Quote:
Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b
I've never seen a Chaplain with an issue weapon. Of course, Iraq and Afghanistan changed the rules on just about everything, and I wasn't part of that, having already medically retired.
|
The last I heard (although I'm a couple years out of touch with any chaplains) was that regs (FM 27-10, Army Regulation 165-1) required chaplains to be unarmed in combat and in unit combat skills training.
More broadly, under the Geneva Conventions, chaplains are non-combatants, and one carrying a weapon could be considered to have forfeited the rights of a chaplain under Protocol I (e.g. they are not considered a POW, cannot be compelled to work, and must be provided transport between camps for visits to groups of POWs). An armed chaplain loses their protected status and, if wearing a chaplain's badge, could be found guilty of perfidy (falsifying protected status) and subjected to appropriate sentencing (usually execution, if history is any teacher). Likewise, chapel buildings (like hospitals) become legitimate targets if a weapon is taken into them - their protected status is contingent on not being used in a combat role.
Now, in the case of our current conflicts, where the opposing side isn't particularly beholden to the GC, it would make more sense to unofficially carry a personal weapon. For a more conventional conflict, less so.