Airman Fatally Shot in 'Trust' Game

Airman Fatally Shot in 'Trust' Game

www.military.com

December 16, 2009
Valley Morning Star, Harlingen Texas

An Airman assigned to Offutt Air Force Base, Neb., died Dec. 11 after being shot during a game involving a handgun, according to police.

Michael Garcia, 23, of San Benito, Texas, died of a gunshot wound to the head in an apartment near the base, the Bellevue Police Department stated in a press release.

Airman Corey D. Hernandez, 21, was arrested on charges of manslaughter and use of a weapon to commit a felony, the military stated in a press release.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow now this really makes me want to join the military! In a new twist of Russian Roulette the gun game soldiers, sailors and aviators call Trust is being played throughout America and Afghanistan and Iraq.

Fellow soldiers point weapons at one another and then ask the soldier being drawn upon if they trust the soldier leveling the weapon at them. The articles sources claim that this is most commonly done with an unloaded weapon.

Unloaded or not it’s a violation of the military’s weapons safety policy and one would have to wonder if there simply aren’t enough dangers facing these men and women in Afghanistan and Iraq that they have to further tempt fate in such a fashion.

With military suicides at an all time high, fratricide between soldiers on the rise, incidents of domestic violence and spousal abuse in military families on the rise and now this, maybe its time we started better thinking just what this culture of prolonged war is truly doing to the men and women tasked to fight it.

It would seem that in all this madness trust is in fact in increasingly shorter and shorter supply!


www.military.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

It's great when the military can't follow simple firearms safety guidelines.

And they have nukes.

Never point a gun, any gun, at anything you dont want to die. Ever.

Children know this. Sorry, I mean children with parents who arent raging hoplophobes trying to disarm everyone.

"Trust," the game that Garcia and Hernandez reportedly were playing, involves a person pointing a handgun at another person.

"It's a game of confidence, a game of trust," Victor Garza, chairman of the San Benito Veterans Advisory Board, said. "Usually the weapon is unloaded."

According to a recent Associated Press report, "Trust" is a game Marines have sometimes played to build confidence in colleagues: Point a gun at a comrade and ask, "Do you trust me?"

The AP has reported that the game has cropped up in barracks across Iraq and Afghanistan and is supposed to make a serviceman feel comfortable enough with a comrade that he would stare into the other's gun barrel. But it violates the military's basic weapon-safety rules.

What a truly insane game to be playing. One does have to wonder what factor other games and the notion of games play into this.

There is no denying that many of the young men and women joining the military do so after falling in love with X-box and Nintendo Games like Heilo and Call of Duty that make war esoteric entertaining and fun for ages 13 and up.

I often wonder to what extent some of these well intentioned young men and women whose frontal lobes aren’t fully formed to the age of 26 imagine when they join the military and if they think in some way its just an extension of a game. Only in this case a game called life which at 18, 19 and 20 years of age they can only begin to imagine what all that game entails, as well as what it doesn’t entail…A Reset Button!

[edit on 16/12/09 by PSUSA]

What I find erroneous in the article is these comments "Usually the weapon is unloaded." What the heck was the guy trying to state, is it ok to play that game when the weapon is unloaded?

reply to post by December_Rain


It certainly does tend to defy all common sense and logic for anyone to play such a questionable and dubious game.

I think it goes to maturity and obviously a wide spread atmosphere of peer pressure that a game like this would be as common as it appears to be within the services.

Its amazing to think anyone could imagine such a game fun or productive.

What does that say about our troops judgement?

Put him up for a Darwin award. I'll take any bet that the only firearms training that these two recieved was in boot camp. Contrary to popular belief, most people in the Air Force and Navy never touch a weapon except for the minimal training recieved in Boot Camp. If my duties hadn't warrented it, the only shooting I would have done during my time in the Navy would have been shooting 5 rounds from a .22 barrel in a .45 frame.

Things sure have changed.

In my day, admittedly decades ago, if you pointed a gun at one of your team, or any member of the service for that matter, you might be looking at - eventually - a fine, a reduction in rank, and giving up any hope of a career in the service - but of course that would only happen after the beating of a lifetime.

Their is only one reason to point a gun at someone. Games didn't enter into it.

This is a juvenile and ignorant practice that serves no purpose other than to risk one's life... and in my case, the permanent obliteration of any trust I would have ever had for the person holding the weapon.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Put him up for a Darwin award. I'll take any bet that the only firearms training that these two recieved was in boot camp. Contrary to popular belief, most people in the Air Force and Navy never touch a weapon except for the minimal training recieved in Boot Camp. If my duties hadn't warrented it, the only shooting I would have done during my time in the Navy would have been shooting 5 rounds from a .22 barrel in a .45 frame.

I agree with you most aviators and seamen have no practical opportunity to fire sidearms in defense or offense modes but two facts remain.

The first that they are given deadly sidearms and they are apparently abusing them.

The second is that it is not just Seamen and Aviators playing this game, but combat soldiers as well who do use their firearms in hostilities.

Either way you slice it this game is a disturbing sign of the times we live in and the current state of mentality that is prevelant in our military here in America.

Originally posted by Maxmars
Things sure have changed.

In my day, admittedly decades ago, if you pointed a gun at one of your team, or any member of the service for that matter, you might be looking at - eventually - a fine, a reduction in rank, and giving up any hope of a career in the service - but of course that would only happen after the beating of a lifetime.

Their is only one reason to point a gun at someone. Games didn't enter into it.

This is a juvenile and ignorant practice that serves no purpose other than to risk one's life... and in my case, the permanent obliteration of any trust I would have ever had for the person holding the weapon.

Agreed the whole thing is just childish at best.

Like the above poster said when I was in it would also be "that's not cool man" statement made and then the one with the gun would be praying there were no snitches around as his military carer would end up being a bus driver of some sorts if he was lucky not to mention the take down and beating of a life time for being stupid.

To ALL
The military has rules but you cant stop dopes. Anyone who would put a gun to there head to play a game should not be looked at as THE MILITARY is like this. The military does waht it can but it also doenst go over board with rule and regs. these two were dopes and acted like other non military dopes.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Wrong. They were not issued this weapon. You do not take issued weapons off base. The shooting happened at an off base apartment. This was somebody's personal weapon. If the people involved here were not military, you would have never heard of this incident. Were they morons? Yes. Did they use bad judgement? Yes.

reply to post by JIMC5499


You really should read the whole article before commenting friend.

This is happening within American Military Unites stationed across the world.

It's great to want to defend our military but when its done in a way that ignores a larger problem to make a big problem seem like a small problem...

Well it's great for Public Relations but BAD for the people who are still afflicted with the problem that Public Relations has now minimized as a sole way of handling a problem.

There is a big difference between being concerned someone's reputation and being concerned about them as a person.

reply to post by itsallalie


How many ways can we tell our selves actions like this are smaller and less significant than they truly are to make our selves feel better and to try to maintain an illusionary reputation?

People really should read the whole article and then comment.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I did read the article. Nothing there changes my mind. So you have a few Marine morons too. Looks like the AP is doing what they do best. Sensationalizing a story to promote their Liberalist agenda. I've lost count of the number of stories run by the AP that have turned out to be pure bull#.

reply to post by JIMC5499


Wtitten by the AP picked up by Military.com!

Now why exactly do you supposed Military.com would pick up on the story if it had no relevance to its mostly military readers?

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


If it's one thing I've learned in life it's that I don't believe everything I read. Some idiots play a stupid game and someone is killed. Now the whole military soldier is to blame. Whatever! I know soldiers that wouldn't even think of such a game and I'm tired of an incident happening and all soldiers are to blame. I guess if someone goes out and commits a murder then we should say the whole human race are idiots and to blame. I still defend our soldiers and always will. When something like this happens it doesn't mean that everyone is doing it. I will never trust the media and the stories they try to add to such tragedy's. Take a look at all the bad stuff that happens everywhere around the world by citizens. There's so much crime in this world but when something happens with a couple soldiers all hell breaks loose. So many murders, rapes, beatings etc... go unnoticed in this world but all soldiers should pay for another soldiers faults. I'm not buying it.

reply to post by Solarskye


My personal opinion is our soldiers would much prefer the following:

More pay

More time off

Shorter and fewer deployments

Better equipment

Better training

and NO WARS

But if you think defending an underpaid overworked military thats showing multiple signs of cracking under the stress we put on it is more helpful by epitaphs and meaningless words have it! It's a free Internet!

This is thread and it's commentary are just more examples of taking a very tragic incident and turning into a sarcastic, propaganda pulpit devoid of serious discussion.

Pointing weapons in such a manner is irresponsible and it's time that the military got a handle on this problem.

However, using this tragedy in the manner it is used here is both irresponsible and insensitive--and typical.


[edit on 2009/12/17 by GradyPhilpott]