Should the Navy History and Heritage Command be a part of the Navy, or civilian run.

2015-04-01T18:12:08-04:00

http://www.history.navy.mil

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2015 6:30 PM

2015-04-01T18:30:02-04:00

I vote that it should be part of the Navy, PO3 Steven Sherrill. Seems to make sense to me: NAVY History and Heritage Command should be NAVY run. That seems like a no-brainer.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Apr 1 at 2015 6:35 PM

2015-04-01T18:35:18-04:00

I love NHHC. I love what they do, and I think it is important. I was just torn because on the one hand the resources available to Active duty Navy personnel are greater than those available to civilians, but on the other hand letting Navy Veterans who are a part of that Navy History and Heritage would provide jobs and a "labor of love" to those who were there. I think I probably should have worded the initial question better.

Response by PO2 Mark Saffell made Apr 1 at 2015 9:37 PM

2015-04-01T21:37:18-04:00

I think the Navy would run it with more respect and caring.

Response by PO3 Jeffrey Saupp made Apr 14 at 2015 3:37 AM

2015-04-14T03:37:49-04:00

I deal with them often enough and they've been good to me but they are severely under-funded and under-staffed.

While I like them being 'inside' the service, primarily for access and "authority", being an Official office also means they are likely subject to the whims of the Navy and information they seek from the service about a specific event can get shut down based on political or more often "institutional" reasons.

Knowledge of events where the USN was found to have been at fault for a catastrophic incident will undoubtedly be tampered down if not completely kept from public access.

While I have no desire to "harm" the image of the Navy I proudly served, I also know that 'History' shouldn't be written based on what's "Pretty".