Posted on 03/26/2014 5:43:12 PM PDT by Timber Rattler
No. In working khaki uniforms, officers and chiefs may ware a single ribbon bar displaying the three highest medals received. They do not have to wear ribbon bars representing all of the medals they have earned. This Captain is a Surface Warfare Officer. You do not earn your collar birds as a Surface Warfare Officer unless you have commanded a ship and most probably two ships. Think he was probably passed over for promotion to flag rank. Generally being assigned to command a large naval station is usually your last tour in the Navy if passed over.
That’s a Surface Warfare Badge.
Update:
PilotOnline.com: Navy launching 2nd investigation ...
Among other new information, Clark said the assailant - whom officials have identified but not named publicly - should not have been on the base that night. At the gate driving a tractor-trailer cab, he used a valid credential called a TWIC card, issued to transportation and maritime workers. But Mayo's shooter also should have had a legitimate business reason for coming in, and Clark suggested he didn't."On this particular evening," Clark said, "he did not have authorization to be on my base."
Clark said the Navy is launching a second investigation - on top of one being conducted by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service - that will examine how the shooter made it through the gate as well as another checkpoint before the pier.
Mario Palomino, NCIS's agent in charge, said investigators haven't determined a motive. They don't think the assailant, who Palomino said did not work for the Defense Department, knew anyone on the Mahan.
And they don't think the attack was planned.
"We have been able to rule out any additional threat to the Navy," Palomino said. "We have ruled out any link to terrorism."
He said that before Mayo died, he shot back.
*****
comment at link:
Anyone find it curious Submitted by RivahMitch on Wed, 03/26/2014 at 6:14 pm. that while the government immediately announces that "there's no link to terrorism" the name of the murderer, presumably on it's TSA approved ID card, has NOT been released?
**********
yeah . . .there are a few of us that remain curious. I suspect there are several additional curious posters at the comments section of that site given the number of deleted comments based on
"rules violation. Reason: Disparaging ..."
Thanks for your thoughtful response. I am going to first say that I have served onboard the Ajax, Hector and Haynesworth both tied to the dock and underway. In addition, being in control of mail destined to/from West PAC ships for two years, I’ve boarded MANY, MANY west PAC ships delivering regular mail. So, that answers your question about my service and crossing quarter decks in port.
Next, I will agree with you that “sometimes” the 1,2 or 3 guys that are on duty at the boarding deck area are horsing around.
And, I will agree with you that the Navy even in my time would give a 45 to anybody. I had one a lot because of delivering registered mail. In my case though, growing up in the country, I could sure use it.
Now though, you and I are going to differ that your “average” man and your “average” woman are the same in terms of upper body strength. My daughter is 28. I am 66 in two more days. And she is in “above average” shape for a woman due to serious, disciplined workouts. And, professionally, she is a CPA. So, she’s nobodies fool. Conversely, I am in average shape for a 66 year old. But, she knows that in a fracas I could take her down easily in 2 seconds!
So, yours and my argument seems to be several. That the Navy was at fault to some degree for lack of training. I agree and admitted as much in my original post. But, on your counter argument that ipso facto this young girls lack of strength is not a factor when we know the gun was taken away from her and used to kill, that is KILL, one of her fellow sailors.............seems on it’s face to be one of the purest illustrations of denial I have seen in a long time.
Lets REMEMBER .......it cannot be denied by anyone that ONE, the gun was taken away from HER (a female) and TWO was THEN used to KILL Seaman Mayo.
Mayo is now prematurely DEAD by fifty years and has loving family left behind. From the facts currently at hand, I think the girls natural lack of upper body strength to fight off her attacker was the primary cause of Seaman Mayos death. You don’t. So, we will have to agree to disagree.
Now, this doesn’t make Mayos death HER fault! She just should not have been put in that position by our beloved, but PC, Navy. The damn PC Navy is in denial that a woman, in a physical fight, should be put in the position of defending a billion dollar warship. Instead, that job should go, common sense tells us, to the meanest, biggest , toughest sob you have on board, and I’ve never served on a ship that didn’ t have plenty of them. 45 years ago, I fit that category pretty good. If some goon came charging up my boarding ramp it is HIGHLY unlikely he would have made it past me and quite possibly would have been dead and a Mayo alive!
Finally, Our PC Navy will cover it all up or normally u and I could rely on a competent, unbiased investigation to settle the argument.
Like everything else in our world today, there will be no accountability and poor Seaman Mayo will just be dead and the world continues turning.
I appreciate your thoughtful and sincere response to my post.
What should be and what is are always two different things.
Sure security should be in the hands of biggest toughest SOBs around. Unfortunately on a ship, and it has always been this way, they are never enough of them to assign to the QD watch all the time. In many cases strongest and toughest are hole snipes that never see a QD watch. So whose left. Anyone on the watch bill, that’s who. I have stood QD watches with 92 lbs. disbursing clerks that my sister could take. I have stood QD watches with men that I would never assign to an ammo working party, because after handling the third 5” 47 lb. projo, they would drop next one. Your point is that it happened because a woman was on watch at that particular time. My point is, that based on my experience, it could have happened just as easily with a lot of men on the same watch.
We will just have to agree to disagree whether or not young girls should be put in these kind of positions.
I think this incident proves without a doubt that the girl lost the fight and that Mayo lost his life because she lost control of the weapon to the perp who then used it to kill Mayo. Surely we can agree on that much?!
We may be gaining a little though because MAYBE, just MAYBE, the Navy has learned from Seaman Mayo’s death that weak little girls standing quarterdeck watches “can” get sailors killed because up against a strong male attacker/terrorist they are defenseless ergo so is the billion dollar ship.
Your continuing argument that the strength of the girl in this incident has nothing to do with Mayo’s death and should not be discussed or considered and could’ve happened to anybody and most naval ships have no big strong men on them are not persuasive to me and seem demonstrative of typical PC mentality. Namely, the PC crowd loves to say in situations like this “look, this is something that is not even permissible to be discussed because you are racist, a homophobe or gender biased to even bring it up”. As Ben Carson says, we have to get over not talking about issues just because The Left starts throwing a hissy fit and slinging personal insults.
Lastly, since you so far have shared little about your experience on this subject, and I have shared mine in detail, I have to presume my experience in the Navy is just as compelling as yours.
Totally agree with your assessment. My daughter was TAD to security on the Lincoln for 18 months. She is qual’d in 9 mm and M16/14. She says this young female sailor’s trainers failed her. They are not taught to expect this sort of thing. They are not taught to not let potential threats get close to them. They are warned and trained to deal with drunk or unruly sailors with nightsticks, not possible terrorists or attacks. Female and male sailors get the same training. Sailors, even those permanently assigned to Security, are not trained in how to prevent being disarmed or in using deadly force. In addition, sailors who are TAD to security are not in the correct frame of mind, imo, and are not TRAINED to be in the correct frame of mind all security personnel should be in. TAD to security is a dangerous way to maintain a protection force, in my opinion.
Thanks my bad. It's been a long time.
The cities of Norfolk and Virginia Beach developed vastly after the bases were built and in doing so enclosed them. I-64 and the Hampton Roads Tunnel is literally in sight of the carrier piers and the by-pass near Portsmouth gives a view of NNSY.
Another idiotic idea was building Pier 10. Back in the mid 1980's as I understand it an additional two carrier berth pier was built between Piers 12 & 7 which at the time only allowed three carriers to be at NOB which IMO was a very wise policy. Evidently instead of keeping Mayport open as a home port for a carrier or two all east coast carriers were moved to Norfolk. Worse than that is the fact the Navy has put carriers there in a shipyard posture.
The base as far as trucks go has several options. One is by appointment only delivery with a checking station right outside the main gate. The other would be a transfer depot away from the base and have military drivers deliver from there.
Realistically there needs to be a security force rating. IIRC this was supposed to be in transition back in 1980's with sailors assuming some of the security duties and Master At Arms being made a permanent rate beginning at E-5 or so. Obviously something fell through.
So who should be well trained in arms including small arms? IMO those most exposed. A good portion of the Bosunmates for example should be trained for several reasons. They handle the boats and there has been cases where liberty launches have come under attack. All Weapons Dept should be trained as well. Each ship needs a sufficient onboard duty section trained to secure the ship. Obviously the smaller the ship the more cross training and qualifications will be needed and a stand alone dept not practical.
A security team can be done and I can give an example of it. Back up till 1980 on my ship at sea fires below the flight deck were fought by Hull Technicians. The were roughly 90% of the fire party. In 1980 a permanent onboard full time Fire Department was put in place while in the ship yards and made permanent afterward. They also took on maintenance of fire stations, repair locker, hatches as a secondary function. It was a pooled Department from all departments.
The concept addressed several issues. More persons were trained to fight fires and if a major fire occurred the ships Hull Techs would not perish in first response situation. I put in nine months there myself three months in the 78 yard period and six months during our 1980 one year overhaul. The second time I was a nozzle man and had gone through at least one major fire in my prior stint. It worked a lot better in port also because the duty sections had daily trained together and had sharpened skills. Before that if you were DC qualified you might be on in port FD one duty day and not on it the next if ever again. The same concept can apply for security but only if providing security is the primary function and proper training is given.
Not trying to take anything away from Sailors, my Dad was a Sailor WWII, my Son Was a Sailor, Desert Storm....but are there no longer Marines aboard U.S. Navy Ships ?
On the larger ones yea likely so. This ship? Likely not. It had a crew of about 350 if fully manned. On the other hand I do know that Subs probably a substantially higher number of qualified shooters. Likely the highest ratio per crew member in the Navy. A friend of mine did sub duty and was a snipe IC1 meaning interior communications tech. He was also a marksman.
Never once did I state that this woman’s lack of upper body strength had nothing to do with PO2 Mayo death. What I said was that many men would have been equally unable to defend themselves when presented with a surprise assault at 11:30 at night on a ship’s quarterdeck. Nothing more, nothing less. With your wide experience in the Navy, which ships have you served on that could man a quarterdeck 24 hours a day six day in a row, with linebacker size male petty officers. That seems to be the point that you are trying to make. In the 30 years I spent in our Navy, on eight ships, only the carrier could might have been able do that, but probably not at both brows. Never stood QD watches when I was an enlisted snipe. As a Junior officer I have stood probably hundred or so QD watches. That enough experience for you. This is not “PC” BS, merely facts as I have seen them.
Thanks. Some people seem to think that a QD watch is manned and trained like gate guards or security forces at Camp Lejeune or Fort Lewis. This is not the case, the sailors receive minimal training, and at least some years back were only required to requal with weapons yearly.
.....Mr. X, obviously I am not going to convince you that I don’t think women are appropriate for these type duties; And, you are not going to convince me that they ARE.
So, enjoyed the discussion, have a nice day.
adios
What you say was true for the Cold War era but things did start changing pre-9/11, specifically after the COLE attack. Pier security was beefed up and more armed watches were put out. Additionally the weapons were carried in condition one, a big change from the past. Much more training and fam fires were given, but still probably not enough.
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.