That argument can be made for every case of fraud. So, we should consider all fraud to be the exercise of Freedom of Speech and that it can only be handled in civil court? No, fraud is, in addition to being an act for which the victim can seek restitution from the perpetrator, a crime against society. It should be punished in a criminal court.
I don't know. This is a tough one from a constitutional standpoint.
Don't get me wrong. I have to severely repress some hostile feelings every time I hear about some jackhole throwing on a uniform and claiming heroism. As a matter of fact, I don't think most people can understand how this feels like a punch in the gut to those of us who have served. It is truly an insult of the highest degree.
Well, at least it is to me...
What you say has merit though Eye, in that it is absolutely correct that the claiming of awards or medals can contribute to claims for VA compensation. It is also true that there are benefits for employers who submit for claim that they have hired someone with a veterans preference.
I believe personally that there are a lot of resources available to veterans that should be, and typically are, very well monitored. This is not to say that fraudulent claims are not made successfully, but rather that its very hard to prove to the VA or other available services that you are a veteran wihout specific documents for proof.
Then though, there is a flipside to all of this that has to be considered:
"On July 12, 1973, a disastrous fire at National Personnel Records Center, Military Personnel Records (NPRC-MPR) in St. Louis destroyed approximately 16-18 million Official Military Personnel Files."
The National Archives
Some of these guys, may not be lying...(Well,..Korean War and back guys)
I guess when it all comes down to it we do have a right to lie if we want.
However:
--If somebody wants to dress up as a veteran, with the express intent to imitate or fraudulently display themselves as such (Not a reenactment) I say nail em.
--If somebody attempts to fraudulently claim medical or other veteran related service through false presentation of veteran status, I say nail em.
Hell, the military community, and our veteran communities, are pretty tight knit. I have run into several guys who all claimed to serve, and within about 10 seconds of talking to them (or less) I could easily tell they were lying. I am fairly confident most vets possess this skill.
SO, here is the short and skinny of it from my perspective.
No claiming of benefits, to include any and all medical, retirement, veteran services, or employment benefits.
No dressing in official military uniform for the express purposes of presenting ones self as in the service or prior service.
(Actual law:
Sec. 772. When wearing by persons not on active duty authorized
-STATUTE-
(a) A member of the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard
may wear the uniform prescribed for the Army National Guard or the
Air National Guard, as the case may be.
(b) A member of the Naval Militia may wear the uniform prescribed
for the Naval Militia.
(c) A retired officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine
Corps may bear the title and wear the uniform of his retired grade.
(d) A person who is discharged honorably or under honorable
conditions from the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may wear
his uniform while going from the place of discharge to his home,
within three months after his discharge.
(e) A person not on active duty who served honorably in time of
war in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may bear the
title, and, when authorized by regulations prescribed by the
President, wear the uniform, of the highest grade held by him
during that war.
(f) While portraying a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or
Marine Corps, an actor in a theatrical or motion-picture production
may wear the uniform of that armed force if the portrayal does not
tend to discredit that armed force.
(g) An officer or resident of a veterans' home administered by
the Department of Veterans Affairs may wear such uniform as the
Secretary of the military department concerned may prescribe.
(h) While attending a course of military instruction conducted by
the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps, a civilian may wear the
uniform prescribed by that armed force if the wear of such uniform
is specifically authorized under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of the military department concerned.
(i) Under such regulations as the Secretary of the Air Force may
prescribe, a citizen of a foreign country who graduates from an Air
Force school may wear the appropriate aviation badges of the Air
Force.
(j) A person in any of the following categories may wear the
uniform prescribed for that category:
(1) Members of the Boy Scouts of America.
(2) Members of any other organization designated by the
Secretary of a military department.)
Other than that, if they want to feel extremely stupid when called out....whatever I guess.
Funny thing about military guys and gals. We all seem to know each other.
Don't bother acting like you were in. I promise you we already know what you are.
Sorry...but it's been upheld by the SCOTUS that lying about factual things is NOT free speech protected by the 1st Amendment...and therein lies the rub!
Can you cite please?
If this were true, or usable as a basis for prosecution or incrimination, then I believe every open carrier on this forum could go to town on the anti-firearms folk.
Just sayin...
