Thanksgiving is supposed to be a time of year and admittedly every person needs a moment to decompress and reflect on forward momentum. I have allowed some time for chatter to calm to see whether or not the holiday is playing a role in the events that transpire across the bases. Since that brief period has expired, I continue onward in my little experiment where I will now begin exposing the ugly harsh truths about not just one branch, but all of them. In some of the most hurtful ways, Bases across the globe are neglecting to care for and protect military family members AND some service members who fall victim. When predicated to protect the family, bases are now often compelled to give appearance that the family is the problem, for what appears to be a secretive route of possible no-action efforts to conceal what is really happening behind the scenes on bases. If you are a spouse facing obstacles on bases, my only caution now is to take heed of this caution: WATCH YOUR SIX- you are far more dispensable and easier to expel and exile from the military environment than you think.
*********************************************************************************
Reputable Newspaper Journalists with Hearst Newspapers expose the grim truth behind the recently scrutinized Texas shooting by Devin Patrick Kelly after flaws in systems and dereliction of duty permitted a known violent offender to purchase weapons where his criminal convictions in a Military Court Martial uniquely precluded him from doing so. The Air Force has already admitted to dropping the ball and failing to enter Kelly into the FBI, NCIC III, NICS and other offenders databases that would have prevented him from purchasing weapons at all. Even the most basic of name checks would have issued results of "no buy hits". For convenience, the article has been snap-shot for a visual read of which we will pick apart section by section.
Defense Department reports that ONLY ONE case of a single misdemeanor domestic violence conviction was listed in the national database as published at the end of 2016. As recent as this past week, the Air Force Confirmed as many as a dozen that also failed to be reported. So my question is, where are the official lists from 2014 when Kelly was convicted and who is going to be held responsible for why his name wasn't placed on the list. Who will be charged with dereliction of duty and who in the Air Force is going to take negligent culpability. That same 2016 list only had a few "adjudicated mental health" reports that preclude weapon ownership, in addition to one felony charge and almost 11,000 dishonorable discharges that qualified to be on the list. Be advised that my info searches have revealed that if a service member refuses to participate in a mandatory periodic mental health assessment, the only thing that happens to them is their ability to transfer, get promoted. or move upward in their duties would become restricted. There is also NO guarantee that a person that has been found a possible "risk to peers, subordinates, spouses, or their families" will ever be pursued to remove and discharge a member for the purposes of protecting the general population on base.
Be advised this article section intro specifically states that the end year reporting DOES NOT include a list of service members who currently have been issued restraining orders by command, a.k.a. Military Protective Orders. Yes, you read that correct. Military Protective Orders that have been issued are not reported for inclusion in the various databases, even though under the Lautenberg Amendment, anyone with a restraining order is also not permitted to be in possession of a firearm.
Here is the conflict: If you show a local enforcement authority an MPO, be prepared to have someone laugh in your face because "it's just a letter on a piece of paper, not a 'court order' ". Even though an MPO IS a restraining order issued by a federal authority, it has ZERO authority when not on a base installation. It might as well be void completely because it offers ZERO true protection as would be required if it were legitimately compliant with the Violence Against Women Act(VAWA). I might also proffer in my opinion that violators of MPOs are also not enforcibly charged under UCMJ Article 92 or Article 15 as required by their own "letters"by most base commanders.
Passing the buck?
Devin Kelley Investigations show the Air Force is actively investigating why Holloman Air Force Base did NOT report Kelley's DV Case, but only after being preempted by the tragic events of the Texas shooting. The Air Force confirms Kelley received a "bad conduct discharge" after serving one year in a Navy Brig (prison). The problem that is revealed is that if he had been released to Army lockup, the reporting would have been automatic whereas a Naval Brig Personnel Administration is not set up to report on the behalf of other branches. In the literal sense, the Navy deflects that ultimate responsibility to the branch that convicted the inmate offender. So, the Air Force failed to report, the Army was not involved, nor was the Marine Corps or National Guard for obvious reasons, but suddenly, the question comes to the Navy Brig as to why THEY did not report. The Air Force is unfortunately known for "passing the buck". This is an unfortunate series of events that only further proves that. Men, Women and Children across the globe associated with the Air Force are all saying this comes as no surprise.
Representative Mac Thornberry of Texas has ordered that a Defense Department Inspector General Investigation take place to determine how Kelley "fell through the cracks". However, I contend based upon unofficial practice and procedure that Kelley is the perfect example of what is to be expected of the Air Force when it comes to a criminal, whether convicted or not. I do not make that statement lightly and to the contrary, I have seen first hand the Air Force passing the buck, not wanting to hold its members accountable, and certainly not wanting the general public informed of its everyday comings and goings. The Air Force has operated for decades in a veil of concealment as what the public doesn't know won't hurt them. The Air Force often is revered as the "paper and button pushers" that support NASA and not the revelry of militaristic force when compared to the other branches of the US Armed Forces, even though their technology implemented works to arm the US with various forms of aerial weaponry and defense In fact, the common joke among retirees is that an Airman might as well enjoy their military career because once they are done, they will often have zero real world job experience other than knowing how to push a button.
The same year convicted, Kelley already had a history of being mentally institutionalized. Was this a defense tactic to attempt a "non compos mentis" (not competent of the mind) defense that went wrong? Definitely makes you wonder, right? Kelley already had an established pattern of ducking authorities and threatening others. El Paso Police were warned that Kelley intended to flee the state, with intent to kill superior officers at Holloman Air Force Base. Now keep in mind, Kelley was previously institutionalized which means either himself or someone else already diagnosed him with mental health issues that needed intervention for harm to self or others. I am by no means a critic who calls people crazy, but here the shoe fits that he was already convicted and deemed a harm to other people when he planned to sneak weapons onto a base installation thereafter and instead was caught red-handed. This goes to show, his mental state was clearly in question and authorities appear to have overlooked prior awareness and notices of potential harm, possibly even in a neglectful manner. Kelley's name was clearly not on any of the three databases to prohibit weapon purchases and as such, I contend it appears this is just one more protocol that was neglectfully applied.
The Air Force states they actively send "dishonorable discharges" to the databases for entry on a regular basis, however they do not clarify where a "Bad Conduct Discharge" falls in that category, nor do they address the mere fact that his discharge was directly related to a convicted act of Domestic Violence which would otherwise require and mandate entry into ALL THREE databases.
Sounds reassuring to think had the Air Force done its job, then weapons would have never been purchased at all, right? Sadly to say, the Government Accountability Office in 2016 conducted an audit where records show people who were entered into even all databases did not guarantee that they would also not be permitted to purchase a firearm, even under the Lautenberg Amendment. The GAO to the contrary clearly identified that the system of entry was not only flawed but as of a year ago and longer, dating back to 2015 when the Inspector General last did a report, according to these reporters, the US Armed Forces have known for quite some time that the databases gave ZERO guarantee 100% of the time. Their investigation clearly demonstrates lapses in duties being executed. At best, some serious dereliction of duty took place and willful negligence over the past two years has now placed lives of dozens of churchgoers in the culpable hands of the Armed Forces- all of whom are now deceased.
ALL FOUR WEAPONS CLEARED NCIC FOR PURCHASE!
Although agency spokesman speaks of questioning bad conduct discharges in particular, I would contend that all convicted acts of domestic violence are required not only under the Lautenberg Amendment as well as VAWA, they must all be entered into databases to preclude purchase of any firearms. I would also contend that when an MPO is issued for Domestic Violence history, those members should also be entered into the database, especially if a HRVRT meeting is convened to determine whether a Domestic Violence MPO is necessary to issue. I further contend that any service member found to have met criteria for spousal abuse or maltreatment and/or charged with some kind of Article charge should also be entered into the database of Domestic Violence offenders. Since not all Domestic Violence abuse is deemed criminal in the military, meaning that most Domestic Violence acts are treated as a "civil matter" and not a "criminal matter", unless caught red handed, and sometimes not even then, I personally think that the military should become completely un-involved in "civil matters" of families and defer all matters to local authorities for investigation and or prosecution entirely.
As a result of both the 2015 Inspector General and the 2016 GAO Reports, I feel I now have enough to conclude and state the following:
The United States Armed Forces does NOT have a ZERO tolerance policy when it comes to its service members nor its contracted Department of Defense Employees. I think it is fair to say that having a true zero tolerance policy is necessary for all persons affiliated with the military and those who are obligated to implement its regulations, practices, procedures, SOPs, MoUs, in addition to all legislative acts of congressional and executive policy. No Person Left Behind I think now has graduated to a new meaning altogether.
Civil Matters need to be handled by Civilian Enforcement. I am a firm believer that a veil of silence over civil crimes leaves too much power in the hands of base commanders and thereby also gives no guarantee for justice of victims off base when they return to the civilian world. I firmly attest that the military is NOT in compliance with the Lautenberg Amendment and hell no it is not anywhere close to being compliant with the Violence Against Women Act for ALL victims, both on and off base.
Comments
Post a Comment