Posted on May 24, 2016
Why aren't people taking "stolen valor" more seriously? I feel they are downplaying this. Is impersonating a LEO a crime? Why? Same, same?
10.2K
107
81
21
21
0
Posted in these groups: 
Military Life
Stolen Valor
Military Life Stolen Valor
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 32
2
2
0
Because if its civilians they think it looks cool to have all that stuff, even though they don't know what it all stands for.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I am the Secretary for the Los Angeles National Cemetery Support Foundation. Our Foundation supports the Cemetery in any way we can. We plan and put on the Memorial Day Ceremony every year. We had a member who would show up for events dressed as a Brigadier General and was only a Private in the Army. When confronted, he explained that he was part of a Funeral Brigade that would preside over Army Veterans when they passed away. Since our program was to honor the fallen heroes, we could not understand why he was dressed for a funeral. We ultimately asked for his resignation and had him banned from the Cemetery. Apparently, only being a Private was something he could not deal with so he had to be important and wear his funeral uniform. We still get guests that wear medals that we know they never earned but choose not to tarnish the Ceremony with calling them out for it. Stolen Valor is not Freedom of Speech! It should be prosecuted the same way that lying in court is prosecuted.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The main thing to note is that being a LEO involves a status that grants certain privileges and authorities within the U.S. that are applicable to the general public because of the law enforcement mission. The same is not true of being military, in which case the privileges and authorities are limited to other military personnel because of the Posse Comitatus Act. Therefore, impersonating a LEO may be a genuine hazard to the public in ways that impersonating a military position never will be. It really all stems from that.
And remember that in all but a few places, even impersonating a LEO is only a misdemeanor (the only place I was able to confirm it being a felony was Kentucky). Of course, there is a separate law, 18 USC § 912, that makes it a felony to impersonate a federal "officer or employee" while either acting as such (which because it is distinct from the impersonation part has a specific, stronger legal meaning, such as actually trying to give orders) or demanding things of value, as well as 18 USC § 701, that makes it a misdemeanor to manufacture, sell, or possess false badges and ID cards. If the feds really want to go after someone for impersonation, there's usually a way...
And remember that in all but a few places, even impersonating a LEO is only a misdemeanor (the only place I was able to confirm it being a felony was Kentucky). Of course, there is a separate law, 18 USC § 912, that makes it a felony to impersonate a federal "officer or employee" while either acting as such (which because it is distinct from the impersonation part has a specific, stronger legal meaning, such as actually trying to give orders) or demanding things of value, as well as 18 USC § 701, that makes it a misdemeanor to manufacture, sell, or possess false badges and ID cards. If the feds really want to go after someone for impersonation, there's usually a way...
(1)
(0)
SGT Charles W.
Yes, impersonating a LEO is illegal, just no one else is entitled to the same customs and courtesies? What BS is that? I'm not talking about vet accusing actual vet either, I'm talking you know damn well the person is talking out their ass and you call them out on it. The article that put a hair across my ass was in Task & Purpose when a full bird Col. (retired Army) called to carpet 3 Rangers who gave a guy a couple bitch slaps for "stolen valor" - I know some of my peers don't believe in it, as it can't be stolen, etc., etc. (it's in the beholder's eyes). I think the Rangers showed great restraint and discipline considering what they could've done to this "imposter". Giving a couple bitch slaps to say wake up, you're insulting us by doing this, is a reasonable thing. That's just my thoughts. But, YES, I KNOW IT'S ILLEGAL TO IMPERSONATE A LEO, even though according to several people, imitating is the sincerest form of flattery. I'm calling BS on that. I'm 4th generation military (including both parents - SSG & LTC). My father's retired SSG 100% disabled, paralyzed due to broken back in Vietnam (3 and a half tours). He's earned the coveted "V" with clusters (see original post - pic of ribbon bar and that's not even all of them). I'm disgusted by people doing this and thinking it's ok, and the messed up thing is several of my peers disagree and don't find it offensive, which blows my mind. I take it personal, as it's a slap in the face, especially to my father. But that's my 5 cents worth, lol. Sorry for long explanation. Have a great week.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
It's not about the "customs and courtesies." Not even a little. The difference in treatment is that a LEO can detain/search/arrest/ticket a civilian, can carry firearms in otherwise prohibited places, etc., while a military person cannot. Therefore, there is a genuine, greater *public risk* in impersonation of a LEO than impersonation of military personnel. And it's not just a theoretical risk, either; there are documented cases of people pretending to be cops specifically to get away with committing other crimes. In other words, YOUR COMPARISON TO LEO IS FUNDAMENTALLY INVALID, PERIOD, AND IS NOT CAPABLE OF BEING SALVAGED BY ANY OF YOUR OTHER APPEALS.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
The second issue is over "stolen valor" itself, and deals with the question of if it is insulting/offending/disgusting/etc. that these individuals are impersonating us. I agree that it is, without hesitation...
...But please, PLEASE, stop insinuating that violence (even just a little, like a slap) is ever acceptable as a response. It's not, and even the *suggestion* that it is is fundamentally debasing to our collective service. Yes, that's right, I said it; approval of violence as a response to stolen valor is at least as bad as the stolen valor itself, and *actual* violence in response to stolen valor is decidedly worse (and also criminal). If the Rangers you mention were "showing restraint" by simply being honorable and not lowering themselves to the level of the impostor, great, but if they were actually right up to the edge of attacking and were "showing restraint" by barely holding back a barbaric impulse to attach someone who was not endangering them then they deserve to be out of the military entirely.
...But please, PLEASE, stop insinuating that violence (even just a little, like a slap) is ever acceptable as a response. It's not, and even the *suggestion* that it is is fundamentally debasing to our collective service. Yes, that's right, I said it; approval of violence as a response to stolen valor is at least as bad as the stolen valor itself, and *actual* violence in response to stolen valor is decidedly worse (and also criminal). If the Rangers you mention were "showing restraint" by simply being honorable and not lowering themselves to the level of the impostor, great, but if they were actually right up to the edge of attacking and were "showing restraint" by barely holding back a barbaric impulse to attach someone who was not endangering them then they deserve to be out of the military entirely.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I was all for it until several instances of young service members getting it wrong and embarrassing older veterans by mistake. We aren't experts on how the uniform was worn 30 and 60 years ago. Coming down on an older vet like an anvil and upsetting them (a few times to tears) only makes YOU look bad.
(1)
(0)
SGT Charles W.
I know this is a lot of info to sift through, but as I've said numerous times to others in this same thread is, "this isn't the stolen valor I'm talking about. I'm not talking about vet on vet". I'm talking about the wannabes (as seen in numerous YouTube videos) where you know they were NEVER military in any way, shape, or form. I do agree with you that the Vet on Vet is wrong and a damn shame. Common sense and caution should have to be used. There's been instances of older, retired, demented service members who have accidentally been accused, and that cuts me to the core because I would NEVER go there for the exact reasons you mentioned.
(0)
(0)
PO3 Sherry Thornburg
SGT Charles W. - We pretty much agree. The wanabees are either mentally ill or trying to scam a few bucks of the price of a product. I'd say 80% of the ones that drive us all up the wall are the scammers. I can't stand people that do that and if you know what to look for you can pick them out easily. I'd have said the woman in the recruiter's office was a scammer, but she turned out to be an E-4 with mental issues.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The SCOTUS has a 50/50 record for getting their rulings wrong. Personally, I think this is one of the wrong instances. It should not be acceptable for a person to wear any uniform or award they did not earn. However, the SCOTUS said it's their freedom of speech to do so, just like it's legal for people to burn the flag (TOTALLY disagree with that ruling).
It's my understanding that a big part of the reason why law enforcement is different from the military is that the military doesn't have as much authority as the police. If you dress as a police officer, you could carry a firearm anywhere; I don't think you could carry an M16 if you went to WalMart in your Dress Blues. If you dress as a police officer, you could handcuff people and wrongfully detain them; it would look odd if someone in their Service Alphas started cuffing people.
It's my understanding that a big part of the reason why law enforcement is different from the military is that the military doesn't have as much authority as the police. If you dress as a police officer, you could carry a firearm anywhere; I don't think you could carry an M16 if you went to WalMart in your Dress Blues. If you dress as a police officer, you could handcuff people and wrongfully detain them; it would look odd if someone in their Service Alphas started cuffing people.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I do find it troubling that a court would say lying is freedom of speech yet perjury is a criminal offense when lying under oath. A perjury charge may be brought when someone makes a false statement after being sworn in or promising to tell the truth in a legal situation. I find it disappointing that a federal authorized persons that defends the constitution is not considered a legal matter especially considering that without the constitution the judicial branch would not exist.
As well the court’s list of “well-defined” unprotected speech includes “obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement and speech integral to criminal conduct.” - so at what point does fraud kick in - the point at which something is gained. Special damages are sought in lawsuits based on contract and tort. They are asked for in addition to "general damages." These two types are classified as Compensatory Damages and are both designed to return persons to the position they were in prior to the alleged injury - for example pain and suffering - something that is intangible. So it seems like honor could as well hold some intangible value. So by the act these individuals are receiving something of value that is merely intangible. If you could convince a jury that honor is a least worth a penny then you have a case. I think the terms of our discharge would lend to that - honorable conditions. So there is honor in our service just what is it worth as it seems that it is earned and not just given out.
As well the court’s list of “well-defined” unprotected speech includes “obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement and speech integral to criminal conduct.” - so at what point does fraud kick in - the point at which something is gained. Special damages are sought in lawsuits based on contract and tort. They are asked for in addition to "general damages." These two types are classified as Compensatory Damages and are both designed to return persons to the position they were in prior to the alleged injury - for example pain and suffering - something that is intangible. So it seems like honor could as well hold some intangible value. So by the act these individuals are receiving something of value that is merely intangible. If you could convince a jury that honor is a least worth a penny then you have a case. I think the terms of our discharge would lend to that - honorable conditions. So there is honor in our service just what is it worth as it seems that it is earned and not just given out.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1%. That is the amount of Americans who serve annually. 10%. That is the overall amount of Americans who have ever served. When you have that little participation and understanding of what it means to wear that uniform, of course the vast majority of Americans see this as a non-issue.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SGT Charles W. SGT I think it is being taken seriously, just I think a lot of people who call out others tend to go overboard I think. But it is taken seriously, just probably not seen is all. Just my 2 cents worth.
(1)
(0)
SGT Charles W.
I definitely agree with you that in certain circumstances it is being blown way out of proportion, especially when you're talking SM on SM. What I'm talking about is SM on civi. I hope people do take it serious and I'm just not hearing about it. I'm curious, do you think any other nation in this world would tolerate this type of behavior. Could you see Russia, Germany, Isreal, etc. allowing people to "steal valor". I can't.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
SGT Wheeler-I think anyone who served is put off by someone "faking it"...whether it is someone simply trying to "sound big", or taking it so far as to garner benefits financial or otherwise.
That said, there "seems" to be a severe lack of common sense and decorum being shown by some "Stolen Valor Hunters" who seem more concerned with announcing their own credentials than discrediting frauds. Worse still, in my mind, is the apparent lack of ability to distinguish between the sixty year old vet "embellishing" a bit at the bar, someone with more recent service getting their "facts twisted" concerning where, what, when and who...a mentally ill person obviously living in their own world...and a dyed in the wool, honest injun liar.
When those of us who DID serve, feel awkward speaking to other vets because we "might" have forgotten some details, or been a "unique" case a less experienced person may challenge on "Stolen Valor"...then I think we have to ask ourselves if we've taken things too far.
That said, there "seems" to be a severe lack of common sense and decorum being shown by some "Stolen Valor Hunters" who seem more concerned with announcing their own credentials than discrediting frauds. Worse still, in my mind, is the apparent lack of ability to distinguish between the sixty year old vet "embellishing" a bit at the bar, someone with more recent service getting their "facts twisted" concerning where, what, when and who...a mentally ill person obviously living in their own world...and a dyed in the wool, honest injun liar.
When those of us who DID serve, feel awkward speaking to other vets because we "might" have forgotten some details, or been a "unique" case a less experienced person may challenge on "Stolen Valor"...then I think we have to ask ourselves if we've taken things too far.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Thank you for all your responses. I saw a similar discussion by Command Post "Stolen Valor: The Ultimate Sign of Disrespect". I this is like anything else where you are going to have people on both sides of the isle, and that's what makes America great. Being someone who does research, I have to look at the pros/cons of whatever I'm researching because otherwise I'd be bias, and I guess maybe I looked at this from just my point of view. You've made some good points, making me think a little harder, BUT, I still feel "stolen valor" should be a crime. If not actually a law written, making it a crime, it is at a minimum a moral/ethical crime and shows lack of integrity. But I'm not a policy maker and don't really have a say, just needed to vent after what I've seen on the net and news lately. That's all. Carry on. HOAH!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google