I just came back here and read your astoundingly ignorant drivel. I would pit you, but you’ll have to earn my respect enough for me to feel you’re worth it. And I don’t see that happening. You’re just a cheaper, less crazy version of Der Trihs. And he’s not worth it. You’ll either have to dial up the crazy or offer something that can’t be shown to be shit with one visit to a dictionary. So, it’s all up to you, you dumb, ignorant bastard.
Sonofabitch. Someone whom agrees with me even though I never had the fantastic opportunity to end someone’s life.
I was so close, too, with that one guy.
In an effort to get this most worthwhile thread back on track, I have to ask:
How is buying a T-shirt from Sears with a 1 on it any different from someone buying, say, a reproduction Pith Helmet with the 24th Regiment of Foot crest on it, or an ushanka with the Soviet Red Star/Hammer & Sickle badge on it?
Could be worse. Target could become a sponsor.
It’s a good question, and I have a good answer for it. The people who seek out the things you’ve described are likely to be people who are interested in military history and are collectors of relics from past wars. They’re not going to be going out and wearing a pith helmet or a Soviet hat in public, in school, to work, whatever. Those items are collectibles that have some historical value.
But a cheap T-shirt that’s mass marketed at a department store? With the oldest and possibly most respected infantry unit of the Army, turned into a fashion commodity? I don’t think it’s really comparable.
It seems like it would be rather difficult for the army to prevent someone selling this type of patch, even if they wanted to. Unlike the insignia of other divisions, the 1st Infantry’s is an extremely simple design. If a business tried to trademark a plain number on a plain background, they’d get laughed out of town.
I’ve worn my Pith helmet at the shooting range, and also out hunting, before. Admittedly it’s a reproduction and doesn’t have a Regimental Crest on it (there’s a photo of it as my Goodreads avatar, actually), and I’ve worn my ushanka extensively in the UK (where I bought it) and in New Zealand (South Island winters are bloody cold!). And I knew other people with ex- Soviet Military ushankas when I lived in NZ, too.
Admittedly, I do have an extensive interest in military history, but I believe my point stands: I really don’t see much difference between my ushanka and a “Big Red 1” T-shirt. Indeed, as Grumman points out, the design is just a large, red, number “1”. It would be wholly unremarkable if not for the fact that happens to be a military unit emblem too.
Basically, I don’t see a problem with it, as long as some of the profits involved are making their way back to the military, preferably the unit concerned.
Anyone who would buy one of those shirts, should also get a big tattoo of the Hells Angels logo, and go into the nearest biker bar and order a Shirley Temple.
I don’t think so; the full design, including patch shape, colours and typography, is probably protectable. It’d be considerably more plausible than T-Mobile’s attempt to trademark the colour magenta, at least. Speaking of trademarks, I would’ve thought American Apparel might be slightly irked by the appearance of “All American Apparel”. But then, the two target markets could hardly be more distinct. 
You earn the right to wear campaign ribbons, skill badges, rank insignia, and branch decorations. Division insignia are not earned. You get assignment orders to a new division, you go there, you wear the patch until you’re assigned somewhere else. Or if you so choose, you order one off the internet just because you like the way it looks.
Hell, even specialty berets aren’t sacred. The black Ranger beret was switched out for a tan one a couple of years back. Rangers didn’t whine because they knew they were still Rangers.
If someone wants to express their support for the first ID by going to Sears and buying a shirt, I don’t see what should be the problem with that. Count me in for the one who sees this as just more recreational outrage from the flag-waving crowd who likely have never worn any patch at all.
Well, FWIW, most of the people complaining about it in this thread are wearing patches right now, or once did.
I still say it’s not a big deal, though. If it buys new wallpaper and a pool table for the 1st ID’s barracks or something, I don’t think they’ll think it’s a big deal anymore either.
I suppose so, but I wonder how many of the people buying these shirts will even know the significance of them? If they’re buying the shirt just because they think the logo looks cool, I don’t think that equates to a direct disrespect or anything, but it just seems, I don’t know…somehow soulless and empty.
It’s a freakin’ logo. It is soulless and empty. It’s not like the Army is selling reproductions of famous soldiers’ dog tags.
I suppose you’re right. It just seems…somehow lacking in reverence for those that have lived and died wearing that patch.
Yeah, I can see that… but as has been mentioned before, for decades it has been possible to just walk into a Surplus Store and get yourself virtually a full [duffel/sea]bag’s worth of military mufti. The USA has long been actually quite liberal about letting the populace use patterns from national/military symbols as fashion statements. It got to the point the Marines had to trademark the MARPAT camo so not every Elmer Fudd out there would show up in it.
Myself, a printed logo based on a unit emblem on a t-shirt or totebag is no biggie, one KNOWS any fool always could and can just buy one. Better that it be under authorized license so the Army gets a cut and controls its use. (BTW, minor hijack: Um, y’know, those units that affect wearing death’s-head skulls on their paraphernalia? (a)You’re not pirates (b) or at a Dead concert and (c) the *Tottenkopf *was the insignia of some folks you’d rather not associate with.)
I expect, though, that the actual made-to-spec sew-on/velcro-on shoulder patch or pin-on crest of the unit, will OTOH remain proper uniform insignia and its distribution remain within the stores catering to the military.
We (25th Inf Div) always called them the “Puking Buzzards”.
But their faces have been stolen. Along with their very souls!
Disclaimer: I was never military. I didn’t pass my draft physical.
That’s part of the reason I’m going to avoid the hottest parts of this thread. I’ve been away for a few days. If you don’t mind, I’d like to leap back to the original topic.
It is not a new thing for civilians to wear mil insignia and gear. Go to your grandpa’s tie rack, and you’ll find regimental stripes for UK units he never saw. When I was just out of high school, a lot of non mil people wore field jackets in the winter. I had one myself. I didn’t want to pretend I was in the Army, I wanted to be warm in the winter.
Several times, the US forces have avoided defending or getting royalties on military gear that was fashionable. When bell-bottom jeans and trousers were at the peak of their popularity, the US Navy changed their unis to straight legs. When the song and movie about the Green Berets were big, you could get faux green berets everywhere. The Army didn’t formally object, and they didn’t get a dime of it.
When it had been 100 years since the civil war, kids could get replica uniforms, and nobody paid royalties to the Army, or whoever the heirs to the CSA might have been.
For many years, catalogs have sold “authentic” WW II bomber jackets, often embellished with emblems. Are they for real units, or made up emblems? I don’t know.
So, finally, the US Army decides to make a little money from all those people wearing military stuff. For all those years, they could have been raking in the royalties, but chose not to.
It’s all right by me, a civilian all my life.
Let"s suppose that you found yourself magically transported through time and space via some wacky Twilight Zone/science-fiction scenario. You find yourself deep in a dark, thick jungle along with 10 of your best friends. All of you are armed and kitted out in the fashion of typical real-Earth infantry soldiers. You are hugging the jungle floor because your group is under attack from what appear to be 20 to 30 hostile soldiers firing machine guns and lobbing grenades at you.
One of those grenades plops down right between you and five other men packed together behind a fallen tree (maybe you see whats coming here). A second before it explodes–on impulse–the man next to you leaps on top of the grenade smothering it and instantly killing himself-- but also saving you and the others from certain death.
In that scenario that man is, IMO, a hero. It doesn’t matter one whit what the circumstances were that brought those men together in that jungle.
Of course the circumstances matter you twit. Replace “soldiers” with “Nazis” and tell me how you feel about their heroics.