Posted on Oct 28, 2014
Was Marine Sgt Major Archie Right or Wrong? What would you have done?
4.69K
3
2
0
0
0
Responses: 1
SGM (Join to see), I think he was right, but - in hindsight - he should have approached the problem situation differently. Getting directly involved, and in the face of Arguello, led to problems and his ultimate downfall.
Sgt Maj Archie even said: "In hindsight ... he should have left the argument and returned to his car when he saw Arguello’s hand fly up." It was a mistake. Seems like a small mistake, but I guess when you're in that type of high-vis position, you have to guard against such things.
It's easy enough now, after the fact, to say that I would have done something differently. I probably would have asked the authorities (MPs, etc.) to handle the situation. Again, though, that's easy to say now.
Sgt Maj Archie even said: "In hindsight ... he should have left the argument and returned to his car when he saw Arguello’s hand fly up." It was a mistake. Seems like a small mistake, but I guess when you're in that type of high-vis position, you have to guard against such things.
It's easy enough now, after the fact, to say that I would have done something differently. I probably would have asked the authorities (MPs, etc.) to handle the situation. Again, though, that's easy to say now.
(2)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
CW5 Montgomery--you are always an exceptionally alert first responder! Agree. Consider the behavioral model of (1) Frustration (2) Confrontation (3) Escalation. The model repeats itself until the frustration is relieved. Protesters and others are usually motivated by initial frustration--and have the right to peacefully assemble. Many seek validation of their position by your participation and media attention. If they seek confrontation--or if they motivate you to confront-- the third phase of escalation begins and they and their argument can gain that attention, and thus more credibility. While I agree with the Sgt. Major, it was not appropriate to take the bait and to escalate the confrontation. Rather, the thing to do is to take the air out of an argument--but in this case it was a decision made a echelons above reality; not one for a local official to deny, defend or explain. It may have been appropriate to patiently listen, but not to confront or to escalate. The situation could have been far worse then, and at the point of "taking" personal property--the hat. One cannot assume it was government property nor was it his right to confiscate it no matter how inadvertantly. He did the right thing giving it to MPs, who did the right thing by returning it.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next