Talk:Navy Ceremonial Duty Ribbon

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Untitled

The fact that this ribbon is only retroactive to 2001 is a slap in the face to all those who have served in the U.S. Ceremonial Guard before that time. Whether you served in the guard in 2003 or 1933, you still served in the guard. It hard for me to understand Gordon R England's thought process when he initiated this award. I guess I'm just sore because the ribbon is just so snazzy looking.

Also, many sailors serving on CONUS duty serve on the US Navy's regiona Funeral Details, providing the same services as the Ceremonial guard to honor our deceased veterans and shipmates. None of those individuals are eligible either.

Shit, when I found out about it I awarded it to myself. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 17:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BullShit they don't perfom in half of the ceremonies that we do, and we probably trained them how to do it. and if you are wearing that ribbon then your just a shitbag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.199.220.95 (talk) 23:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HOO-YAH FIRING PARTY

T.I.F.P. (THIS IS FIRING PARTY) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.199.220.95 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was Ceremonial Guard 1990 to 1992 I sure as shit should be elegible.

Petition to Include Ceremonial Guardsmen Prior to the NAVADMIN Cut-off Date of 2001

There is an effort of former and current Guardsmen that is currently organizing to petition Congress to have the NAVADMIN policy changed, sponsored by the USN Ceremonial Guard Alumni Association. The website for this petition is at http://guardmember.ning.com.

This group disagrees with the NAVADMIN policy that establishes the eligibility criteria to receive the award as the formation of the USN Ceremonial Guard as it's own command, than a department that fell under the auspices of Naval District Washington. This group believes that the short-sighted policy set forth by NAVADMIN ignores the 70-year long generational legacy of Guardmembers who received, learned, practiced, supported and taught the Guard standard since the formation of the Guard in 1931. The group also feels that the award of the USN Ceremonial Guard service ribbon is "empty" without the legacy of a 70-year legacy of former members who have also earned the award by their actions, during their dates of service.

Former Guard members that fail to meet the arbitrary cut-off-date, are ineligible to receive the award, regardless of their performance or service. It is a great injustice to deny due honors to any Veteran. The NAVADMIN cut-off date applies to former members being ineligible to receive this ribbon based on the command change date, but not other parts of the Ceremonial Guard legacy. There is the issue that the current USN Ceremonial Guard Navy Colors carry a number of streamers that were awarded to past Guard generations. The group feels that this creates an uneasy double-standard by the new USN Ceremonial Guard command where it's accepted that the Guard embraces it's legacy in some ways, but not all ways, specifically to those in the Guard prior to 2001, that like every Guard generation, assure the integrity of the Guards standards. It is unfortunate that past Guardsmen, and the families of Guardsmen do not have an opportunity to submit a candidate award package to be evaluated for the award, and it's also unfortunate that recipients of the award are not included in the legacy of former Guardsmen who should have received the award, but were ineligible based only upon the time that they served.

If you want to correct this injustice, please join the petition effort and follow the guidance to write your congressional leadership. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.240.13 (talk) 18:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]