Soldiers Banned From Military/Veterans Themed Motorcycle Groups or Events?

[Haggis]

I've seen a couple of posts on other social media sites stating that CAF soldiers have been ordered to not participate in military or veterans themed motorcycle events or groups. This appears to be 5 Div centric at this point. Any truth to this?

 

[brihard]

Nothing heard, no CANFORGEN, but given how OMGs have their tendrils all over the place in other patches clubs and their associated events, I could see it becoming enough of a regional issue to necessitate that. 5 Div may simply have a particularly pronounced problem with it?

 

[Remius]

I’ve only heard rumours .

 

[Haggis]

Nothing heard, no CANFORGEN, but given how OMGs have their tendrils all over the place in other patches clubs and their associated events, I could see it becoming enough of a regional issue to necessitate that. 5 Div may simply have a particularly pronounced problem with it?

Yeah, I checked for a CANFORGEN, too. Was not surprised to not see one given OPSEC. QC is ground zero for several well established OMGs and the site of Canada’s bloodiest OMG turf war to date. I often see full patch HA and Outlaws on the QC 20 and 40 while commuting.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I saw a letter or some form of direction from a Snr Officer in Gagetown stating this..

Not sure if it was just the CFB or the whole of 5XX.

 

[OldSolduer]

I saw a letter or some form of direction from a Snr Officer in Gagetown stating this..

Not sure if it was just the CFB or the whole of 5XX.

I saw a posting on FB and IIRC it was 5 Div.

Nothing heard, no CANFORGEN, but given how OMGs have their tendrils all over the place in other patches clubs and their associated events, I could see it becoming enough of a regional issue to necessitate that. 5 Div may simply have a particularly pronounced problem with it?

And you sir are correct. I had to deal with HA and their asshole wannabes for a year in jail. Not a fun bunch.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I've seen a couple of posts on other social media sites stating that CAF soldiers have been ordered to not participate in military or veterans themed motorcycle events or groups. This appears to be 5 Div centric at this point. Any truth to this?

They've come out with some 'drinking in uniform' policy changes too....

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[dimsum]

They've come out with some 'drinking in uniform' policy changes too....
View attachment 86809

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Is that just 5 Div or CAF-wide?

 

[Halifax Tar]

They've come out with some 'drinking in uniform' policy changes too....
View attachment 86809

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

That's definitely a CA; and not pan CAF, direction of some sort.

 

[Harris]

Each of the Divs was directed to produce an alcohol policy. AFAIK each Div may be different.

 

[lenaitch]

It might be a preemptive move if they saw an 'uncomfortable' level of OMG interest in local legitimate bike groups/events. The US ATF reported several years ago the OMGs were targeting vets. There might have been some more recent and local intel.

With some legitimate veteran biker groups apparently wanting to mimic the appearance of OMGs, I can see how OMG intermingling and infiltration can happen. It's apparently 'all about freedom', but I don't get it. I've been riding for 50 years and never had the urge to look like either a pirate or OMG.

I can see the concern. A Legion branch was recently 'de-chartered' because of OMG infiltration.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/royal-canadian-legion-branch-to-be-sold-after-being-infiltrated-by-bikers-1.7122583

 

[Haggis]

It might be a preemptive move if they saw an 'uncomfortable' level of OMG interest in local legitimate bike groups/events. The US ATF reported several years ago the OMGs were targeting vets. There might have been some more recent and local intel.

With some legitimate veteran biker groups apparently wanting to mimic the appearance of OMGs, I can see how OMG intermingling and infiltration can happen. It's apparently 'all about freedom', but I don't get it. I've been riding for 50 years and never had the urge to look like either a pirate or OMG.

I can see the concern. A Legion branch was recently 'de-chartered' because of OMG infiltration.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/royal-canadian-legion-branch-to-be-sold-after-being-infiltrated-by-bikers-1.7122583

We had some Outlaws show up at our local Remembrance Day events last year. Our combined guard of local, provincial and federal LE had a "WTF" moment, but they were well behaved and respectful. Shortly thereafter they attempted to host a children's movie day at the Legion branch and that was quickly quashed.

I've been riding for a long time, too, and have been courted by various LE and vet's riding clubs and have turned down all of them. The biggest reason has been because I am heavily involved with my local gun club and regimental association and simply don't have the time to commit to another volunteer organization where 95% of the work is done by 5% of the members.

 

[Journeyman]

They've come out with some 'drinking in uniform' policy changes too....
View attachment 86809

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

I always thought that a constraint was an absolute restriction, whereas a restraint was "it is strongly suggested that one..."

I've been wrong on non-zero occasions though.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I always thought that a constraint was an absolute restriction, whereas a restraint was "it is strongly suggested that one..."

I've been wrong on non-zero occasions though.

English dictionaries will say what they will, but in military planning, a constraint is something that we must do, while a restraint is something that we cannot do. Both constraints and restraints are limitations on our freedom of action but couched a different way.

Being assigned a specific route or a specific battle position or a specific timing would be a constraint. So a unit might have a support by fire task which the commander will focus his plan on, but there might be a constraint of conducting that support by fire from a specific location due to the higher plan. I suppose all tasks are also constraints, but we generally consider those assigned and implied tasks separately and refer to all those little things that we must do (or statements from higher as to how we must do something) that limit our freedom of action as the constraints to ensure that our plan is viable within the higher plan.

Being told we cannot cross a certain line on the map before a certain time would be a restraint, as would be prohibited from ground recce before a certain time or using a certain type of ordinance in a given area, etc.

So for a policy document using this constraint/restraint framework, a constraint might be "All consumption of alcohol in unit lines must be approved by the (whatever commander has the authority)." The constraint would be the obtaining of permission. A restraint could be "Consumption of alcohol during working hours is prohibited." The restraint is the prohibition.

Anyhoo.

 

[Fabius]

Each of the Divs was directed to produce an alcohol policy. AFAIK each Div may be different.

Yeah, 3rd Div has produced one as well. Honestly the entire direction from higher is very adhoc. So each Division makes its own policy, in theory there could be numerous differences in each policy. The Division policies don’t apply to other L1s nor to units that report to a different L2 but reside next to units from another Div.

If the CA wanted its own Alcohol policy they should have just issued their own vs telling the Divs to make their own.

What do I know though.

 

[Remius]

Yeah, 3rd Div has produced one as well. Honestly the entire direction from higher is very adhoc. So each Division makes its own policy, in theory there could be numerous differences in each policy. The Division policies don’t apply to other L1s nor to units that report to a different L2 but reside next to units from another Div.

If the CA wanted its own Alcohol policy they should have just issued their own vs telling the Divs to make their own.

What do I know though.

Especially in areas with multiple commands. Army can’t drink in public in uniform. Perception etc. But CMP, Adm IE and Adm Mat can. If it’s a perception thing that defeats the purpose.

They should either do this CAF wide or not at all.

 

[dimsum]

Especially in areas with multiple commands. Army can’t drink in public in uniform. Perception etc. But CMP, Adm IE and Adm Mat can. If it’s a perception thing that defeats the purpose.

They should either do this CAF wide or not at all.

In Australia and elsewhere, RAAF and RAN can drink in uniform on ANZAC Day but not the Army.

So the Army folks parade in uniform, then change to suits and medals to get on the piss.

 

[markppcli]

Yeah, 3rd Div has produced one as well. Honestly the entire direction from higher is very adhoc. So each Division makes its own policy, in theory there could be numerous differences in each policy. The Division policies don’t apply to other L1s nor to units that report to a different L2 but reside next to units from another Div.

If the CA wanted its own Alcohol policy they should have just issued their own vs telling the Divs to make their own.

What do I know though.

I’m just glad we cracked down on all those section and platoon Friday lunches, these are the real issues that need solving.

 

[Haggis]

I’m just glad we cracked down on all those section and platoon Friday lunches, these are the real issues that need solving.

This willl doubtless be applied to all those who wear the Army DEU regardless of where they serve and those who wear RCAF and RCN DEU who serve in CA units. Because, well, why not?

 

[Furniture]

This willl doubtless be applied to all those who wear the Army DEU regardless of where they serve and those who wear RCAF and RCN DEU who serve in CA units. Because, well, why not?

Alternatively, the CAF could stick to the rules that already exist and go after people for drunkeness when required, and leave the rest of us alone.

All a rule like this does is make life a bit less enjoyable for everyone, while solving nothing. The loud drunken asshole that caused problems in CADPAT will do the same in a regiment/ship/squadron t-shirt, and cause the same amount of negative impressions(very few).