The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Military Impostors Are Neither Few Nor Proud

TickTockMan

"Repent, Harlequin!"
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Posts
15,160
Reaction score
819
Points
113
Location
Salem
by Richard C. Paddock

(Dec. 14) -- Steven Douglas Burton wore the Marine Corps uniform proudly. He had rows of medals, including a prestigious Navy Cross, a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star.

He posted a photo of himself in uniform and blogged about serving one tour of duty in Afghanistan and four in Iraq. He was at the Battle of Fallujah, he said, and praised the doctors who "patched us up."

But Burton wasn't a hero. He was a fraud who purchased medals online.

A scam that began two years ago when Burton wore a Marine Corps uniform as a Halloween party costume ended Monday with a guilty plea in federal court in Riverside, Calif.


http://www.sphere.com/nation/articl...-impostors-are-neither-few-nor-proud/19280604



I am curious what you guys think about this. Should this be illegal? One can dress as the president and it’s fine. Why should dressing and posing as a decorated
ex/member of the service be held to a higher standard? Is it because one is not living as such?

Since it is illegal wouldn’t it make more sense to go after the ones who sell the medals more so than the ones who buy them? It seems to become their drug since they don‘t seem to stop when they know people are watching them because of it.

Anyways if you have any thoughts on this I’d like to read them.
 
Its one thing to make fun of politicians who usually make speeches on how war is sometimes necessary but to actually impersonate somebody who is off FIGHTING the war, risking their lives, physical health and many cases their mental well-being in defense of our country just seems shameful and cowardly and should be outlawed. A president sends people over seas, soldiers do the dirty work
 
http://www.sphere.com/nation/articl...-impostors-are-neither-few-nor-proud/19280604



I am curious what you guys think about this. Should this be illegal? One can dress as the president and it’s fine. Why should dressing and posing as a decorated
ex/member of the service be held to a higher standard? Is it because one is not living as such?

Since it is illegal wouldn’t it make more sense to go after the ones who sell the medals more so than the ones who buy them? It seems to become their drug since they don‘t seem to stop when they know people are watching them because of it.

Anyways if you have any thoughts on this I’d like to read them.

Apparently if he pleaded guilty it already is illegal so I miss the point of the question.
 
Then you're not that bright. It’s called an opinion. People have them. I want to hear/read them.

Wow! I am not that bright será but you are not that bright when, in response to a fair question you decide that the person who asks it must not be bright. Did you never have the teacher who said "NO question is a stupid question"? I simply stated that I did not understand the questions asked in the OP. Does that make me, despite all of my degrees, :not bright:.
 
Wow! I am not that bright será but you are not that bright when, in response to a fair question you decide that the person who asks it must not be bright. Did you never have the teacher who said "NO question is a stupid question"? I simply stated that I did not understand the questions asked in the OP. Does that make me, despite all of my degrees, :not bright:.

Yes for no other reason than you say you have degrees, but you still don’t/can’t comprehend what an opinion is. My first sentence was:

I am curious what you guys think about this

Clearly asking for opinions.

You should go back to school and get a few more degrees. Also you didn't ask a question, you made a statement. That’s why I originally took issue with what you wrote.
 
What a Tool.
ba-medals_Burton_0500834062.jpg
 
This guy is a complete tool and he deserves whatever he gets. If you've never been a soldier, I don't think you can understand how repulsive and deceitful this is. Those medals he is wearing are given for going beyond the call of duty and in some cases are largely posthumous awards. For this D-bag to wear them when he probably hasn't ever even been in cub scouts is disgusting. I wish the penalties were exponentially more harsh than they are.

As far as going after the people who sell the medals, that is a moot point. Everything on that uniform can be bought at any military PX anywhere in the world. A lot of soldiers buy/replace the ribbons they were rightfully awarded. In some cases, units run out of ribbons and soldiers are forced to buy their ribbons. Having them available for sale is necessary and beneficial thing, having pieces of garbage buy things they never earned is the problem.
 
So he legally bought them but it's illegal to wear them? That's pretty stupid.

I understand they represent something he did not earn... but they are just bits and bobs after all. You own it, you should be able to do what you want with it. Collect it, wear it, burn it, etc.
 
So he legally bought them but it's illegal to wear them? That's pretty stupid.

I understand they represent something he did not earn... but they are just bits and bobs after all. You own it, you should be able to do what you want with it. Collect it, wear it, burn it, etc.

Like I said before, if you've never been a soldier, you won't understand just how low this is. The only thing I can liken this to is if you had a friend die in a car accident. Their family is awarded a settlement from the accident. Then some guy off the street pretends to be part of the family for a piece of the money. It's not a perfect analogy, but it's as close as I can think of.
 
I think America has more important things to worry about.

What if you made your own medals though? They can't stop you wearing medals you created, can they?
 
If you've never been a soldier, I don't think you can understand how repulsive and deceitful this is.

Why is it ex/soldiers always say things like this?

Why is it if non ex/soldiers agree it helps the argument, but if you don’t then “you just don’t understand”?

I hear it a lot from you guys on pretty much any subject that is being talked about. What happens if two ex/soldiers disagree? Does it come down to rank or do they both just not understand?

Oddly American ex/soldiers are not the only ones that do this. Its seems a favorite for most veterans from any country.
 
Why is it ex/soldiers always say things like this?

Why is it if non ex/soldiers agree it helps the argument, but if you don’t then “you just don’t understand”?

I hear it a lot from you guys on pretty much any subject that is being talked about. What happens if two ex/soldiers disagree? Does it come down to rank or do they both just not understand?

Oddly American ex/soldiers are not the only ones that do this. Its seems a favorite for most veterans from any country.

And I am the one who is not bright? You really do not get this? Really?
 
I am curious what you guys think about this. Should this be illegal? One can dress as the president and it’s fine. Why should dressing and posing as a decorated ex/member of the service be held to a higher standard? Is it because one is not living as such?

The purpose of a "uniform" is to establish that a person has achieved a certain rank within an organization, and then the insignia on the uniform denotes accomplishments within that framework. Starting with boy scout merit badges to the Order of the Garter worn by members of the British Royal Family, and everything in between - these insignia are earned in some (usually traditional) fashion.

I agree that impersonating a decorated soldier is, IMHO, a rather despicable form of lying and should be treated accordingly. Likewise, the impersonation of a police officer (exception being male strippers, of course ;)) is a dangerous and unacceptable.

That said, what needs to be addressed is not the costuming itself, but the purpose for which the costuming is being presented. I suspect that I could dress up as the Lord High Admiral (ok, I already have) complete with plumed hat and enough swag to choke a metal detector for halloween and no one would say a word, because my intent is not nefarious. However, don the same getup and waltz into the British Admiralty Office with the intent of launching a fleet or some such...and there might be trouble.

OK (here comes the point) So if someone is dressed as a decorated war hero to defraud someone, solicit donations, etc., it should be treated as a crime. If they are dressed as a decorated war hero (or the pope for that matter) because they are a bit wacky, it should be treated as a mental health issue - and dealt with accordingly.

Mixing the crazies with the scammers has created too large a prison population already!
 
And I am the one who is not bright? You really do not get this? Really?

You’re not bright because you have degrees, but don’t know what an opinion is.


This is completely different, but obviously you don’t get that either. I know what their argument is and it comes down to non ex/soldiers can’t understand and comprehend “freedom” and other things without having served. That would be fine, but not all vets believe the same things. Also there are a lot harder things to comprehend and non ex/soldiers historically seem to do fine understanding them

They use it as nothing more than a convenient debate stopper to “win” their argument. There is no real substance to the sentence, just a way to make themselves seem to be more than they may be.
 
The purpose of a "uniform" is to establish that a person has achieved a certain rank within an organization, and then the insignia on the uniform denotes accomplishments within that framework. Starting with boy scout merit badges to the Order of the Garter worn by members of the British Royal Family, and everything in between - these insignia are earned in some (usually traditional) fashion.

I agree that impersonating a decorated soldier is, IMHO, a rather despicable form of lying and should be treated accordingly. Likewise, the impersonation of a police officer (exception being male strippers, of course ;)) is a dangerous and unacceptable.

That said, what needs to be addressed is not the costuming itself, but the purpose for which the costuming is being presented. I suspect that I could dress up as the Lord High Admiral (ok, I already have) complete with plumed hat and enough swag to choke a metal detector for halloween and no one would say a word, because my intent is not nefarious. However, don the same getup and waltz into the British Admiralty Office with the intent of launching a fleet or some such...and there might be trouble.

OK (here comes the point) So if someone is dressed as a decorated war hero to defraud someone, solicit donations, etc., it should be treated as a crime. If they are dressed as a decorated war hero (or the pope for that matter) because they are a bit wacky, it should be treated as a mental health issue - and dealt with accordingly.

Mixing the crazies with the scammers has created too large a prison population already!

Just for you to know I agree with you. When I ask people for their opinions I don’t say mine so I don’t skew the answers. I feel that happens when a question is asked and people pick up on what the OP wants to hear. I find most people can not defend their beliefs so they only share them with like minded people. I find that boring.
 
Why is it ex/soldiers always say things like this?

Why is it if non ex/soldiers agree it helps the argument, but if you don’t then “you just don’t understand”?

I have noticed this as well.

What it comes down to is that such an argument is the easiest thing to say without actually having to form a logical argument or basis for their opinion.

Just huff-and-puff, "Oh, you wouldn't understand!" and BAM! You've won, right? The other person is clearly unenlightened and wouldn't understand your position. However, if they support your position then they are suddenly enlightened and in the club of acceptance. You can now be outraged together.

I don't get it. At any rate, I still mentioned my opinion. My brother was a Marine so I am not that far removed from the military. He's done a couple tours of duty and I have been on the base a handful of times. Hell, I even played golf on their private golf course! I respect the job that they have chosen to do.

I assume that military individuals feel an imposter takes away their legit recognition and are thus angered. Therefore, I should be angered if somebody was sporting around one of those college degrees you can purchase on the internet. Well, maybe not.

As far as I can read, this guy never profited monetary-wise from his deceit. That seems an important point in my stance that this wasn't too big of a deal.
 
Actually forget it.

But personally, I would never post anything on here just because a poster wanted to hear it.

I don't think i've posted something anyone wanted to hear in a long time...


I’m not talking about guys like you two. I’m talking about “the agree bunnies” that only post to say “I agree” or a version there of. The ones that can’t or don’t want to defend themselves at all so they only post in threads that are almost 100% going the way they believe. Those are the ones I find most interesting.
 
You’re not bright because you have degrees, but don’t know what an opinion is.


This is completely different, but obviously you don’t get that either. I know what their argument is and it comes down to non ex/soldiers can’t understand and comprehend “freedom” and other things without having served. That would be fine, but not all vets believe the same things. Also there are a lot harder things to comprehend and non ex/soldiers historically seem to do fine understanding them

They use it as nothing more than a convenient debate stopper to “win” their argument. There is no real substance to the sentence, just a way to make themselves seem to be more than they may be.

This is silly. You do not know me at all, so you have no idea how bright I am or am not, so just drop that right now and move on.

As far as the vets are concerned, I believe that each and every one of you Americans should have to serve some time in the military as we do in most of the rest of the world. Almost every other country I have ever been aware of (such as Switzerland, where I live) has an obligatory service requirement fpr every (at least male) citizen, and I think that is quite correct. This way each and every one of us has a stake in our sovereignty, our freedom and our security.

Perhaps then you would see why those who actually HAVE served their country get so upset when a) someone pretends to have served and has not and b) people who have never served their country in the military question their motives when they tell you that you cannot understand something that you obviously cannot understand without having lived the experience.

The reason you hear veterans say that you do not understand is very likely because, well I don't know, maybe you just do not understand.

And to this day, I still do not understand the point of your original qustion.

See? I have no problem admitting when I do not understand something. Even with the degrees I have, I do not pretend to know everything like some people...:wave:

Doesn't make me "not bright". Makes me human...
 
Back
Top