Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Bowe Bergdahl to be charged with desertion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Joel View Post
    As do employees in general. That doesn't justify employers shooting employees that try to quit
    (or imprisoning, etc).
    Most employment in the US is "at will" and can be terminated either by the employee or employer. The military ain't that.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Joel View Post
      As do employees in general. That doesn't justify employers shooting employees that try to quit
      (or imprisoning, etc).
      It does if it's part of the contract. Of course, the average employer also doesn't have the government's power, so they usually have less options when it comes to enforcing contracts. Like relying on the government to do it for them.

      Another possible argument is that it's because defense/combat/emergency is unique. That's lessened by the fact that police also engage in defense and sometimes combat, and rely on each other. And people join and leave police forces all the time. We can also consider private security forces, firemen, etc.
      Cops usually do their primary job most of the time, whereas soldiers don't necessarily see combat for the bulk of their employment. If people could just leave whenever they wanted they could show up for training, suck up the government's money, then take off when they actually have to fight.
      "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

      There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
        It does if it's part of the contract.
        I'm pretty sure employment contracts cannot (and should not be able to) compel someone to actually continue performing labor services in indentured servitude. My understanding is that they just specify an agreed-upon exchange: some additional benefit/consideration in exchange for a certain period of work.
        E.g., if you work for me for 2 years, I will give you a bonus of $x.
        If the bonus is paid as an advance, it is sometimes stipulated that it must be repaid, in part or full, if the employee quits early.

        It may also be possible to stipulate a monetary sum that is owed if the period of work is not completed. That could take care of the worry of recruits skipping out after training. (Also I hear that boot camp is the best part of being in the military. )

        I've heard it said that most entry-level positions consist of lots of training with the employee not being profitable at first, yet employment contracts are typically reserved for high-level and high-skilled employees in special cases (e.g. when the purchaser of a company wants to retain the top talent).

        And then all of that would be a civil matter, not a criminal conviction (including for non-military government employees).

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by myth View Post
          I'm dumbfounded at the White House's logic on this. He left his unit voluntarily, so we're going to free to terrorists to get a deserter back? Sounds rather like we freed terrorists to kidnap a deserter. Epic fail.
          IIRC it seemed calculated to draw attention away from one scandal or another (there have been so many under this administration I've lost track of them all).
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Joel View Post
            I'm pretty sure employment contracts cannot (and should not be able to) compel someone to actually continue performing labor services in indentured servitude. My understanding is that they just specify an agreed-upon exchange: some additional benefit/consideration in exchange for a certain period of work.
            E.g., if you work for me for 2 years, I will give you a bonus of $x.
            If the bonus is paid as an advance, it is sometimes stipulated that it must be repaid, in part or full, if the employee quits early.

            It may also be possible to stipulate a monetary sum that is owed if the period of work is not completed. That could take care of the worry of recruits skipping out after training. (Also I hear that boot camp is the best part of being in the military. )

            I've heard it said that most entry-level positions consist of lots of training with the employee not being profitable at first, yet employment contracts are typically reserved for high-level and high-skilled employees in special cases (e.g. when the purchaser of a company wants to retain the top talent).

            And then all of that would be a civil matter, not a criminal conviction (including for non-military government employees).
            I'm assuming you were joking about boot camp being the best part of it all...

            When one begins work with the federal govt, you take an oath to uphold the Constitution and all lawful orders given by your ssuperiors. Now I don't know how this oath is administered anymore...I had mentioned this oath to a new employee who just gave me a blank look...so perhaps they just sign a piece of paper now.

            As for bonuses and all that, the military already have all that going in their efforts to recruit.
            Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Joel View Post
              I'm pretty sure employment contracts cannot (and should not be able to) compel someone to actually continue performing labor services in indentured servitude. My understanding is that they just specify an agreed-upon exchange: some additional benefit/consideration in exchange for a certain period of work.
              E.g., if you work for me for 2 years, I will give you a bonus of $x.
              If the bonus is paid as an advance, it is sometimes stipulated that it must be repaid, in part or full, if the employee quits early.

              It may also be possible to stipulate a monetary sum that is owed if the period of work is not completed. That could take care of the worry of recruits skipping out after training. (Also I hear that boot camp is the best part of being in the military. )

              I've heard it said that most entry-level positions consist of lots of training with the employee not being profitable at first, yet employment contracts are typically reserved for high-level and high-skilled employees in special cases (e.g. when the purchaser of a company wants to retain the top talent).

              And then all of that would be a civil matter, not a criminal conviction (including for non-military government employees).
              I'm assuming you were joking about boot camp being the best part of it all...

              When one begins work with the federal govt, you take an oath to uphold the Constitution and all lawful orders given by your superiors. Now I don't know how this oath is administered anymore...I had mentioned this oath to a new employee who just gave me a blank look...so perhaps they just sign a piece of paper now.

              As for bonuses and all that, the military already have all that going in their efforts to recruit.
              Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Joel View Post
                I'm pretty sure employment contracts cannot (and should not be able to) compel someone to actually continue performing labor services in indentured servitude. My understanding is that they just specify an agreed-upon exchange: some additional benefit/consideration in exchange for a certain period of work.
                E.g., if you work for me for 2 years, I will give you a bonus of $x.
                If the bonus is paid as an advance, it is sometimes stipulated that it must be repaid, in part or full, if the employee quits early.

                It may also be possible to stipulate a monetary sum that is owed if the period of work is not completed. That could take care of the worry of recruits skipping out after training. (Also I hear that boot camp is the best part of being in the military. )

                I've heard it said that most entry-level positions consist of lots of training with the employee not being profitable at first, yet employment contracts are typically reserved for high-level and high-skilled employees in special cases (e.g. when the purchaser of a company wants to retain the top talent).

                And then all of that would be a civil matter, not a criminal conviction (including for non-military government employees).
                Joel, when you sign on to service with the military, you agree to subject yourself to a whole 'nuther legal system - the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is no similar "additional" legal system that you subject yourself to when you take a job in the private sector.
                Last edited by Cow Poke; 01-27-2015, 09:05 PM. Reason: left out "no" similar l
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Joel, when you sign on to service with the military, you agree to subject yourself to a whole 'nuther legal system - the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is similar "additional" legal system that you subject yourself to when you take a job in the private sector.
                  Yeah....that too.
                  Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Joel, when you sign on to service with the military, you agree to subject yourself to a whole 'nuther legal system - the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is no similar "additional" legal system that you subject yourself to when you take a job in the private sector.
                    I know it's different. I'm suggesting that this particular difference (a special law written by Congress into the UCMJ) making 'desertion' a crime (punishable even by death) is maybe a bad thing--creates involuntary servitude for those wanting to quit. (And may also be unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.)

                    My guess is that this law is a relic of the barbaric era of the draft. It makes a kind of logic that if you are going to force people into service, then you'd want to make it a crime to leave.

                    This law may also reflect the tendency of states to protect their own interests more than those of the people. States have tended to want to force people to work for them. Other examples are how the crimes that states typically treat most severely are crimes against itself (as opposed to crimes against the people it exists to protect), e.g. treason, desertion, subversion, counterfeiting, tax evasion, assaulting a police officer or other agent of the state, vs assault of an ordinary citizen. For most of history, speaking ill of the state was also in that list.

                    As for whether people can voluntarily submit to a legal system that denies you liberty, it depends on whether the right to life and liberty are unalienable--which means you cannot give them away by contract even if you wanted to. If they are unalienable, then any contract/oath/etc that purports to transfer those rights (e.g. you agreeing to sell yourself into slavery) is null and void.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Are you thinking that leaving the military is always considered equivalent to desertion? If so, I don't think that's correct. I've heard of people getting out of the military before their contract is up. Not sure what kind of penalty they incur...but I don't think they call that desertion.
                      Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Joel View Post
                        I know it's different. I'm suggesting that this particular difference (a special law written by Congress into the UCMJ) making 'desertion' a crime (punishable even by death) is maybe a bad thing--creates involuntary servitude for those wanting to quit. (And may also be unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.)

                        My guess is that this law is a relic of the barbaric era of the draft. It makes a kind of logic that if you are going to force people into service, then you'd want to make it a crime to leave.

                        This law may also reflect the tendency of states to protect their own interests more than those of the people. States have tended to want to force people to work for them. Other examples are how the crimes that states typically treat most severely are crimes against itself (as opposed to crimes against the people it exists to protect), e.g. treason, desertion, subversion, counterfeiting, tax evasion, assaulting a police officer or other agent of the state, vs assault of an ordinary citizen. For most of history, speaking ill of the state was also in that list.

                        As for whether people can voluntarily submit to a legal system that denies you liberty, it depends on whether the right to life and liberty are unalienable--which means you cannot give them away by contract even if you wanted to. If they are unalienable, then any contract/oath/etc that purports to transfer those rights (e.g. you agreeing to sell yourself into slavery) is null and void.
                        Desertion as a capital crime has been in effect for centuries, if not millennia. Treason, et al. can be considered crimes against the people the state exists to protect (in that specific case, because treason can make it more difficult for the state to protect the people.
                        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                        sigpic
                        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Joel View Post
                          I know it's different. I'm suggesting that this particular difference (a special law written by Congress into the UCMJ) making 'desertion' a crime (punishable even by death) is maybe a bad thing--creates involuntary servitude for those wanting to quit. (And may also be unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.)
                          If you ENLIST, it's not "involuntary". And ENLISTING is entering into a CONTRACT of one's own free will. Do you not believe we should honor contracts we enter into?
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                            Are you thinking that leaving the military is always considered equivalent to desertion? If so, I don't think that's correct. I've heard of people getting out of the military before their contract is up. Not sure what kind of penalty they incur...but I don't think they call that desertion.
                            Correct, one can be released from the military on a hardship, among other things. You just don't "walk away".
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Joel View Post
                              I know it's different. I'm suggesting that this particular difference (a special law written by Congress into the UCMJ) making 'desertion' a crime (punishable even by death) is maybe a bad thing--creates involuntary servitude for those wanting to quit. (And may also be unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.)

                              My guess is that this law is a relic of the barbaric era of the draft. It makes a kind of logic that if you are going to force people into service, then you'd want to make it a crime to leave.

                              This law may also reflect the tendency of states to protect their own interests more than those of the people. States have tended to want to force people to work for them. Other examples are how the crimes that states typically treat most severely are crimes against itself (as opposed to crimes against the people it exists to protect), e.g. treason, desertion, subversion, counterfeiting, tax evasion, assaulting a police officer or other agent of the state, vs assault of an ordinary citizen. For most of history, speaking ill of the state was also in that list.

                              As for whether people can voluntarily submit to a legal system that denies you liberty, it depends on whether the right to life and liberty are unalienable--which means you cannot give them away by contract even if you wanted to. If they are unalienable, then any contract/oath/etc that purports to transfer those rights (e.g. you agreeing to sell yourself into slavery) is null and void.
                              I've discussed this with military friends before. 'Desertion' is much more specific than just quitting the military before your contract is over. From my understanding, there are soldiers in some branches that go AWOL indefinitely all the time while stateside. Most branches will just take some administrative action after a certain period of time and voila, the person is no longer in the military. A lot of times they don't even bother prosecuting. The Marine Corps takes a different stance, though....from what I hear. But just quitting doesn't equal the death penalty, it requires more specific circumstances.
                              "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Joel View Post
                                I know it's different. I'm suggesting that this particular difference (a special law written by Congress into the UCMJ) making 'desertion' a crime (punishable even by death) is maybe a bad thing--creates involuntary servitude for those wanting to quit. (And may also be unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.)
                                Not really because it wasn't as though this was kept a secret and you 'found out' about it afterwords. There's also other ways out of the military too, including medical discharges due to 'mental health' or something else like that. Besides, abounding your post, in an area of the world known to capture and kill Americans, doesn't seem to be the best idea there is.

                                My guess is that this law is a relic of the barbaric era of the draft. It makes a kind of logic that if you are going to force people into service, then you'd want to make it a crime to leave.
                                There was no force involved in any of my enlistments and they were done by my own free will and I knew darn well what the rules were. Plus, the rules about desertion date from the days of the founding fathers (IE the articles of war were established in 1775 and updated in 1806) because they understood that the military requires different views and rules than the civilian world does. If you can't deal with that, don't join. Simple as that.

                                This law may also reflect the tendency of states to protect their own interests more than those of the people. States have tended to want to force people to work for them. Other examples are how the crimes that states typically treat most severely are crimes against itself (as opposed to crimes against the people it exists to protect), e.g. treason, desertion, subversion, counterfeiting, tax evasion, assaulting a police officer or other agent of the state, vs assault of an ordinary citizen. For most of history, speaking ill of the state was also in that list.


                                There was no force involved when I walked into the recruiters office and said I wanted to join the AF. There was no forced involved when I signed the paperwork to join the AF in the 3 times I've done it so far. Even than, there are still ways out of it if you really don't want to do it that don't involve running from your post, into hostel areas, to the arms of people that want to kill Americans.

                                As for whether people can voluntarily submit to a legal system that denies you liberty, it depends on whether the right to life and liberty are unalienable--which means you cannot give them away by contract even if you wanted to. If they are unalienable, then any contract/oath/etc that purports to transfer those rights (e.g. you agreeing to sell yourself into slavery) is null and void.
                                It isn't slavery, there's ways out of it and if you don't want it, don't sign up. It doesn't seem that hard to me.
                                "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                                GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                139 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                364 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                364 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X