Why can the Army decide what we wear on and off post?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 07:49:11 -0400

I understand that there are many statutes from the UCMJ and from historical legal precedents that allow Military Necessity to overcome individual liberties. However, it seems the Army is going very deeply into private lives deciding what civilian attire can be worn on and off post. When should the line be drawn if at all? How does restricting certain clothing preferences bolster good order and discipline? It seems high schools enforce the same standards (wear your hat straight, pull up your pants, no sleeveless shirts, no dorags, etc.).
Edit: this post is primarily concerned with off-post wear, regardless of CONUS/OCONUS status.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 8:02 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:02:26 -0400

Boils down to discipline and looking like a Soldier at all times Sir. We protect and defend our nation and the public supports us strongly. When we start walking around looking like a bunch of "rag bags" (for lack of a better term) the public will loose faith in the professionalism of the military. That's just my $.02

Response by COL Randall C. made Sep 16 at 2014 8:53 AM

COL Randall C. — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:53:11 -0400

1SG Private RallyPoint Member is correct - professionalism.

Seeing as you're in 2ID, I am making the assumption that you are referring to the Warrior Standards as well as some of the other off-post policies. Before going any further, understand that there is a world of difference between regulating off-post behavior in CONUS and that in another country. When in another country, there are a multitude of influencing factors such as host-nation agreements, different cultural norms, etc.

You question, "How does restricting certain clothing preferences bolster good order and discipline?" alludes to how does it bolster the INDIVIDUAL'S good order and discipline, not the organization. By and large, it doesn't. What they do is to protect the negative impact to the order and discipline of the organization as a whole.

Absent of any additional policies, your conduct off-post during off-duty hours is already being controlled (mostly through UCMJ and such as there are many things that society allows that aren't allowed by the military). Usually, when off-post policies are put in effect, they are tied to some type of previous behavior that was exhibited by an organizational member which negatively impacted either the individual or the organization (yes, another case of 'one bad apple...') and the leadership reacted to minimize the behavior in the future. Usually it was because common sense wasn't applied when it should have been and the leadership feels it has to spell out the regulation of behanvior because either the situation might be ambiguous or because the soldiers aren't showing the maturity to make good decisions. Either way, the organization can suffer based on the individual's actions.

What was drummed into me 26+ years ago is that the military is not just a job, it is an all-encompassing way of life and that the military doesn't (or if it does, very reluctantly) adapt to you, you adapt to the military. What is accepted behavior for a college student isn't necessarily the accepted behavior for a junior enlisted/officer (especially considering articles 133 and 134).

Having said all this, your first line sums it up (or should) - military necessity. A command has the right to implement any policy as long as it isn't illegal and has a basis in military necessity (not in personal opinion/belief). Keep in mind, the leadership isn't required to let you know what that military necessity is (and in many cases, won't).

There used to be a time when UCMJ didn't apply 24/7. A 'service connected nexus' had to be shown to apply jurisdiction over military members off-duty and off-base. A famous SCOTUS case (Solorio vs the US) established that jurisdiction depended solely upon the status of the person (in other words, if you're T10 active duty, then it applies ... period).

The same concept can be applied to policies as well because your behavior on/off-post or on/off-duty reflects upon the organization as a whole. If you were on the way home and came upon a burning vehicle with someone trapped inside, the headlines the next day (I'm assuming ;) would read, "Army Soldier risks life to save family", not "Chris Bennett risks life to save family". Likewise, if you head downtown and put your brain in neutral for the rest of the night, the headlines might read "Army Soldier goes on drunken rage and destroys nightclub"

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 9:47 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:47:31 -0400

It may not bolster good order and discipline but, you have to admit. A soldier walking around with his pants around his ankles, hat cocked all kitty-wompus and a lady showing all her lady parts (minor cleavage is acceptable- but showing most of your ass in a pair of shorts is one of those- why wear shorts if you want the whole world to see your lady parts)

I see it as professionalism. We want to be seen as professional people. If we are dressing like a bunch of high school kids, looking like we just dropped out of high school- what part of that screams -Hey, thats a good looking soldier right there? Sure, please wear something you want. But, when your attire starts making the rest of the Army look bad then its time to set some rules.

Too many times than not, soldiers go out and wear something ridiculous and then flaunt 'Well Im in the Army...' It portrays us poorly. I agree that some of the rules seem to be a little much. But, if we don't set rules and guidelines we all know there will be some Joe walking around with his rear hanging out acting all bad ass. Or a young lady wearing something that, well is more suitable for a club than an every day walk on post.

Do we really need more people causing crazy stereotypes amongst the Army?

Rant... Over

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 2:04 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:04:16 -0400

It is because there is a professional image we must maintain off base, especially in a foreign country. As others have posted there are FPCON considerations as well. This is important, I have had an encounter with a possible FORINT on a trip to an eastern block country once. We were wearing non american type stuff, even then it is hard to blend in 100%.

On another note it is embarrassing to me when mil personnel walk around looking like scrubs off duty. I was in line at a bar in downtown Albuquerque, saw a group of kids I thought were gang bangers. They turned out to be Airman stationed at Kirtland. I was kind of annoyed seeing them walk around all thuged out.

Response by SPC Jason Helsel made Sep 16 at 2014 2:40 PM

SPC Jason Helsel — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:40:02 -0400

Lets say hypothetically that you are wearing a shirt that says "F*** the Military" off post. You are in line at the local store (we'll say Walmart because Walmart is everywhere) and you remove your wallet to pay for your goods. When you open said wallet the cashier, the man in line behind you and the man's daughter all see your military ID card. What kind of a person do these three individuals see you as? A professional, or an immature thug? Is it not then at least plausible that they might assume that (based on your shirt) ALL U.S. Military share your view point?

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Sep 16 at 2014 7:18 PM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:18:45 -0400

As you are apparently part of USFK, you are basically an ambassador of our country in South Korea and are expected to dress in a manner that doesn't reflect negatively upon the Army or the US. It's all about the manner in which we present ourselves to the communities in which we reside either on post or off, and "Big Army" dictates that we should not dress as a bunch of trashy individuals. As a leader it is part of your job to ensure that you and your Soldiers comport yourselves in action and in dress in a manner that will not reflect badly on the Army or the nation especially OCONUS.

Response by SFC Nestor Nievesmoran made Sep 16 at 2014 7:55 PM

SFC Nestor Nievesmoran — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:55:24 -0400

Soldiers represent the country and anything they do will also affect the country image. We see this with the police here in the states, is no longer about the officer but about the police force as a whole.

On the other side I understand the point of the discussion, I believe the author understands the importance but his point goes a little further than just the image or representation of the country or military branch. It is about some freedom that are being taken away and about decisions by leaders that makes no sense. An example, a Soldier can not wear an earring while on civilian clothes but that same Soldier is authorized to married the same sex (just example). How can an earring will degrade the image of the country but being married to the same sex will not?. or a soldiers on leave must be clean shave every day if not he violate regulations, this is a time to decompress and relax.

A professional Soldiers lives the Army Values and learn to lived with what others believed is right, with what is best for the country, for the unit, and for himself. But into what extent a believe becomes a rule?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 9:24 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:24:47 -0400

Going back to an old First Sergeant once told us "You want to be a Soldier, act like one, you're a professional in the largest professional organization in the USA (The Military). When your appearence and your actions bring discredit to yourself, it brings discredit to the Army as a whole.

The talk goes like, "Did you see that Army guy/gal" or "Can you hear that group of Soldiers at the bar, their launguage, the way they're dressed. Then when it hits the local paper, "Soldier stationed at Ft So and So, arrested for..............whatever! Soldiers name never gets mentioned.....but the ARMY does!

Or as we had here last year "3 Ft. Stewart Soldiers charged with murder, terrorist activiy, drugs, and plot to overthrow government".

This may be "The Army of One", however, as a professional, it's not about you, the individual. The term Selfless-Service tends become Self Before Service to often. Discipline starts with "Self", when someone else has to enforce it, you know you're wrong. Fix it!

Not a bad question CPT Private RallyPoint Member . Any question that quickly draws out responses as yours has....is a good question. Good luck on your tour. Some of old(er) Soldiers tend to get passionate about this, as we see things like this happen more and more every day instead of less and less.

Response by SGT Robert Hawks made Sep 17 at 2014 2:34 PM

SGT Robert Hawks — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 14:34:17 -0400

When we raised our right and swore to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, obey the orders if the president of the United States and the officers appointed over me so help me God. That's when we became soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. From that moment on we gave them sway over our lives because in or out uniform your on duty 24 hours a day everyday. So you represent your branch of service all the time and they want you to set a positive example.