Friendly fire

Anyday

Well-Known Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Has anyone been approved for CRSC based on friendly fire? Mine was disapproved because it is a “crime”, which doesn’t make sense to us, as it is still an injury from an instrument of war… I have not seen anything posted that says it can’t be crime related. Can anyone elaborate on it please?
 
Hello,

Please describe the circumstances of the event.

Ron
 
Weapon used against someone on the same team— a fellow service member using their pewpew (not sure if the word is restricted here like most social media) against me, on purpose.
 
Weapon used against someone on the same team— a fellow service member using their pewpew (not sure if the word is restricted here like most social media) against me, on purpose.
if it’s a one on one situation, they’re going to consider that a “soldier on soldier” assault (not approved for CRSC). If you were shot at in a mass shooting (think Fort Hood) they will approve that for CRSC.
 
How does that make sense when an example given is being injured by a “broomstick” during pugil would be approved… I mean that’s one on one. “Soldier on soldier” and that’s not even a real weapon nor does it even have to be in a combat zone… and they could injure you on purpose during that training. Seems pretty backwards. I’m not coming after you… I know you’re just informing but doesn’t that seem unjust?
 
How does that make sense when an example given is being injured by a “broomstick” during pugil would be approved… I mean that’s one on one. “Soldier on soldier” and that’s not even a real weapon nor does it even have to be in a combat zone… and they could injure you on purpose during that training. Seems pretty backwards. I’m not coming after you… I know you’re just informing but doesn’t that seem unjust?
Yeah man I get it. Just telling you what I learned during the process.
 
6F17D07B-918F-4EED-90C7-F65D0536A08E.jpeg
I mean even here it has “shot in foot on firing range” as an example… just doesn’t really add up to me.
And I know you’re just sharing what you have learned, that’s why I said I’m not coming after you and that it just didn’t make sense to me. Didn’t mean anything negative by it.
 
How does that make sense when an example given is being injured by a “broomstick” during pugil would be approved… I mean that’s one on one. “Soldier on soldier” and that’s not even a real weapon nor does it even have to be in a combat zone… and they could injure you on purpose during that training. Seems pretty backwards. I’m not coming after you… I know you’re just informing but doesn’t that seem unjust?
Hello,

As you likely know, you can appeal via a Reconsideration Request.

Somewhat related, although not for CRSC was the death of a Sergeant Major with the 64th Finance Section in 1969, Danang, Vietnam.

He was fragged by a coward in his unit. His awards/medals do not show the Purple Heart.

@RetiredColonel-MikeT keeps up with CRSC-related matters and has done so for years. He might chime in.

Good luck to you.

Ron
 
Has anyone been approved for CRSC based on friendly fire? Mine was disapproved because it is a “crime”, which doesn’t make sense to us, as it is still an injury from an instrument of war… I have not seen anything posted that says it can’t be crime related. Can anyone elaborate on it please?
I hate to see this. I would call HRC and ask to talk to the HMFIC of CRSC and see what he says. I have a good friend who was in the tent with 101 in 04. He was shot and blown up by a frag, No Purple Heart. I saw a news article that another SM that was there is now pushing Congress. Pat Tillman (RIP) got a Silver Star for friendly fire. They need to do better with these situations. WE ANSWERED THE CALL! Let me know if there's anything I can do to help.
 
It would be nice for them to change it. Unfortunately I do not do well to stand up and appeal, I am rated 100% due to a TBI from the incident so my confidence and ability to speak/convey a message do not always work well. Hopefully they will do better for others. I really thought my case was cut and dry, it took me over a year to read the very little documentation on CRSC that I could found and I thought my case fit fine. Did not expect to get denied. Thank you all for your information. And anyone please feel free to add more. Thanks again.
 
It would be nice for them to change it. Unfortunately I do not do well to stand up and appeal, I am rated 100% due to a TBI from the incident so my confidence and ability to speak/convey a message do not always work well. Hopefully they will do better for others. I really thought my case was cut and dry, it took me over a year to read the very little documentation on CRSC that I could found and I thought my case fit fine. Did not expect to get denied. Thank you all for your information. And anyone else please feel free to add more. Thanks again.
Sorry to hear that brother. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help. if you need someone to call for you or whatever I'm be glad to help.
 
It would be nice for them to change it. Unfortunately I do not do well to stand up and appeal, I am rated 100% due to a TBI from the incident so my confidence and ability to speak/convey a message do not always work well. Hopefully they will do better for others. I really thought my case was cut and dry, it took me over a year to read the very little documentation on CRSC that I could found and I thought my case fit fine. Did not expect to get denied. Thank you all for your information. And anyone please feel free to add more. Thanks again.
Did your incident take place in a combat zone? I was reading it as a garrison situation.
 
Would you mind sharing the circumstances of this one?
I was approved based on an incident that I’d rather not discuss in a public forum. The information I’ve given comes directly from the folks at HRC.
 
View attachment 9168
I mean even here it has “shot in foot on firing range” as an example… just doesn’t really add up to me.
And I know you’re just sharing what you have learned, that’s why I said I’m not coming after you and that it just didn’t make sense to me. Didn’t mean anything negative by it.
I get what you're saying about being shot in the foot: in this example, it's not stating whether it's accidental or intentional. I'm presuming it's accidental, which means no negligence as well.

You can also check with NVLSP.org as they advocate for vets all the time when it comes to CRSC and other benefits. But it takes time, 12-18 months on average.
 
Top