Posted on 07/17/2013 7:04:39 PM PDT by neverdem
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) has made a hallmark issue out of the problem of sexual assault and related misconduct in the U.S. military, and her bill to change the way that crimes are prosecuted throughout the armed forces has drawn support from key Republicans, first Senator Chuck Grassley and now Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. Senator Gillibrand and her associates are doing a service by drawing attention to these detestable crimes, but the solution they have put forth is the wrong one.
The legislation in question involves a good deal more than sexual assault. Senator Gillibrand’s bill(PDF), the Military Justice Improvement Act, would identify 37 specifically military crimes, such as disobeying orders or absence without leave, that would remain under the jurisdiction of the offending soldier’s chain of command. Other serious crimes — those punishable by a year’s incarceration or more — would be referred to a new, independent system of military prosecutors. It would, in short, replicate the civilian criminal-justice system. The direct involvement of commanders is part of what makes a court-martial a court-martial, and it is a fundamental part of the U.S. military’s command structure. Upending that structure is a serious thing to contemplate, and it is not at all clear that crime in the U.S. military, lamentable though it is, justifies doing so.
A more reliable indicator, the number of soldiers who in fact report sexual assaults, has risen, albeit less dramatically, up 13 percent since 2010. In 2012, there were 880 sex-crime suspects in the U.S. military, which has 1.4 million active-duty personnel. Of those 880 cases, 509 were dismissed because of insufficient evidence, and 81 were dismissed because commanders had determined the charges were false. Of the 594 suspects who faced a court-martial, only 302 went to trial, the other cases either ending in discharge, resignation, or dismissal or still pending resolution. Of the 302 tried, 238 were convicted, and 64 were acquitted. That is a conviction rate that compares favorably with the results achieved by civilian prosecutors in felony cases.
In any case, those 238 convictions are a far cry from the 26,000 episodes of criminal sexual misconduct that, relying on those questionable survey findings, critics of the military attribute to it, the latter a number that probably has no meaningful basis in reality and yet rounds out articles in The New Republic and elsewhere. Those same critics charge that this gaping disparity is itself evidence of a sick military culture that discourages soldiers from seeking justice. If we are to believe that there are in fact tens of thousands of sexual assaults happening in the military every year, and a commanders’ conspiracy so vast that fewer than a thousand suspects are named each year, and barely 300 make it to trial, we are going to want better evidence for that implausible proposition than has been presented. It is possible that commanders are throwing out sexual-assault cases at too high a rate; Senator Carl Levin has proposed additional reviews of such decisions by the Judge Advocate General corps, along with additional measures to protect complainants, and those measures deserve support.
The 2013 National Defense Authorization Act already institutes important reforms that are more narrowly targeted toward the specific issue of sexual assault in the military. They include the prohibition of recruitment waivers for those with sexual-assault convictions and the mandatory discharge of personnel convicted of sexual assault. It also creates a system for gathering data about sexual assault in the military, and the military’s response to it, which may or may not justify taking additional steps. Another possibility is training prosecutors with a special competence in sexual assaults, to whom commanders can turn when needed. Rather than upending the command structure — over the objections of the military’s leadership — we should give those reforms time to produce results, and give reformers a chance to gather data sufficient for constructing a more reliable picture of what is and is not happening in the U.S. military.
That Senator Gillibrand would have so little regard for the leadership structure of the military is unhappily no surprise, but we do expect a more sober assessment from Senators Cruz and Paul.
The higher the percentage of females in the military, the greater number of sexual encounters, both consensual and non-consensual. No educational course designed to prevent will ever have an effect. It is called biology - hormones.
To reduce the frequency, reduce the number of females working in close proximity with males. The solution is quite simple. It doesn't cost anything and no bureaucracy is needed to administer. Reduce the number of females in the military.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) has made a hallmark issue out of the problem of sexual assault and related misconduct in the U.S. military, and her bill to change the way that crimes are prosecuted throughout the armed forces has drawn support from key Republicans, first Senator Chuck Grassley and now Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz... the Military Justice Improvement Act, would identify 37 specifically military crimes, such as disobeying orders or absence without leave, that would remain under the jurisdiction of the offending soldier’s chain of command. Other serious crimes -- those punishable by a year’s incarceration or more -- would be referred to a new, independent system of military prosecutors. It would, in short, replicate the civilian criminal-justice system.
Ted Cruz’s first serious tactical error.
Why do they all need to show that they can “work with” the commies? Gillibrand would gladly politically castrate Cruz in a nanosecond.
Cruz know jack sh#t about the military. He needs to back off on this issue, if he knows what’s good for him politically (as well as for the military itself). (Rand is a bit of an eccentric, so I don’t expect him to back off. He probably figures he needs to protect the wimmin in the military and the illegals at the same time, no doubt.)
Full disclosure: I had a cruz sign in my yard and I voted for him.
The “problem” of sexual assault in the military is largely trumped up, not that there is no problem (gasoline stored next to the pilot light problem), but it is clearly a “planned crisis” at this time for reasons known only to the Left. Why does Cruz need to dance to the Left’s tune here?
By the way, as I understand it, the biggest upsurge of attacks — in the wake of the removal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell — is of males on males. But that is not being mentioned by either the military brass or the manipulators like Gillibrand.
D#MN you! Don’t you go getting simple and logical and common sense on our military brass now! They won’t stand for it for a minute — and have not for some 30 years.!
When Liberals turn the United States Military into a Social Experiment, Poo-Poo happens.
When Conservatives react to the problems caused by the Liberal’s Policy instead of attacking the Policy itself, you have “consensus”. Consensus isn’t a cohesive Policy. it is a cluster***k of epic proportions.
The Times Falsely Claims That Obamacare Cuts N.Y. Health Premiums By 50 Percent
Jury Finds Roderick Scott Not Guilty (Scott was a black man who killed a white teenager.)
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
Then they delivered an obviously bogus message to excuse their horrible murder of entire families of geese, that the meat was to be used to feed homeless people upstate. Like you would eat meat from geese exposed to jet fuel residues and pesticides! That was just lib-talk trying to make a rational excuse for killing these beautiful birds and devoted parents. There are several other more humane ways to control geese populations, which other cities are exploring, but not Bloombutt and his evil twin Gillibrand. THEY know better, right? A pox on them both!
This article is based on some outdated & now false information about the bill. If you watched the Rand/Gillibrand press conference, they talked about how Rand Paul had AWOL and other crimes removed from this new special prosecutor system proposed in the bill. The language has been tightened up and focused on stuff like rape & murder.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.