Why can't a person be discharged before his enlistment is up?

[Rocky Top Lady]

Based on the events at Fort Hood this week, a question has come to my mind.

If a person wants out of the service badly enough to hire an attorney to accomplish his discharge, why does the Military refuse?

In reality, would it not make more sense to let someone out with a discharge (even if it was considered dishonorable or general) than to refuse and have that person go on a shooting rampage?

By the way, since I have never posted under the Military forum, I will take this opportunity to thank you all! I appreciate the commitment and sacrifice that servicemen and servicewomen and their families make and we all owe you more than we could ever hope to repay. If not for your service, we would not enjoy the quality of life and our freedom. Thank you and God bless you and your families!

 

[RadiomanATL]

Based on the events at Fort Hood this week, a question has come to my mind.

If a person wants out of the service badly enough to hire an attorney to accomplish his discharge, why does the Military refuse?

In reality, would it not make more sense to let someone out with a discharge (even if it was considered dishonorable or general) than to refuse and have that person go on a shooting rampage?

By the way, since I have never posted under the Military forum, I will take this opportunity to thank you all! I appreciate the commitment and sacrifice that servicemen and servicewomen and their families make and we all owe you more than we could ever hope to repay. If not for your service, we would not enjoy the quality of life and our freedom. Thank you and God bless you and your families!

If the military changed their policy, I would think that it would have to go under "dishonorable". Since that person did not fulfill their obligation. Also it would also discourage people from trying to get out if they knew it would be dishonorable discharge.

 

[geauxtohell]

Based on the events at Fort Hood this week, a question has come to my mind.

If a person wants out of the service badly enough to hire an attorney to accomplish his discharge, why does the Military refuse?

In reality, would it not make more sense to let someone out with a discharge (even if it was considered dishonorable or general) than to refuse and have that person go on a shooting rampage?

Because it allows those who have money to buy their way out of their obligation. Service members who have been involuntarily mobilized can retain a lawyer and make their case for a delay or exemption to those orders, but the ultimate decision is up to the Army

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No ONE forced anyone to join, They agreed to a contract and were compensated for it, in this case with YEARS of schooling. Promotions and cushy assignments. Then when he gets an assignment he does not like he should be allowed to just quit? I think not.

 

[SFC Ollie]

No ONE forced anyone to join, They agreed to a contract and were compensated for it, in this case with YEARS of schooling. Promotions and cushy assignments. Then when he gets an assignment he does not like he should be allowed to just quit? I think not.

And that is all anyone needs to say about that.

 

[Toome]

Enlisted personnel enlist in the military. Or, to put it another way, they enter into a legal-binding contract with the US government for a pre-determined amount of time. As with any other contract, there are clauses that may either reduce or extend the length of service. This is a practice that dates all the way back to the American Revolution.

Officers are commissioned by the United States Congress and are retained on active duty at the pleasure of the President.

There are actions that may disqualify a person from continued service. For enlisted personnel, these are included in the contract (e.g. bad conduct, incompatibility with the service, etc.). For officers, it's a bit different which may result in disciplinary action in addition to dishonorable discharge from the military.

 

[Douger]

Based on the events at Fort Hood this week, a question has come to my mind.

If a person wants out of the service badly enough to hire an attorney to accomplish his discharge, why does the Military refuse?

In reality, would it not make more sense to let someone out with a discharge (even if it was considered dishonorable or general) than to refuse and have that person go on a shooting rampage?

By the way, since I have never posted under the Military forum, I will take this opportunity to thank you all! I appreciate the commitment and sacrifice that servicemen and servicewomen and their families make and we all owe you more than we could ever hope to repay. If not for your service, we would not enjoy the quality of life and our freedom. Thank you and God bless you and your families!

If the military changed their policy, I would think that it would have to go under "dishonorable". Since that person did not fulfill their obligation. Also it would also discourage people from trying to get out if they knew it would be dishonorable discharge.

What difference would that make ?
Honorable or dishonorable there's no jobs anyway ..........and never will be.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Based on the events at Fort Hood this week, a question has come to my mind.

If a person wants out of the service badly enough to hire an attorney to accomplish his discharge, why does the Military refuse?

In reality, would it not make more sense to let someone out with a discharge (even if it was considered dishonorable or general) than to refuse and have that person go on a shooting rampage?

By the way, since I have never posted under the Military forum, I will take this opportunity to thank you all! I appreciate the commitment and sacrifice that servicemen and servicewomen and their families make and we all owe you more than we could ever hope to repay. If not for your service, we would not enjoy the quality of life and our freedom. Thank you and God bless you and your families!

If the military changed their policy, I would think that it would have to go under "dishonorable". Since that person did not fulfill their obligation. Also it would also discourage people from trying to get out if they knew it would be dishonorable discharge.

What difference would that make ?
Honorable or dishonorable there's no jobs anyway ..........and never will be.

Please don't use my posts to stupidly try and get in some cheap shots at whatever it is yer aiming at.

Kthnxbai.