Turning a fellow midshipman in for under-age drinking is more likely to end his "career" than the drinking will. There's a difference between being a raging alcoholic and just being a stupid young kid who is only 20-yrs-old and having too much to drink at a party.
I simply disagree with the notion that a midshipman should always turn them in every time they witness this. I understand where you're coming from, but I think it is rather sanctimonious to suggest that IF it is not addressed that it will ALWAYS lead to something disastrous. No - I disagree. I'm an example of that. And, I dare say I represent the MAJORITY. Did I ever drink while under age? Yes! Am I trying to justify it? No! I'm just saying that it happens and there is no reason to make a bigger deal out of it than necessary.
I think that sometimes kids do stupid things (like under age drinking) that do not necessarily require that they be given the "death penalty." Ultimately people are responsible for their own behavior. Some behavior crosses the line, no doubt. But a 20yr old getting a little tipsy at a party should, in my opinion, be handled at the friend-level.
I guess a midshipman has to decide for himself if he's going to be "the guy" who turns everybody in for every violation he observes. My advice (take it for what it's worth) is to not be "the guy."
The young man asking the question has received two different opinions. Should he become a midshipman someday, I can assure you he is going to have the opportunity to exercise his judgment on this matter, one way or the other. He'll know what to do.
Well said and spot on. If you go back to the OP- the guy is NOTasking about turning the guy in for DUI. He is asking about reporting someone for going home on leave and drinking too much while underage. What is a Mid; Cadet or Officer's responsibility? Well- first and foremost he has a responsibility for the safety of his people, the unit and the accomplishment of the mission, and the honor code or concept tells him to do so without lying, cheating or stealing. Thankfully -
there isn't a requirement that says you won't occasionally be personally stupid. So on what grounds would you be "turning this guy in"? There is no honor violation here- nor as written here is there an indication that the kid is boozing and driving- just a bunch of barracks stories about going home and getting smashed- which may be stupid but certainly seems to be a personal action that doesn't call for the destruction of the kids life by a classmate who as related is neither present nor a witness to anything other than the kid saying that he got blasted on leave. Turning someone in for this one would produce an effect which is likely to be not that the kid learns from his "mistakes" (what ever those may actually be) it is that you as a distant third party believe he may have committed", but more likely either that you will have destroyed his career by inuendo, or that he will survive after going thru a huge amount of bureaucratic over-reaction. Either way you will have made yourself a pariah among your peers and pretty much just contributed to the chilling of unguarded speech even among comrades over a pretty minor law (and regardless of what LITS says- it's underage drinking- which is right up there with speeding which I assume he is not advocating you also would turn someone in for).
Surely LITS also recognizes that his follow up about "what do you do when he lies" is a completely different offense?
Bottom line- the first requirement of an officer to possess is common sense combined with honesty. Are you faced with evidence that this persons actions put people in danger or hurt someone else? Are you faced with evidence that this person was lying, cheating, stealing? If not - how could you possibly come to a conclusion that you should be "turning them in?"
Finally- to digress somewhat-
in my opinion the whole concept of 18 year olds "underage drinking" is pretty stupid. You are old enough to enlist- old enough to get your butt blown up by an IED but not old enough to buy a beer- even though 20 years ago you would have been old enough to buy one at that age, and in virtually any NATO country to include the one just north of us you can do so. It's an idiotic law foisted on the country by those who approach life from the "nanny" perspective and it exists because 18-21 year olds are too lazy to exercise their right to vote in the numbers to which they are entitled. It equates drinking with DUI. But DUI is DUI and it should be punished by virtually the harshest means availaible- which is exactly what does happen in Norway for example. Virtually no one drinks and drives there as a result- it just isn't done. But to tell an 18 year old that you are liable to be called upon to fight,die, vote, pay taxes, marry, be sent to prison as an adult- but not buy a beer? Oh please!
"USNA is not a life of total incarceration and chivalry after all"
No KD it is not- nor is it intended to be. It is about taking responsibility for
your actions and the actions of others
when it is appropriate- which doesn't necessarily imply that you are either a "plaster saint" or the guy who no one will talk to. Your responsiblity to this classmate seems to be clearly to use your commons sense- remind them that "acting the fool" is a good way to shorten his career, and then make sure that your actions are consonant with how you expect a leader to act.