mentioned heel and toe caps?
The brown danner mountain boots from RFI? Had they not come from RFI, they don't meet the regulation specifications so they set quite the precedent
The brown danner mountain boots from RFI? Had they not come from RFI, they don't meet the regulation specifications so they set quite the precedent
(1)
(0)
12
12
0
Zippered boots are for dumbasses. If the zipper breaks, and they do, the boot is useless. Laces, however, are easy to replace. Boots with zippers are for the truly lazy, and possibly stupid. The Army should allow them so that you'll know which soldiers to avoid.
(12)
(0)
1SG(P) (Join to see)
We didn't have zippers on BDUs for a reason. A Joe in the field can sew a button onto the fly of his trousers much easier than replacing a zipper. I recommend dental floss, toughest thread you'll ever use. As for broken laces, use whole 550. You can gut it later if you need to McGyver something.
(6)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
The list has some merit but in my experience, the very rare instance where a Soldier's boot is over the top isn't worth making the 99% of us who have legit, professional looking boots change back to standard issue.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Chris- agreed. And for the zippers on the ACU comments: we have zippers on ACUs because a dumbass designed it. Zipper and Velcro. I'll never understand.....
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
After long discussions here at my unit, at the end of the day is regulation is regulation, if you fail to enforce a standard you just created a new one. Now im not saying the world will come to an end by wearing the wrong boots. We all signed the dotted line. its not like the reg is a big secret. Leaders Enforce Standards and if you cannot handle that simple task probably time to find a new line of work. And a senior leaders we should be mentoring the junior leaders in how to find the answers in the regulation....... Also it makes sence, synthetic material on boots that could potentialy melt to your feet in a fire......Hmmm I dunno probably a good call.
(1)
(0)
11
11
0
1SG Conner
I understand and I am forced to respect/enforce a standard such as this one which I do not agree with. I believe it's ridiculous to be so restrictive on Soldiers' boots when a Soldier's feet are probably the most important part of the body to care for. You would think it's obvious everyone's feet don't do well with the Army standard issued boots but there are some people out there who believe that because the Army boots work for them, they must work for everyone else.
At the end of the day, I suppose a standard like this doesn't leave room for someone with my rank to use discretion. It's unfortunately black and white regulation.
I understand and I am forced to respect/enforce a standard such as this one which I do not agree with. I believe it's ridiculous to be so restrictive on Soldiers' boots when a Soldier's feet are probably the most important part of the body to care for. You would think it's obvious everyone's feet don't do well with the Army standard issued boots but there are some people out there who believe that because the Army boots work for them, they must work for everyone else.
At the end of the day, I suppose a standard like this doesn't leave room for someone with my rank to use discretion. It's unfortunately black and white regulation.
(11)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
Haha good point! Luckily most commanders and CSMs I know wear a pair of the boots in the photo so they prevent me from even having to request permission.
(1)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
NOPE! It's my duty to first look it up to see if it's allowed in their unit SOP before I try to correct them ;)
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Once again, SSG Woods is on point. I can see why the reg was put into place, but on the other hand with all the walking/running around SM does it be nice to do it in comfortable boots. Imagine how much money the Army would save if they didn't have to pay disability for leg and feet injuries
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google