The obligatory “puppy-tossing Marine expelled from Corps” post; Update: Administrative discharge?
posted at 1:51 pm on June 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
I guess the puppy was real after all.
The Marine Corps on Wednesday said it was expelling one Marine and disciplining another for their roles in a video showing a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff while on patrol in Iraq…
Lance Cpl. David Motari, assigned to the 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment at Kaneohe Bay, is “being processed for separation” from the Marine Corps, the Marine Corps said in a news release. He also received unspecified “non-judicial punishment.”…
“The actions seen in the Internet video are contrary to the high standards we expect of every Marine and will not be tolerated,” Marine Corps Base Hawaii said in a news release. “The vast majority of Marines conduct their duties with honor and compassion that makes American people proud.”
Here’s the official release noting that the specifics of his NJP can’t be divulged. Question for Marines, Marine spouses, and anyone else capable of answering: On what grounds, precisely, was Motari “expelled”? Article 15 of the UCMJ doesn’t list expulsion or discharge as one of the available punishments for enlisted men. The worst sentence you can get, it appears, is “correctional custody” for 30 days. Did they just lean on him to quit (note that the official release says nothing about expulsion just that he’s being “processed for separation”) or is there something I’m missing? Furthermore, what’s the offense here? “Being a douchebag”? I’m guessing it falls under Article 134, but you tell me.
Update: A reader in the know e-mails:
I’m a former Marine Company Commander and have done many of these.
By the news stories, everything regarding the NJP seems correct. A Marine can be processed for administrative discharge for a variety of reasons (misconduct, pattern of misconduct, fraudulent enlistment, “good of the service”, humanitarian, etc). Marines discharged administratively are eligible for Honorable or General Discharges. General Discharges are characterized as either “General, Under Honorable Conditions” or “General, under Other than Honorable Conditions”. Each are determined by the totality of his service and the type of admin discharge received. A “Hums Sep” would most likely be an “Honorable” discharge. A “Misconduct” or “Pattern of Misconduct” would most likely receive an “OTH”.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »
I don’t give a damn if the son-of-a-bitch was a Medal of Honor winner. There is a place in hell for any sadist who would “throw a puppy off a cliff.”
I’d say more, but any further profanity of mine would get me thrown off this site.
OhEssYouCowboys on June 12, 2008 at 1:56 PM
The “douchebag” clause would also apply under Article 133 if he was convicted of anything.
Valiant on June 12, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Not exactly correct. He can not be discharged without a court-martial the way I read it. I am guessing what happened here is that he agreed to a (perhaps honorable or non-dishonorable) discharge in order to avoid court-martial and a dishonorable discharge.
NotCoach on June 12, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Well, if indeed the puppy was real, then this major douchbag (major as in seriously huge, not his rank) deserves worse than just getting fired (or being asked to quit).
kutabeach on June 12, 2008 at 2:04 PM
That was so disturbing.
I kept hoping it wasn’t real.
He will get his, I am sure, from his neighbors. And good the for the Corps to dump him.
drjohn on June 12, 2008 at 2:04 PM
I think the Marines have a “conduct unbecoming a Marine” clause, reg, rule which they might have got him on – the last paragraph above seems to bare that out.
Strictly on UCMJ grounds, he could have been prosecuted under Disorderly Conduct perhaps? Though that normally doesn’t rate discharge.
Not knowing the specific charges is hard in this case. Additionally under the UCMJ the offense must satisfy certain elements of the crime, and there are usually lesser included offenses which could relate to the original offense.
In the military, the norm is to “stack ‘em like pancakes”, (the charges) and see what sticks during trial. But if this guy was Article 15′d, this didn’t go to trial, so…
catmman on June 12, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Administrative discharge is the usual method for cases like this…it’s totally separate from Article 15.
James on June 12, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Sounds about right.
malan89 on June 12, 2008 at 2:08 PM
I don’t think the question was ever…. if it was a REAL puppy or not. The question was, if the puppy was already dead or not. I’d like to know what the hearing found in that regard.
If the dog was already dead, then it was just a stupid thing to do, especially to make a video of it. But it should not have been cause for anything more than perhaps an article 15 fine (if the dog was dead).
If the dog was alive, then I think the military is justified in this action, just because it brings disgrace upon the Corps.
Maxx on June 12, 2008 at 2:09 PM
What a monumental ignoramus.
TheBlueSite on June 12, 2008 at 2:10 PM
I cannot say which specific article but any conduct that reflects badly on the Marine Corps will get you the boot. IIRC it would be “for the good of the Corps”. If you get called on the carpet too many times you can get booted under this directive. If you’re a douchebag whose conduct reflects badly on the Marine Corps you will get the boot.
My guess would be that the puppy tossing turd will most likely receive a bad conduct discharge as his act reflected badly on the Marine Corps.
jdkchem on June 12, 2008 at 2:10 PM
well, hopefully since muslim countries have little to no respect for dogs this doesnt hurt us too bad over there. Although for the rest of the world it makes the marines and specifically that douche look horrible. I cannot stand seeing this video, and to think I told my coworkers when this originally broke that the puppy had to be fake because there was no way someone would do that to a real puppy. now i feel like an idiot
SoCalInfidel on June 12, 2008 at 2:10 PM
If I were your co-worker, I’d be proud of you. It speaks volumes of your character. Don’t be so hard on yourself..
bernzright777 on June 12, 2008 at 2:15 PM
That would be the “don’t get caught” clause of the Secret Code of Military Toughness…
mojo on June 12, 2008 at 2:15 PM
A Marine can be discharged administratively if his/her douchebaggieness reflects badly on the Corps. What you’re referring to only applies to a dishonorable discharge.
jdkchem on June 12, 2008 at 2:15 PM
That could be the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me. Thank you :)
SoCalInfidel on June 12, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Man…screw that guy. Class A *&%!wad
Dr. Manhattan on June 12, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Unless punishment standards have changed, he was probably busted down to E-1 (private), could have been fined, confined to quarters or confined to base. At sea he could have been sentenced to 3 days in the brig on bread and water. CO’s at NJP aren’t allowed to do much more than that. He will also be ineligible for the Good Conduct Medal.
The “separation” is probably a general discharge under other than honorable conditions. It means he’s a jerk but not worth sending to court-martial for a Bad Conduct Discharge.
piraticalbob on June 12, 2008 at 2:20 PM
The new white meat.
Alden Pyle on June 12, 2008 at 2:21 PM
I know who is going to show up and defend the guy, and I repeat, justify the videotaping of a US soldier smiling as he kills an animal in a needlessly brutal and callous manner, and then posting it on the internet to glorify it.
MadisonConservative on June 12, 2008 at 2:22 PM
So he would be listed as having an administrative discharge and not an honorable discharge?
NotCoach on June 12, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Yeah right. His acts of heroism in the face of war horrors that many of his critics are too cowardly to face, is surely outweighed by single moment of weakness in his life.
How nice is it to live in a world where you can judge others through the eyes of someone who sleeps safely at night because Marines man that wall.
Had this been kept in house, he would have received a slap on the wrist. In other words, his biggest sin was getting caught and casting the USMC in a bad light.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:25 PM
As a Lance Cpl, would he already have earned the GCM? If so, would they actually strip him of it?
bernzright777 on June 12, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Sub-human piece of shlt, disgracing the uniform and the Corps.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Yeah I suppose if we judge Marines by who is cordial to puppies this guy fails. Trouble is, we train Marines to defend our lives and be threatening enough to defend our security against the enemy. Every Marine I have met is an example of the finest American; a hero walking. Now we dismiss one because of a puppy? Sorry… I see this as far less than what it was judged to be. A mark on his service record maybe. The loss of a Marine due to a puppy? No.
Far worse is the damage such stories have in our world opinion. This story was also hyped by Animal Advocates. We need to do a better job keeping discipline within the Corps; and keeping puppy stories like this far from the media. Judging between a Marine and a Puppy is easy when your life is provided by that Marine’s heroism.
IntheNet on June 12, 2008 at 2:28 PM
All of us should be showing up to defend a hero who had a single weak moment in his life.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Amen. That pathetic, low, piece of #@&$ should get thrown off a cliff. This loser did not help the PR of many, many brave men and women in the service. I can’t look at the screenshot, much less watch the video. I respect the Marines immensely, but there are bad, worthless people in every group. See Charles Whitman and Lee Harvey Oswald.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:28 PM
I don’t get it AllahP … NOWHERE do any of the articles linked say that it was a real live or dead creature. It refers to the object as “puppy”, but does not state anywhere that the “puppy” was real, or stuffed, or even already dead for that matter if it were real.
Perhaps it’s simply the shock factor where even the mere conotation of animal abuse of a “puppy” by an American Marine may be enough for a “don’t let the hatch hit you in the ass on your way out“, but I don’t see any indication from any source of information that it was a real live or dead “puppy”.
I’ll have to go with voluntary General Discharge (plea bargain if you will) absent further details regarding the processing of his “separation” from the Corp as well.
SilverStar830 on June 12, 2008 at 2:30 PM
I’m sure the people whose lives he saved feel the same way. Obviously his single action toward an animal is WAAAAAAAAAAY more important that how he treats his fellow humans.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:30 PM
I’m a disgusting human being here, but I keep remembering that “Raul’s Wild Kingdom” scene from UHF:
“Today, we’re teaching poodles how to fly.”
I know, I shouldn’t find it funny, but I can’t help it.
Pcoop on June 12, 2008 at 2:31 PM
As a Lance Cpl, would he already have earned the GCM? If so, would they actually strip him of it?
GCM is awarded at the end of each enlistment period. Since Motari was probably on his first enlistment, he would not be entitled to it until he reenlisted or was Honorably Discharged. Since he screwed up, he won’t get it.
piraticalbob on June 12, 2008 at 2:32 PM
I’m going to take crap for this but…
Hold on hold on. Yes, we all love our dogs and think this is horrible.
But it’s just a dog, mmkay? Should we really be ready to cause physical harm to a man over a dog? What is this, PETA?
Really, what if he’d … launched a rat over cliff? Would anyone care? But since we’ve decided that dogs are little people (guess what, they’re not) everyone’s all fired up in a race to showcase just who loves the cute animals the mostest!
Now, that said, this could be a sign of sociopathy (or at least stupidity). At the bare minimum some disciplinary action and a few psych evals are in order.
But let’s not make one of the guys who get shot at so that we can have our freedoms into the devil because he may have hurt an animal we consider “cute.”
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Surely you are either a troll or an idiot. Perhaps both.
I am grateful to those Marines and all military men and women who fight for our country. But don’t give blind respect to any stupid ficking loser who will someday be, either, a mass murderer or a serial killer.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:35 PM
I’m sure the people whose lives he saved feel the same way.
I was critiquing the single action, not everything else he did during his entire tour of duty.
douche.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 2:35 PM
I called bullshit on this originally, and said I’d apologize if proved wrong–guess it’s time to say I’m sorry.
Just makes me feel sick for all the honorable Marines that were sulllied because of this jerk.
For the rest of you Marines, I honor you and the mission you are tasked with.
irongrampa on June 12, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Expelled? I really wish people writing about the military had enough initiative to understand the subject before using terms like “expelled” for involuntary separation.
As to the question about what the charge would be, that really isn’t relevant. The military can pretty much send you home whenever they want. There is an appeals process but it wouldn’t result in anything different if the above story really happened. The characterization would be “general” rather than dishonorable.
highhopes on June 12, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Perhaps Murtha can get him a job. They seem to be Marines of the same caliber.
highhopes on June 12, 2008 at 2:37 PM
The puppy was real.
I said it was from the beginning.
The Marine got what he deserved.
End of Story!
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Now, that said, this could be a sign of sociopathy (or at least stupidity). At the bare minimum some disciplinary action and a few psych evals are in order.
But let’s not make one of the guys who get shot at so that we can have our freedoms into the devil because he may have hurt an animal we consider “cute.”
Exactly right. He received NJP instead of court-martial because he displayed stupidity instead of evil. He was discharged because his stupidity was such that it stained the reputation of the Marine Corps and showed his lack of judgement.
piraticalbob on June 12, 2008 at 2:38 PM
You.stupid.ass. So killing humans wont make a soldier or Marine a mass murderer, but killing a puppy will?
Dig your head outta yer ass.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:39 PM
I noticed that too. The punishment seems to light if it was a live puppy. But if it was fake, why wouldn’t they say so so as to mitigate any animosity directed at the Marine Corps?
SPCOlympics on June 12, 2008 at 2:40 PM
The most telling thing is that you pick a single event of extreme weakness and ignore his myriad of heroic actions. The first being to voluntarily go over there to get shot at by people in a culture who hold dogs in less esteem that cockroaches.
Douche? Look in the mirror.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:44 PM
What armaments was the puppy carrying and how great a threat was it to the Marine?
Stupid ass.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 2:44 PM
He got exactly what he deserved. His life will go on, he can find another job. Obviously, like I said before, he is a skidmark on the Corps and they thought so too.
Geronimo on June 12, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Do you know anything about psychology? Guess what, abusing animals is a common link amongst serial killers and mass murderers. Let me guess, you are one of those kids that put firecrackers up a cat’s butt and laughs?
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:45 PM
I used to teach at another University (now I’m just a researcher) and I once caught a military guy cheating. Coming from a culture that tolerates cheating in school I wasn’t really to eager to prosecute him but for the hell of it I asked Marines that I knew what they would do if they were in my shoes.
I was quite surprised (in a good way) to hear that they all want him fried. They would tell me: you’re a civilian, you don’t care. But we may end up with him on a battlefield. I think high moral standards is a very good thing. Good to see they keep maintaining them.
freevillage on June 12, 2008 at 2:46 PM
cdseven is a boogerhead.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:46 PM
I’m sorry, but I don’t think any individual Marine or the USMC as a whole is sullied by this. This was a moment of weakness by an otherwise heroic Marine. It isn’t like he is beyond redemption as many here are acting.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Was this thread about the heroics of the Marine or the slaughter of a puppy? I was addressing the topic of the thread douche, what are you doing?
Please cite for us the myriad of heroic actions of this particular Marine, will ya?
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 2:47 PM
BARBARIC!
MrC_5150 on June 12, 2008 at 2:47 PM
it has nothing to do with the animal… it has to do with the respect you must give your uniform and that you do not represent yourself, you represent the United States of America and every single citizen and soldier under the flag.
we as a whole expect much more of our soldiers.
Kaptain Amerika on June 12, 2008 at 2:47 PM
You can say that all you like but you’re still totally wrong. His actions, to the wisest of us, reflect on him, not the USMC or anyone else. And the fact of the matter is that had this not made it to You Tube, very little would have been done about it.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:48 PM
First, csdeven, I know you’re neither a troll nor an idiot :P So don’t confuse me for these others when I argue against your point. I do so knowing you have good reasons for feeling very strongly in defense of our fighting men and women.
However, I’d like to hear about the myriad of heroic actions. Medals, or commendations or something. Unless you’re trying to say that enlistment in the military makes him a hero per se – just like Scott Thomas Beauchamp. Personally, I don’t really buy that. Psychos can end up in the military. While the percentage of malcontents and miscreants is actually much lower in the military than in an average american population, it’s not zero. You don’t think this guy is getting what he deserves, if not for the puppy tossing than for helping liberals claim that all Marines are psychos?
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 2:49 PM
No matter what actions one does, a stupid moment in ones life can screw everything up.
It is over, the Marine got what he deserved. Drop it already.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 2:50 PM
*yawn*
I think your delivery sucks compared to the original.
freevillage on June 12, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Bwahahahahaha!!!
These liberal bleeding hearts who hold animal lives above those of humans sound exactly like that guy. Their moral outrage is so complete that they cannot speak a word about it in a rational fashion.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:51 PM
where is Bryan Preston? what happened to him?
Kaptain Amerika on June 12, 2008 at 2:51 PM
He was offered a general discharge and article 15 in lieu of a courts-martial and a dishonorable which would have included a felony record.
paulsur on June 12, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Wrong again. This just isn’t your day is it?
It does sully the USMC. You can deny it but it does. There are so many people in the world that already loathe the military and the “moment of weakness” as you call it does not help that. A moment of weakness? No sir, any one that throws a live animal off a cliff for laughs has zero character.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:52 PM
And the dog is dead. Ruining a heroes life over it wont bring it back. That makes two tragedies. Even more when you count the people, ya know, ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS, that may suffer and die because he isn’t manning the wall.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:53 PM
He left some time ago! Got a new job somewhere doin something. Don’t remember what :P
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 2:55 PM
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Exactly, he’s a double moron for videotaping it and posting it on youtube. Kinda like those moronic girls who beat the shite out of the girl and then posted it on youtube.
Geronimo on June 12, 2008 at 2:56 PM
You think the Marines teach that behavior? No they don’t. They teach them to shoot dogs whenever they get close.
And what kind of character does it take to sign up to get shot at for people who don’t really care about them? That don’t matter to people who sit all warm and cozy in their safe neighborhoods. How silly to expect you to understand that.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:57 PM
what’s the offense here?
Pal, if you need us to help you understand such an issue of fundamental decency you’re flat out of luck.
Tell us again why Malkin keeps you around? It certainly can’t be for the humanity or the judgement.
pabarge on June 12, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Did you just come online to post this crap?
Look, being in the military and having to walk by animals you aren’t suppose to be messing with anyways. He wasn’t given an order to throw a puppy.
1.The guy wasn’t listening to his orders.
2.He was fiddle farting around and decided to throw a puppy as a battle buddy was recording it.
3.if the guy wants to be a child and not go off orders, he shouldn’t be in any branch of the service. period!
I wonder if the friend who was taping it, got a reduction in rank?
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 2:58 PM
I think it is funny that all you fn dog lovers freak out over this. I love dogs and think it was an extra sh/tty thing to do but come on…. it was just a mangy ass mutt.
big whoop.
TheSitRep on June 12, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Glad you noticed that. I was hoping that would draw out the liberals who can’t stand the cost of their freedom but want to enjoy it just the same.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 2:59 PM
So I realize you’re not actually responding to my argument, but I guess you’re saying that by enlisting in the military, they are a hero, per se. Just like Scott Thomas Beauchamp, just like the soldiers that raped that Iraqi girl – there are no such things as unheroic soldiers.
I’m not certain that’s a path you really want to go down. There’s some pretty bad conclusions as the end of it.
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Yeah, to greener pastures where his idealogical righteousness could bloom to full flower.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Ideally yes. The actions taken against the marine were entirely justifiable based on the climate of public opinion. We don’t want to make it any harder for the Marines to recruit after all.
But, I contend that the reason his dismissal was necessary and the reason that this act even brought shame on the corp in the first place is based on a fundamental distortion in the way this country and this culture view dogs. They’re just animals, but we anthropomorphize this particular animal so often that we lose sight of that. The fact that we don’t object to other animals receiving similar treatment points up that this isn’t an outcry based firmly on principle, but
raw pathos. And pathos, my friend, is cheap.
The fact that many justify calling this man a monster, threatening his property and well being, and utterly impugning his character without any personal knowledge beyond the fact that he once mistreated an animal should be troubling.
It shows that a large cross section of the public are incapable of or unwilling to take a moment to bring their emotions to heel and consider what actually happened. All because the victim in this case was “cute.”
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 3:03 PM
You may be upset, but there’s no need to speak ill of people who aren’t here to defend themselves. That’s unwarranted.
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 3:03 PM
I still feel that way. This is hard to absorb.
How do you know that? Just because he’s a Marine, it doesn’t mean he’s heroic. More often than not, the two words are synonymous, but that isn’t always the case. For all we know this man is also a coward who can only attack puppies instead of our actual enemies.
The blind hero worship of our soldiers is not helpful. It’s preferable to the blind hatred of our soldiers from people who hate the war and Bush, but that’s not really saying much.
It’s not as though he didn’t know he was being filmed. This man abused a puppy for pleasure while ensuring that his demented act was saved on video.
I will agree with you though that the worst part of this is that he allowed it to be seen by civilians, thus allowing war protesters to paint our troops are blood-thirsty psychos who are tainted by war.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 3:03 PM
csdeven, I am sure you are a nice girl, however, look around and get a clue. You have numerous people disagreeing with you. That should give you “a clue”. Why don’t you go shopping for some new shoes or something.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 3:04 PM
It’s an animal. You do understand the difference right?
Beauchamp was a security issue that put HUMAN BEINGS lives at stake. The little girl was a HUMAN BEING. We are talking about an ANIMAL.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Ms. cdseven: why is it that you hate puppies?
Were you abused as a little girl?
Someone wise once said: “I don’t trust anyone who does not like animals.”
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Exactly, Lee Harvey Oswald and Charles Whitman were not exactly heroic.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I’m sure AP’s comment centers on what offense in the UCMJ was violated.
But then again AP is a cat lover, so maybe a tortured dog isn’t such a big deal? ;-)
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Again, will SOMEONE, ANYONE, show me where it has been determined for a fact that it was a REAL ANIMAL, alive or dead?
ANYONE?
No one.
That’s because it hasn’t been determined, or divulged, so some of you unduly indignant folks need to give your high horse a rest!
SilverStar830 on June 12, 2008 at 3:11 PM
You know it’s one thing to disagree with people even if you’re outnumbered. It can be admirable. It’s something else to keep repeating the same bs while ignoring counter-arguments.
As has been mentioned, this isn’t about animals. If that soldier was shooting at an enemy and 10 camels heard the noise and had a heart attack, nobody would give a crap. He tortures animals for fun. He’s a sick bastard. The Marines are expelling him not because they’re on a mission to protect dogs. They just don’t want sick bastards to be among their ranks.
freevillage on June 12, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Yeah, it was probably an animal rights misanthropic whack job who held human life in contempt.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:12 PM
You’re not understanding my argument. You are saying that this man is a hero with no proof, none at all. He could be a substandard Marine that’s a disgrace to the Corps, and the Corps could be 100% better off now that he’s gone. You have no idea who this guy is, you are defending him merely because he enlisted. Beauchamp wasn’t a security issue, please do not try to rewrite that history. One of the big things that he made up was something JUST LIKE THIS. Yes, that SOLDIERS KILLED DOGS using APCs. That was one of the 3 stories that caused the big trouble. He wasn’t giving away sensitive information, he wasn’t giving away state secrets, that’s NOT why he got in trouble. He was eventually confronted by the military and asked whether anything he said was true, and he said that it was not, and none of it happened. My point is that Beauchamp enlisted in the military to bolster his writing career. He ADMITTED that shit. What if this guy enlisted not because he was brave, not because he was a hero, but because he was a psychopath who enjoyed hurting people. Psychologically, the willingness to torture defenseless animal while being filmed is kind of a warning sign. Do YOU understand? That’s the question here cs, do YOU understand?
I am not saying that this guy is an evil monster because of the DOG. I’m saying YOU are assuming this guy is a hero simply because he enlisted, and that’s a BAD assumption. You cannot deny that torturing or killing a PUPPY is evidence to the contrary. You act as though you have this guy’s service record in hand, so lets hear it. The Marine Corps seemed to think this guy was not worth it, the Marine Corps isn’t defending this guy – so what about your judgement is better than that of the Corps itself? What do you know that they don’t?
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 3:14 PM
I really do not care what you say to liberals… but don’t attack the vets.
I do not want a jag off who is like that Marine near me.
Maybe you do…. to each their own!
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 3:14 PM
He impugned his own character by his own actions and didn’t need help from anyone posting here. For a guy who seems to think he knows everything about animals, and human treatment thereof, here’s something to ponder ……
Purposely tossing a puppy off a cliff to it’s death as some kind of sick joke is a far cry from a simple “mistreatment of an animal”.
I prefer my world, to yours.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 3:15 PM
I’ll take the loyalty of a dog, K-9, mans best friend over a human almost every time. There’s a reason they’re called mans best friend. They are selfless and just want to please you. This may sound stupid to some people but I imagine there are a whole lot of people out there who feel exactly the same way I do.
There’s a reason police and other armed forces consider dogs as officers.
Geronimo on June 12, 2008 at 3:16 PM
I think what csdeven is saying is: Think about all the puppies this guy didn’t throw off a cliff!
What, he didn’t know he was being filmed?
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Being a Marine in Vietnam, I was always told I was a manic killer anyway, sans any throwing of a puppy, but I digress. From my perspective, and mine only, I didn’t like what the Marine did. I don’t anthropomorphize any animal, but the rationale for the tossing of the dog is beyond my thought process. I even went so far as to put myself back in Nam and ask myself would I have done that. The surprising thing is I might have done something more to my enemy than a dog. To me, there’s the difference. A true Marine can turn that “switch” on and off. This Marine will get an admin discharge, no GCM and will carry on , sadder but wiser, but I’d have busted him to PFC first then given him the discharge.
MNDavenotPC on June 12, 2008 at 3:17 PM
On the contrary, this is about animals. It’s about one specific animal. If he’d done the same thing to a rat or a snake the outcry would be minimal at best.
And killing or disposing an animal isn’t exactly torture either. It may be cruel and brutal assuming that this was a real live dog, but even then it doesn’t rise to the level of torture. Systematically torturing a puppy would be ample cause to question his sanity, but that’s not what happened. Even assuming it was real, the marine may well have been disposing of a dead puppy for all we know. Tactless, tasteless, and stupid to film it, but hardly an indicator that he was a “sick bastard.”
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 3:19 PM
YEAH, because the MARINES will kick you OUT for playing around with a STUFFED animal.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Yeah I actually think it was a dead dog too. But when you do something that reflects so poorly on the Corps, you’re going to get in trouble for it – something he should’ve known, as a Marine.
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Well that is the very first RATIONAL argument posted. Thanks for that.
You express my feelings exactly when you say “More often than not, the two words are synonymous”. On the surface, all any of us have is this one single weakness to judge him. But as you so brilliantly point out, the odds are in his favor. Since he volunteered to serve and was doing his job, that gives his the presumption of being a hero who had a weak moment rather than a scum bag who happened to get past the screening process.
I resent people who pick the easy fruit arguments and ignore the whole picture. They will always be frustrated (and a pain in the ass to boot) by those concepts they cannot grasp.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Actually I am curious about the guy who was filming him and wonder if he was busted down in rank at all.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Some of the Jack Nicholson wannabe posters on this thread remind me of the jock-sniffers who worship athletes, because they, too, wear a uniform. The uniform doesn’t make the man – it’s the other way around. You are not a “hero,” simply because you put on a uniform, or are in the military. What makes you a “hero,” depends on what you do while in uniform.
Sniff away, jock-sniffers. This punk was nothing but a sadist. And, for all of you “it’s just a dog” imbeciles; you remind me of the pro-abortionists who say that “it’s just a fetus.” Sadism is sadism. Be it ripping a child out of a womb, or be it throwing a puppy off of a cliff.
The operative word is “sadist.”
OhEssYouCowboys on June 12, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Puppy off a cliff? We kill 10′s of thousands of unwanted pets in shelters each month.
A report in a local newspaper said that there has been an uptick in the number of dogs and cats being turned over to shelters because of our current economic difficulties (MSM, so who knows). People buy pets and then don’t want to be bothered.
One guy, One dog, I don’t know.
But if you buy a dog from a
puppy millpet store…you’re no better. At least this ex-marine did what he did in the open.Look, a lot of people in this country shouldn’t be allowed to have children, much less a dog. Whats the news here?
dingbat on June 12, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Dude, that was my exact argument, phrased differently. What’s up with that?
apollyonbob on June 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Hmmm. I notice that CSD still hasn’t explained how it’s just fine to make a video out of this and post it on the net for all to see, and how that course of action is not glorification of the incident.
MadisonConservative on June 12, 2008 at 3:25 PM
If, in your world, you make judgment calls about people without ample information or even an acknowledgment of the possibilities, you’re welcome to it.
1) It is uncertain that the puppy was alive or even real.
2) You have no deep personal knowledge of the man, his life, or his circumstances.
Of course, if you’d be comfortable with everyone assessing everything there is to know about your character based on a video of you at your worst possible moment, I suppose I’ll have to give you a pass on that second one.
I will grant you that this falls beyond mistreatment. If it was what you think it was, it was a killing. But it wasn’t torture either.
And again, if it was a rat or a snake, would you care?
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 3:25 PM
I believe the Marine admitted it.
But that is beside your point that these misanthropes need to get off their high horses.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Oh please, get off your moral high horse. I bet you never have said that about an abortion doctor.
Listen, I’ve killed many animals for the good of the animal. You generally can’t just bring those dogs back to the base and leaving him out there to starve or die slowly is less moral.
So what if he got creative in the killing of the dog and taped it. I once broke a birds neck to put it out of it misery, he did the same here.
My Lord, people are just sooooooo morally and emotionally mixed up in this country. It is a dog, not a baby.
I bet you a huge overwhelming majority who find this morally wrong support abortion.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »