Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

False Valor/ Walter Mitty

Plumbline

One Too Many
Messages
1,271
Location
UK
think it's actually ILLEGAL to wear uniform, part of uniform, insignia and rank

In the USA http://www.lawinfo.com/illegal-wearing-of-uniforms.html unless you are :

- A U.S. military retiree who may wear the uniform of the service from which they retired and the insignia of the rank earned at the time of their retirement.
- A Person honorably discharged from military service who may wear their uniforms while traveling from the place they were discharged to their homes, and may do so within three months of the discharge.
- A Person who are not on active duty but who served honorably in time of war in any U.S. military branch may wear their uniforms bearing the highest rank held during the war.
- An Actor making a war movie may wear the uniform of the service branch they portray.
- An Officer and resident of veterans’ homes that are administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs who may wear their uniforms as prescribed by the secretary of the military branch in which they served, such as the Secretary of the Army.
- A Civilian attending a course of military instruction who may wear the uniform of the service branch administering the course.
- A citizen of a foreign country who graduated from a U.S. Air Force school who may wear the appropriate aviation badges of the Air Force.

The FEDERAL offence carries a maximum penalty of 6 months improsonment .... not sure if anyone has actually bee prosecuted but that's the federal law which ( incidentally) applies to uniform being worn as fashion items e.g. dog tags.

Equally in the UK The Uniform Act 1894 (as amended) is a good place to start if you're worried about the legal position.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content...filesize=10528

There isn't much to it, so here it is in full:

1 This Act may be cited for all purposes as the Uniforms Act 1894.

2(1) It shall not be lawful for any person not serving in Her Majesty’s Military Forces to wear without Her Majesty’s permission the uniform of any of those forces, or any dress having the appearance or bearing any of the regimental or other distinctive marks of any such uniform: Provided that this enactment shall not prevent any persons from wearing any uniform or dress in the course of a stage play performed in a place duly licensed or authorised for the public performance of stage plays, or in the course of a music hall or circus performance, or in the course of any bona fide military representation.

2(2) If any person contravenes this section he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

3 If any person not serving in Her Majesty’s Naval or Military Forces wears without Her Majesty’s permission the uniform of any of those forces, or any dress having the appearance or bearing any of the regimental or other distinctive marks of any such uniform, in such a manner or under such circumstances as to be likely to bring contempt upon that uniform, or employs any other person so to wear that uniform or dress, he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month.

4. In this Act—

“Her Majesty’s Military Forces”has the same meaning as in the Army Act 1955;
“Her Majesty’s Naval Forces”has the same meaning as in the Naval Discipline Act 195

I guess for me it comes down to HOW it's being worn.

If you're wearing an A-2 ( patched or not) with jeans and a T shirt in a casual context then I have a view that anything goes. It's not being passed off as military uniform and you are clearly not pretending to be a WW2 vetran of a specific squadron or rank ..... it's just a leather jacket !!!! I don't think you have to have been a member of the USAF to wear a USAF jacket, or former USN to wear a USN jacket ..... especially as many of these "repro" jackets are long discontinued / retired as military uniform.

Wearing of insignia, qualifiers and rank identifiers ( either in positive or negative context) has been a practice in civillian street for decades e.g. the single bar, double bar or one star eppaulette adornment for early bike jackets. As someone who's military experience never got beyond the ACF ( Army Cadet Force) then the OTC ( Officer Training Corps). I don't get upset about people wearing a Glengarry e.g. Pipe Bands or Regimental Tartan e.g. Black Watch or even rank insignia on leathers or surplus items ( My Denison had Ruridh Rutherfords crowns on the eppaulettes when he gave me it and his name on the inside label). It's not being worn as military uniform and the wearer doesn't expect to be addressed in relation to or expect the courtesy of the insignia or rank. ( TBH most people in the UK have no idea what pips and crowns mean ... as such they have almost no awareness of the meaning of bars and stars). If someone wants to take issue then I guess I'd be respectfully apologetic for any offence caused and take it from there.

Ribbons and medals are a different thing though .... wearing those that haven't been earned is just wrong :D
 
Last edited:

Big J

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,961
Location
Japan
Plumbline, I kind of agree with your opinions there.
But there does seem to be a wide range of opinions on the subject.
So, I was thinking, maybe if I frame the question a different way, we can get a different kind of insight. For example;

Some people like vintage workwear, but no one worries about being mistaken for a logger, miner, construction worker.
Some people like cowboy hats, but no one seems to worry about being mistaken for a cowboy.

Flight jackets aren't seen the same way I think. Why do people think that is?
 

Fanch

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,490
Location
Texas
I read a very interesting book a few years ago entitled "Stolen Valor" by B Burkett that detailed how a number of people claimed combat awards they never received, most of whom were never in combat at all. That has occurred throughout the history of warfare, although Burkett described the way this was done primarily during the Vietnam conflict.
 
Last edited:

thor

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
NYC, NY
Plumbline, I kind of agree with your opinions there.
But there does seem to be a wide range of opinions on the subject.
So, I was thinking, maybe if I frame the question a different way, we can get a different kind of insight. For example;

Some people like vintage workwear, but no one worries about being mistaken for a logger, miner, construction worker.
Some people like cowboy hats, but no one seems to worry about being mistaken for a cowboy.

Flight jackets aren't seen the same way I think. Why do people think that is?
Here in the U.S. it's actually a criminal offense to claim military awards and decorations not earned or to falsely state that you were a veteran of the Armed Services. There are certain privileges and benefits for being a legitimate veteran and maybe it all ties in with that. Vets have dearly earned their status and their benefits within our society. Perhaps seeing a patched-up flight jacket being worn by a non-vet/non-aviator evokes the same sort of ethical dilemma. Is the jacket a tribute to real veterans and their squadron/service history? Is it being paraded about by some "wannabe"? Or, more nefariously, is it worn to garner praise and admiration unjustly (like the unsettling penchant for some men nowadays to wear Navy SEAL paraphernalia in hopes of some false recognition)?
 

Big J

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,961
Location
Japan
Here in the U.S. it's actually a criminal offense to claim military awards and decorations not earned or to falsely state that you were a veteran of the Armed Services. There are certain privileges and benefits for being a legitimate veteran and maybe it all ties in with that. Vets have dearly earned their status and their benefits within our society. Perhaps seeing a patched-up flight jacket being worn by a non-vet/non-aviator evokes the same sort of ethical dilemma. Is the jacket a tribute to real veterans and their squadron/service history? Is it being paraded about by some "wannabe"? Or, more nefariously, is it worn to garner praise and admiration unjustly (like the unsettling penchant for some men nowadays to wear Navy SEAL paraphernalia in hopes of some false recognition)?

That's exactly it Thor! That's exactly the thing that I'm suddenly worrying about.
 

Trotsky

A-List Customer
Messages
421
Here in the U.S. it's actually a criminal offense to claim military awards and decorations not earned or to falsely state that you were a veteran of the Armed Services. There are certain privileges and benefits for being a legitimate veteran and maybe it all ties in with that. Vets have dearly earned their status and their benefits within our society. Perhaps seeing a patched-up flight jacket being worn by a non-vet/non-aviator evokes the same sort of ethical dilemma. Is the jacket a tribute to real veterans and their squadron/service history? Is it being paraded about by some "wannabe"? Or, more nefariously, is it worn to garner praise and admiration unjustly (like the unsettling penchant for some men nowadays to wear Navy SEAL paraphernalia in hopes of some false recognition)?

Actually, it's not. The Stolen Valor law was struck down by the Surpreme Court in 2011 or so and a adjusted 2012 law never made it out of the House.

There's a HUGE, ENORMOUS difference between some idiot claiming to be from SEAL Team 90 who personally killed Bin Laden and a guy wearing a sweet flight jacket with nametag, squadron patch and rank from WWII.
 

AdeeC

Practically Family
Messages
646
Location
Australia
I don't feel comfortable wearing jacket with squadron/group patches, name tags or any military insignia. Makes me feel like I am trying to live in reflected glory or attention seeking. My repro jackets are all bare. I do have an original patched A2 but the patch is of the nose art of a B17 bomber with no military insignia which I think is OK for me to wear occasionally. This is a personal thing and don't mind seeing patched jackets on others unless they are those ridiculous over patched jackets that were around in the top gun film days. I don't like wearing clothing with sporting logos either even if I follow the sport. I rather not pass judgement based on what people wear unless over the top.
 
Last edited:

thor

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
NYC, NY
Actually, it's not. The Stolen Valor law was struck down by the Surpreme Court in 2011 or so and a adjusted 2012 law never made it out of the House.

There's a HUGE, ENORMOUS difference between some idiot claiming to be from SEAL Team 90 who personally killed Bin Laden and a guy wearing a sweet flight jacket with nametag, squadron patch and rank from WWII.
The new Stolen Valor Act (Pub.L.113-12, H.R. 258) was signed into law by President Barack Obama on June 3, 2013. It's an amended law to the previous one that had been struck-down.
Plus it's a provision within the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that covers all of us in the military.

All of us here on TFL would know an A-2 jacket with a historic squadron patch worn by a 30-something is just meant as a tribute jacket. It's not always so obvious, such as the case of some 20-40 year old male "wannabe" wearing SEAL insignia. How about a 40-50 year-old wearing a Vietnam era MA-1 with pilot wings, name tag and prominent fighter squadron patch? Personally I think it would be cool to honor Vietnam squadrons with patched MA-1 jackets.
Sometimes it becomes more hazy though when a person might actually be mistaken for a war vet just by wearing a certain piece of military gear. Not everyone we might bump into are as knowledgeable (or understanding) when it comes to the wearing of military uniforms and insignia.
 
Last edited:

Big J

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,961
Location
Japan
The new Stolen Valor Act (Pub.L.113-12, H.R. 258) was signed into law by President Barack Obama on June 3, 2013. It's an amended law to the previous one that had been struck-down.
Plus it's a provision within the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that covers all of us in the military.

All of us here on TFL would know an A-2 jacket with a historic squadron patch worn by a 30-something is just meant as a tribute jacket. It's not always so obvious, such as the case of some 20-40 year old male "wannabe" wearing SEAL insignia. How about a 40-50 year-old wearing a Vietnam era MA-1 with pilot wings, name tag and prominent fighter squadron patch? Personally I think it would be cool to honor Vietnam squadrons with patched MA-1 jackets.
Sometimes it becomes more hazy though when a person might actually be mistaken for a war vet just by wearing a certain piece of military gear. Not everyone we might bump into are as knowledgeable (or understanding) when it comes to the wearing of military uniforms and insignia.

I think my point of view is pretty much the same as Thor's here. I'm glad that I'm not the only person who sees it this way, but I'm also glad to read all the other comments, because I'd never want to offend someone when I thought I was just showing respect.
Maybe the main thing is that if you aren't genuinely attempting to pass yourself off as a vet when you aren't, and that you actually know enough enough about the units who's patches you're wearing to hold a conversation about it, then maybe most people would understand your respect, I think.

I just wanted to add, the History Channel here in Japan is having a season about the Vietnam War. A lot of it is very negative, and I guess that you could make a case that that is a valid point of view. But I think that without glorifying or whitewashing the negatives (which surely affected veterans, many of whom were drafted), there is still a case that the war and the veterans deserve remembering, because we should remember our history, look it straight in the face, and learn what we can from it. If we just pretend that it never happened, well, then we're not just being disrespectful to the veterans, but we're also being disrespectful to the Vietnamese who suffered too. I think that we have to be mature enough to get away from trying to see it in terms of 'black and white', 'good or bad', 'right and wrong', but try to understand that it was a whole lot of 'shades of gray' made up of regular people.

(Having said that, I'm a patriot, so I'm not going to dis-respect veterans of Vietnam by second guessing the politics of it all with the benefit of hindsight).
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
107,351
Messages
3,034,990
Members
52,782
Latest member
aronhoustongy
Top