Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dressing up in uniform

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by johnny no stars View Post
    Words fail me.
    What's the problem? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. The only part is the pants. Members of the public wear them all the time. It would be exactly the same as wearing a US woodland one, whether against the law or not.

    It's like a 17 year old drinking the day before his 18th, would you consider it unacceptable just because the law says he can't drink till he's 18?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
      But do people here see wearing the uniform and just wearing a part of it as the same thing or wha??

      Like if i see a guy wearing the full uniform at a fancy dress or something i don't approve of it.

      But i think if he's just wearing Irish DPM combats and like a green tshirt and a bandana with some camo on his face then thats ok, because he's clearly just dressing up. You know what i mean?

      Even if he's not wearing boots, just a pair of runners or something.
      One thing doing law in college has thought me is how reading a statute carefully actually lets you understand exactly what it's saying.

      So, lets do just that. Again...

      264.—(1) If any person (not being a member of the Defence Forces) wears, without permission granted by or on behalf of the Minister, any uniform of the Defence Forces or any colourable imitation thereof, such person shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding ten pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months.

      (2) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply in respect of the wearing of any uniform of the Defence Forces or any colourable imitation thereof in the course of a stage play or other dramatic representation or performance.

      (3) In this section the word "uniform" includes any distinctive part of a uniform.

      tie this little baby in with this;

      265.—(1) If any person wears any uniform of the Defence Forces or any dress, having the appearance of, or bearing any of the regimental or other distinctive marks of, any such uniform, in such a manner or in such circumstances as to be likely to bring contempt upon that uniform, such person shall be guilty of an offence under this subsection.

      and this, as taken from the Reserve Defence Force Regulations, R.5.;

      Uniform – wearing of.
      59. (1) Uniform shall be worn by members -

      (a) when on military duty, and

      (b) when proceeding to and from parades or other military duty.


      (2) Uniform may be worn by members -

      (a) when attending Church Services;

      (b) when attending social functions promoted under State or official military auspices,
      or promoted by recognised Welfare Committees of the Defence Forces;

      (c) on such other occasions as may be permitted by -

      (i) the General Officer Commanding the Formation or Flag Officer Commanding
      the Naval Service in the case of officers, and

      (ii) the Officer Commanding the Unit in the case of reservists.
      Uniform - prohibition of wearing.


      60. (1) Members shall not wear uniform outside the State, whether in the course of duty or not,
      except where the members concerned -

      (a) are serving on board a State ship or aircraft, or,

      (b) have been granted prior permission by the Deputy Chief of Staff (Support), or
      have been directed by the Deputy Chief of Staff (Support), to wear uniform.

      (2) Uniform shall not be worn by members attending a political meeting.

      (3) Uniform or any article shall not be worn by members on any occasion other than those
      set out in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph or in the Administrative Instruction issued by the
      Deputy Chief of Staff (Support) pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 59 of this Regulation.

      In summation...

      You can get a fairly clear picture that the uniform so proudly worn by our soldiers is not, and i repeat that with a good deal of conviction, not an option for a halloween party, a night in the local club, or a fashion item to be worn with a beard and long hair becuase military chic is in fashion again. If you have any doubts or corrections though, please feel free to bring them to my attention.

      Is mise le méas, Cpt. B
      Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
        What's the problem? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. The only part is the pants. Members of the public wear them all the time. It would be exactly the same as wearing a US woodland one, whether against the law or not.

        It's like a 17 year old drinking the day before his 18th, would you consider it unacceptable just because the law says he can't drink till he's 18?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
          What's the problem? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. The only part is the pants. Members of the public wear them all the time. It would be exactly the same as wearing a US woodland one, whether against the law or not.

          It's like a 17 year old drinking the day before his 18th, would you consider it unacceptable just because the law says he can't drink till he's 18?
          In the eyes of the law, yes. For example, drink driving. Against the law, dangerous, selfish, and stupid. But in certain places, accepted as the norm. But does that make it any less illegal or right?
          Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
            What's the problem? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. The only part is the pants. Members of the public wear them all the time. It would be exactly the same as wearing a US woodland one, whether against the law or not.

            It's like a 17 year old drinking the day before his 18th, would you consider it unacceptable just because the law says he can't drink till he's 18?
            I'm not talking about the law, i've already read that a few times. I'm asking YOU and the rest of ye whether ye think it's acceptable or not in your own opinion.

            I'm not asking if you can read.

            You all seem to be just responding by saying it's against the law rather then giving your own actual opinion on what you think.
            Last edited by spaceghetti; 27 October 2009, 00:45.

            Comment


            • #51
              Funnily enough I have respect for the law (as, it would seem, do many people here). You seem to assume that I don't. So when someone quotes the legal on it, perhaps they actually do respect the law...
              Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
              Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
              Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
              Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
                What's the problem? Seems perfectly acceptable to me. The only part is the pants. Members of the public wear them all the time. It would be exactly the same as wearing a US woodland one, whether against the law or not.

                It's like a 17 year old drinking the day before his 18th, would you consider it unacceptable just because the law says he can't drink till he's 18?

                You have lost this one sunshine. Back away and save some face.
                What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

                Comment


                • #53
                  I think you can take it that a lot of the posters here feel it is unacceptable. If you want further discussion, use the search function and find the older thread on this topic.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    It happens. Sadly it does. To be brutally honest I would prefer it didn't. Same with drinking in the street, bad buskers, and loud children when you're hungover. There are legal ways that you can drink under the age of 18, but there's no loop hole in hell that allows those clowns to be wearing uniform as they set off for a night out. None.
                    Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Sadly, as ever, debate is just that, and there will still be w**kers out acting the B*ll*cks wearing the uniform in the coming week.

                      All I know is that when it's finally my turn to raise my own little f*ckers, and please god i'll be serving this country too, I'll pass on the respect that was passed onto me. And no, I'm not a raving bible bashing patriot, I just respect what our flag represents, and the people who've given their lives in the cause of peace while wearing uniform enough not to dishonour or bring shame on either.

                      Thanks to you who see the sense.

                      Is mise le méas,

                      Capt. B
                      Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by ODIN View Post
                        You have lost this one sunshine. Back away and save some face.
                        x2.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
                          I was told by various folks that as long as you remove the cap badge from the beret, remove the tricolor shoulder flash and velcro name yoke from the shirt or smock, then it makes that item of clothing legal to where in public as it's no longer considered part of the uniform.

                          The law apparently states (i haven't read it, but it's what i've been told by higher ups) that you cannot wear the DF "uniform", nothing about not wearing DPM.

                          The pants and bush hat and any rucksacks, bags and equipment that do not have any DF identification (DF logo or whatever) are perfectly legal to wear in public apparently.

                          As for the shirt/smock, doing the above makes them legal.

                          As for the beret.....i dunno why'd you wanna wear it anyways.

                          The purpose of the uniform being illegal was to prevent people from infiltrating the DF and so on, but when those identifications are removed it allows members of the PDF to spot those trying anything like that, as well as making it no longer a uniform anyways.

                          The reason smocks, shirts, pants and so on aren't sold in shops down here (the rare few are in the north) is because of these ID's. And the only way retailers are able to obtain them is apparently directly from the DF, who won't give it to them anyways. So any surplus any retailers may obtain (either by buying them from the DF, or just coming across some) is apparently not cost effective because they would have to remove these ID's from each individual garment.

                          Now i'm not 100% sure of this, it's just what i've been told.
                          I heard the pope smokes dope but doesnt make it true ..utter crap here sorry!

                          Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
                          Well actually the guy i got the info from is a guy who owns and runs an outdoor adventure club, and part of what they do is airsoft. And you know how airsoft guys try to look the business. Well apparently airsoft clubs around the country are in debate whether or not to ban Irish DPM being used by players altogether and are always up to date and informed on the laws made by the government that effect airsoft players.

                          As for DPM, there's loads of legally sold Irish DPM stuff out there in Ireland if you look for it, Protac DPM as well as official DPM. The only thing not sold are the uniforms themselves.

                          To anyone not in the DF or familiar with camo's, Irish camo looks like any other camo, and even some well informed folks often get it mixed up with French CCE.

                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          As for seeing guys in public with irish DPM. You would not believe the amount of people at oxegen who had irish DPM, and i mean full uniforms and kit. I saw guys with Irish DPM bergans and rucksacks, wearing Irish DPM ponchos, wet gear, everything. I saw a gang of about 5 guys in full uniform (minus beret) wrestling in the mud in front of the main stage.

                          No one noticed they were wearing irish DPM or even thought they were real soldiers (if they were) they just thought they saw a bunch of guys dressed as soldiers, because to the general public ALL camo is the same.
                          this gets worse the further i read down this thread! ..Protac DPM is a different shade and not official pattern colors

                          Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
                          So according to this, members of the defence forces are allowed to wear uniforms while off duty, but civvies can't?? Doesn't specify between duty and off duty.

                          And Protac, Go tactical as well as this site and a few other websites and shops in Ireland are breaking the law by producing and selling official as well as imitation DPM gear to civvies??

                          Not exceeding ten pounds? That, plus the fact that the guards don't care or probably don't know when they see Irish DPM, in my eyes make it legal. A 3 month conviction would only apply to people using it in a crime (ie, robbery, etc)

                          And pounds?? How old is this source?? That law has changed since then i'm sure. Especially seeing as how nobody has shut down Protac or Gotactical, or this site or anywhere else for selling Irish DPM and imitation DPM gear acquired legally.

                          Do you have a link to this documentation?
                          It's called the Defence Act 1954 ..when you are in a hole, stop digging

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by amurph0 View Post
                            I'm not talking about the law, i've already read that a few times. I'm asking YOU and the rest of ye whether ye think it's acceptable or not in your own opinion.

                            I'm not asking if you can read.

                            You all seem to be just responding by saying it's against the law rather then giving your own actual opinion on what you think.
                            Prehaps because it being against the law is our opinion.

                            Those that do it should be hunted down and culled by the traffic cones!

                            Is that opinionated enough or do you need more drama?
                            It is only by contemplation of the incompetent that we can appreciate the difficulties and accomplishments of the competent.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Ok, i don't and have never worn my uniform in public. I follow the rules but it does not mean i have to like them, it's not what democracy is about.

                              I didn't mean to make a huge fuss out of this whole thing. Basically what i was trying to ask is do you think it should be against the law or not? Not "Do you think it's acceptable to break it?"

                              Looking at my posts i realized how i worded it wrong and it my have come off as if i was asking you whether or not you thought it was acceptable to break the law.

                              What i was really trying to say is do you think whether or not Irish laws regarding uniform are too strict and do you think they should be more along the lines as the type of laws they have in the UK??

                              I'm sorry over the whole confusion and misunderstanding that i caused there. My bad.

                              Now obviously i don't need an answer because it's clear your all in favor of the current laws, i'm just trying to clear up the mess i left

                              sorry.:redface:
                              Last edited by spaceghetti; 27 October 2009, 03:02.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Personally I don't like wearing it in Public. I don't wear it when going on the Bus to Parades, I have it in a bag and carry it like that too and from wherever I am going. Unless i am offered a lift.

                                I actually get alot of sh1t and a load of people asking me "Why don't you wear the uniform coming up?"

                                My answer is usually along the lines of, "Because I don't want to" Noone likes that answer. It seems that means I am ashamed of it or something.

                                Mind you, these are all people who drive that ask me, they don't have to put up with the endless barrage of kids asking questions when one does go to adn from training in uniform.
                                I probably am wrong, sorry about that!!!

                                Please PM me to correct me.

                                But, not if I state an opinion, only if I state something as truth!!!

                                I have bad opinions but I stick by them!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X