Business Insider
A Colonel serving as the commanding officer of Security Battalion at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va. was relieved Friday after he allegedly fired his pistol accidentally inside of his office, Hope Hodge Seck of Marine Corps Times reports.
Citing “loss of confidence” stemming from the alleged shooting of his M9 pistol into his office floor, Maj. Gen. Juan Ayala relieved Col. Daren Margolin of command and he also faces military charges. The specific charge was not made public, but Article 134 is often used for “negligent discharges” — leading to possible penalties of jail time and/or loss of pay.
Negligent discharges are somewhat common in Iraq and Afghanistan — the military’s public affairs site mentioned 126 being reported in just 2007 alone — but back stateside, where troops are not armed all the time, it’s certainly out of the ordinary.
Margolin was in charge of Security Battalion, the unit made of fire and police personnel responsible for the protection of the base.
The Marine Corps knows how to respond to negligent handling of firearms. They make no attempt to downplay it or white wash it. Negligence is just what it is, and it's inexcusable.
Gun-rights fanatics could learn something from this.
What we learn is that you want to treat everyone in the manner that military personnel are treated, especially in the way that rights are restricted for such people. It would be so much easier if "inexplicable Obama hatred" could simply be banned, for example.
ReplyDelete"The specific charge was not made public, but Article 134 is often used for “negligent discharges” — leading to possible penalties of jail time and/or loss of pay."
ReplyDelete"The Marine Corps knows how to respond to negligent handling of firearms. They make no attempt to downplay it or white wash it. Negligence is just what it is, and it's inexcusable."
Actually Mike, there is a lot about the way the military handles these things you might not like. For example, the Colonel in this article isn't going to jail. He isn't in jail now. In reality, he has already been punished for the negligent discharge. His relief from command is pretty much a death sentence for his military career, and he will likely retire soon.
As for what the military does for negligent discharges, the normal outcome is that there is an investigation, normally charges for non-judicial punishment, a fine, often a letter of reprimand.
The service member continues to perform their regular duties. He is retrained extensively by his first line leader, but continues his duties under arms. The military doesn't downplay or whitewash it, but it also doesn't demonize it.
Did you get the impression that I want negligent discharge people put in jail?
Delete"Did you get the impression that I want negligent discharge people put in jail?"
DeleteI don't know Mike, you were a bit vague in your comments. Normally when this happens you immediately comment on how no one has been arrested and is not in jail during the investigation, though in honesty, you might reserve that for NDs that cause injury. I have seen the handling of an ND with a rocket launcher which did cause injuries, and no one went to jail there.
Also you normally also bring up your one strike and your out rule, and perhaps its this part which is more applicable to this article and your comments.
I thought you had a clearer idea of where I stand on this. I believe the most important part of the sanction should be the disarming part. Going to jail or not should be determined by a judge. I've often mentioned that negligent gun owners who lose kids as a result of their stupidity may not need to go to jail since they've already suffered a much worse punishment, but they've definitely got to lose the guns.
Delete