Ethics of throwing a rifle at a civilian? and other questions
Sure, Joe was a good guy, he was a Texan whose family was filled with soldiers, meaning he probably knew how to fire a rifle pretty well, and he sure was dressed like a soldier in those fatigues. That's all well and good. But throwing a rifle at a civilian, no matter what his background or how he's dressed, and telling them to fight? There have gotta have army rules against such things, right?
Look, I'm not a moron - I know they needed every single person they could get to carry a rifle, or at least that's the way it was depicted in the movie. I'm not questioning the propriety of what was actually done here. I'm just asking more in a hypothetical situation, whether there are specific rules about having non-combatants fight, even in an extreme situation like this. Also, are army medics still not allowed to carry a gun? (And I know that most of them probably do, or at least did; again, I'm not stupid. My uncle was a medic and "secretly" carried one in WW II.) Were the medics fighting, or ordered to fight during this battle?
How about journalistic rules and ethics about not getting involved in the story you're covering? Did Joe get any journalistic heat for this? I know the Army eventually gave him the bronze star (or at least, so Wikipedia says), but what about UPI? By the way, the movie shows Joe mowing down a couple of PAVN soldiers; did he really do this? What was he given the bronze star for?
I asked the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.