Wiki has a list of UCMJ offenses punishable by death. Most of them (Mutiny, aiding the enemy, espionage, murder, rape) make sense and most of the rest I could figure out.
I couldn’t figure out why “forcing a safegaurd” is on the list at all, as Wiki defines safeguard as “A detachment, guard, or detail posted by a military commander for the protection of persons, places, or property of the enemy during a war or other conflict.” And what on Earth is “improper hazarding of vessel?”
From my understanding: Forcing a safeguard is when you refuse to submit to the guard’s order to halt or otherwise encroach on what/whom he is guarding.
Improper hazarding of a vessel is, IIRC, when you do something to try to make a ship sink, an airplane crash, etc. regardless of whether you succeed or not…
A safeguard is when you leave a guard of your own men to protect things of cultural value to the enemy or even captured enemy troops. One forces that safeguard when by use of force he take plunders injurs or detroys the subject of a safeguard. An example would be where a commander detaches a group of his soldiers to protect a museum in captured enemy teritory. If you attack those guards to loot the museum you have forced a safeguard.
Just to clarify: you’d be attacking soldiers on your own side, right?
Ahh. I read “forcing” in the sense of “requiring” not “attacking.” Still though, wouldn’t forcing a safegaurd be either attacking the enemy (fairly normal for combat) or attacking your own/allied troops (which seems like something treason would cover)?
It’s when you unneccesarily put a vehicle in danger of damage or destruction, either through action or negligence.
It includes enemy soldiers who have been left to guard things of no strategic value to them and who offer no resistance.
Say an American museum was being protected by a “safeguard” of enemy forces. You may accept their surrender but you may not attack them. If they act in a hostile manner they can lose their status as “safeguard” and you may then attack them.
I think the term is outdated in that it was coined at a time when we had delusions of civility concerning warfare.
Wait, so if I carelessly leave a jeep in neutral and forgot to set the parking brake, I could get capital punishment under the UCMJ, even if no harm came to the vehicle, any person, and I had no ill intentions?
Probably not, but if you left an billion dollar aircraft carrier in neutral and forgot to set the brake thereby endangering thousands of men and women and countless materiel in war time you might. War time is not a time for carelessness.
The UCMJ doesn’t make that distinction. In fact, it is not one of the crimes that is punishable by death only in war time.
So, technically, in 2014, when we are out of Iraq and Afghanistan, if a soldier in Ft. Bragg, NC, excited about his 4 day weekend over Thanksgiving, leaves his jeep in neutral without setting the parking brake, this soldier can be punished by death?
Even without the vehicle drifting or people getting hurt or killed?
Logic tells me that the court or tribunal involved will.
I’ll assume the answer here is yes, but point out that “can be” and “will be” are not the same. I’m not sure what you’re driving at, but I would consider that the regulations may have been written long ago when civilian life was different, may have been written with an underlying assumption of a military context, and most of all may have been written with the assumption that rational, reasonable officials would apply them, and therefor NOT written so as to pin down every nuance.
No. A jeep is considered a vehicle, not a “vessel” (i.e., a ship). And the offense you describe would be negligence, but not “willful” (which implies premeditation).
Article 111 might possibly apply. It covers “Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel” and has no provision for a death penalty. (Though it would probably be a stretch to construe failure to set the parking brake as reckless.)
Believe it or don’t, we’ve done this before . I didn’t check for a thread on hazarding vessels. I’m going to guess that it’s when you jump into a battleship through the windows because the doors are welded shut.
Niiiiiiiice.
Even if a jeep were defined as a vessel, Article 110 states:
So your over-excited soldier could be punished “as a court-martial may direct”, but not by death (which is pretty much how all the punitive articles of the UCMJ read where the death penalty is not on the table; to find out the exact sentences that would be handed down you’d have to plow through the Manual for Courts-Martial, a lengthy PDF file).
As far as actual “vessels” go, a captain (or officer of the deck or whatever) who screws up and accidentally runs his ship aground could be court-martialled and punished “as a court-martial may direct”, more specifically defined in the MCM (maximum penalty: dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years). A captain (or other person in charge) who deliberately ran his ship aground (sank it, rammed it into a friendly vessel, etc.) could face the death penalty. Even the nearly 10 meg MCM doesn’t seem to specify exactly what aggravating circumstances would warrant the death penalty in such a case, but I would guess that if he got a bunch of people under his command killed, or if he did such a thing in time of actual war, he’d be more likely to get the firing squad (or I suppose they’d use lethal injection these days).
Probably the best recent ansewer is that sub that was traveling at high speed (30 knots aprox) and slammed into a mountain.
Declan