quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Very enlightening. Thanks, gentlemen.
I thought I might have understood the concept, but always had doubts. Now I do not.

I will point out, though, that just as “ex” is being objected to now, other Marines (I assume) object to alternate words such as prior or former and therefore I will always wonder what is acceptable.

Please, please, please, don't ever leave us. Your insightful and thought-provoking prose is much appreciated.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:


I will point out, though, that just as “ex” is being objected to now, other Marines (I assume) object to alternate words such as prior or former and therefore I will always wonder what is acceptable.

The only acceptable use of ex-marine is reference to one who has been dishonorably discharged, and for such crime that the individual is undeserving of recognition as a marine.

Honorably discharged marines may be referred to as former marines, but one will generally draw ire with the reference to an ex-marine. Given the connotation tying it to dishonor, to call a marine an ex-marine is an offense.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
What the hell is an "ex-marine?"

Lee Harvey Oswald

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
No one with any awareness refers to a prior or former Marine as an ex Marine. It is disrespectful.

All right, now I’m curious.

As I recall (without looking) The Chicago Manual of Style states that “ex-” anything is a poor way of referring to someone’s status. Prior, former, previous, and other terms are preferred. News articles, however, very commonly resort to shortcuts to save space, even if that’s not as necessary with the Internet as it is with print pieces. I don’t use “ex-” myself very much, but why is it disrespectful? Would “ex-soldier” or “ex-police officer” or “ex-professional boxer” be disrespectful as well?

I will attempt to give my version of why Ex-Marine is disrespectful. Earning the title of United States Marine is considered life changing and the change/transformation is forever. The title US Marine can therefore never be taken away, once it granted. The term Ex disaffirms that. Even though a Marine's following actions may not always represent the Marine Corps' leadership traits and principles that are instructed throughout the Corps from day one until you EAS out, you still earned it and it is yours. This is why terms like "conduct yourself like a US Marine" are ingrained deep into every Marine in everything that you do. There is a higher expectation that goes with the title. Sometimes that doesn't happen obviously, but that is the expectation. This is why they list the guy with the AD as a Marine, inferring to the expectation of excellence in handling the weapon and it discharging must be a mechanical issue. I am not saying I agree necessarily, but that is the picture that is being painted.

The internal and external fortitude required to earn the Eagle, Globe and Anchor is a life accomplishment that is fiercely defended by those that have earned the title. The camaraderie and esprit de corps among Marines regardless of time of active service is real and it is unrivaled among any other military service as a whole. I prefer the term Marine Veteran. It speaks to the status earned and to the fact that you are no longer on active duty, my opinion of course. I had worked with other special ops units during my time. I completed US Army Ranger school, and other special schools with those operators and their camaraderie and esprit de corps is also very high and very much deserved, so in total fairness this topic should also be afforded to other units as well.

Others may have a different interpretation, but this is mine (served from 1986-1994 0311/0321).

I give Uncle Sams Misguided Children a fair bit of shit but......

One a Marine ALWAYS a Marine they might be formally active but they are always a Marine unless they had a dishonorable.

24 posts. Only 12 have to do with the what the O.P. posted.

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
24 posts. Only 12 have to do with the what the O.P. posted.

To be fair, this particular topic has been rehashed so many times on here that the thread drift is actually more interesting than the original topic. Also, thanks to ksss's explanation, I've learned something useful. I will henceforth endeavor to only use the term "Marine Veteran" when referring to an individual no longer in the military service.

Start a new thread.

I know Seals who called all Marines, dance partners

P320's with negligent discharges. Just went off on their own. Always a cop. Always a bullshit excuse, blaming happenstance. Dunno, it just went off. All by itself.

Not one of those sad sacks would accept that shit from a suspect. Dunno, officer. The gun just went off, killed the man fucking my wife. Not my fault. That knife just flew out of my hand and stabbed that clerk. It cut all by itself.

We have this conversation every other week. Same old, same old. Nothing new under the sun.

The next P320 negligent, striking self, causing lawsuit...will be a cop. Again. And the pistol will have discharged itself. Again.

Surprise, surprise.

quote:

Originally posted by Blackwater:
I know Seals who called all Marines, dance partners

Must have been when taking a break from writing their next tell-all book, or promoting the brand.

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
24 posts. Only 12 have to do with the what the O.P. posted.

Clearly you didn't read the link to which the original post referred, and upon which it was based. The opening line of the article referred to the self-shooter as an "ex-marine."

The discussion that followed is a direct outshoot of that, and relates to the verbatim language of the linked article, and thus is wholly relevant, whether you realize that, or not.

After the injured plaintiff has his deposition taken and it is learned what type of holster he was wearing, clothing that might have gotten tangled up in the event. Also ER records if a blood draw was taken that would show if alcohol is a factor.

Once holster and clothing determined put them on a plastic dummy and determine if the wound channel matches the story.

quote:

Originally posted by Lord Vaalic:
I am the only one in this room professional enough....

That is a classic.

So to be clear, Marines were the first to declare their own pronouns and attack people that use their non-preferred prepositions.

In the launch of the P320 years ago, in their compatible parts advertisement, they included a trigger with a dingus. How many lawsuits could have been avoided if they would have just used that already proven system? Instead they never released that part.

I don't want a P320 with a dingus. One of the reasons I like the P320 is that it doesn't have a dingus. Having a dingus isn't going to stop people from pointing the P320 at their body parts and pulling the trigger...people have done the same plenty of times with dingus-equipped Glocks (case in point, "I'm the only one in this room professional enough" guy).

Guns are dangerous. Every time I pick up a gun, I am aware that if I mishandle it, I could kill myself or someone else. No matter how you design a gun, eventually some irresponsible idiot is going to do something dumb, then try to blame it on somebody else (just like "I'm the only one in this room professional enough" guy who shot himself then sued his employer). And there's a whole profession of litigious scumbags, aka lawyers, who will try to capitalize on that person's irresponsibility. I don't want a gun designed by lawyers...I want a gun designed by competent engineers who know how to make a safe, accurate, and reliable weapon. This country needs tort reform, not more guns with dinguses.

^^^Well Put...A Dingus won't help if you're a Doofus!

Only YOU can prevent Negligent Discharges...

The filed complaint is available online and quite well written in the legal sense. It specifically alleges:

"12. When he placed his hand on the pistol grip to draw it out of his holster, the
weapon fired. Slatowski never touched the weapon’s trigger."

This is will be a good case to follow if you are interested on how the legal system works in the context of firearm product liability cases.

quote:

Originally posted by celticwolf:
So to be clear, Marines were the first to declare their own pronouns and attack people that use their non-preferred prepositions.

No, you're not clear. Most of those replying were not marines. They were just bright enough to know the difference.