Why don't officers wear marksmanship badges?

Oh, heck. Let's man up. Most officers couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle. I wouldn't want that generally known either.

Yes officers should wear their Marksmanship Badges as does the Enlisted personnel. The absent of them only means they did not qualify with a weapon, or they were very low in qualification. SO HAVE THEM WEAR THEM. Then there is now questionable doubts.

I suppose it's a matter of preference?

The officer marksmanship badge would be a metal outline of the broadside of a barn. LOL
In all seriousness I agree with COL Smallfield. I was only an E-4 when I was in the Reserve and I appreciated the expert leadership that was in my unit.

I retired from HHB I Corps Artillery. Most of our officers wore their marksmanship badges. However not many of our senior command wore them. We had a Ltc shoot Hawkeye almost every year, and he wore his expert badge. I had expert driver, marksman and M-60, but I usually only wore the rifle badge. When half your unit is field grade officers and 1/3 of the enlisted are E-7 there really isn't a whole lot of people I had to impress. I found the two most important things were 1) you perform your job in a motivated and proficient manner. 2) you can take an ass chewing from a general and still be high speed low drag and complete the mission without excuses. That was how you got promoted. The junior grade officers were pretty much graded the same way, only they spent more time on the carpet feeling the bite!

My answer wear it and if questioned or stopped then ask for them to find it in the Regulations to show you then you will take it off.

I used to wear mine. I was always expert, but no big deal, my weapon was my platoon, or company that I had trained and conditioned

Officers are not experts in all things, that is impossible. Many, if not most, are excellent marksmen. Officers compete with each other intensely so there is inherent motivation to be a good marksman even if we do not wear a badge.

We are one of the few armies in the world (if not the only) that recognizes enlisted personnel with ribbons more frequently than officers. For example, British Army culture used to be that ONLY officers received ribbons or medals, except for extraordinary cases like earning the Victoria Cross. Our culture is the reverse - enlisted achieve and wear awards largely for individual achievement until they reach senior ranks, officers achieve and wear awards that represent organizational achievement (most of the time). All of my awards are a product of the achievements of my units, not just my own, so although I could wear a marksmanship badge, I don't because it does not represent the accomplishments of those I lead.

The exception on my uniform is the German Armed Forces Proficiency Badge. Foreign awards are individual, but that is because of how we earn them. It is impossible to earn the GAFPB as a group. To address comments about the Schutzenschnur, officers do not wear the German marksman badge (Schutzenschnur) because German officers are prohibited from wearing the badge. Skills badges, such as Airborne or Ranger, would also be an exception and represent individual accomplishment.

Bottom line for me: wear it if you like. I don't intend to because I prefer the cleaner look of the uniform without it and I do not think it is necessary. If I need a marksmanship badge to prove to my Soldiers that I am qualified to lead, I am failing miserably. My ability to earn the confidence of those I lead should stem from the decisions I make, how I treat those I lead, and my character, not a badge or award.

Badges and ribbons are nice, but leadership is a must. Leaders must inspire others to follow by their character, not the bling they wear.

We can dance around this with Officers theories and NCO speculations. The bottom line is no Officer is going to wear a badge that indicates marksman or sharpshooter. Nothing less than expert would be acceptable. (Understandably so). The real issue is and has been for years we expect our soldiers to be proficient on their weapon right out of the shoot. The only time a Soldier fires there weapon is in qualifying or in real world situations. And than we ridicule them as substandard soldiers if they fail to qualify and blame their NCO. We as an Army owe it to them and our mission to get our soldiers to the range as often as possible. Yeah yeah budget! Well how does the Army treat it's pilots almost every day they are out flying (training) and if they have a pilot who is having a difficult time maintaining their RL status we get them help and more time in the cockpit. All of this costs the Army big with maintenance hours and fuel cost etc but in the end you have a better force. But that is not the case for the enlisted soldier. Yes we have an EST but that is not the same just as a flight simulator is not the same as a actual aircraft. We as an Army must do a better job.

Probably because they can't shoot.