Laser Tag and the Military-Civilian Divide

By Former Staff Sgt. Nicholas DiMichele

Retired Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik Non-Resident Writing Fellow and former Infantry Platoon Sergeant

Nov. 27, 2024

Download the PDF

The simple task of playing laser tag with a group of friends can be a dramatic experience for combat veterans. (Graphic by NCO Journal)

There was chaos all around me. The green and red lights blinded my eyes, and the techno-funk music playing was equally disorienting.

As I maneuvered to the barrier before me, my buddy provided covering fire. Suddenly, the enemy attacked.

“Player hit!” was all I heard. I looked down at my chest: Nothing. Glancing over at my buddy, I saw his chest alight and flashing red.

I was alone now, but I needed to complete my mission.

As I moved from barrier to barrier, I finally came face-to-face with the enemy. As we both raised our weapons, I pulled the trigger first and saw his torso sparkle crimson, illuminated by the pulsing sensor at his sternum.

“Player hit!”

Before I could understand what I had done, a bright flash blazed across the room, and I heard the sweet words: “Game over!”

The war was over, but the events that had unfolded would stay with me forever.

Do I have your attention? Good. If you couldn’t tell, the passage above dramatizes my recent experience playing laser tag.

The game figured among the festivities at my recent high school reunion. When it came time to play, many people wanted me on their team. I had military experience, which few others did in my graduating class from a town outside of Boulder, Colorado.

At first, I laughed off the attention. But before we started, some people asked if I would be OK.

I was so taken aback that I asked why I wouldn’t be. Many wondered if I had PTSD because of “Afghanistan and military stuff going on.”

Now, I wasn’t upset with them asking. I appreciated their sincerity and sensitivity about combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). What struck me was the disconnect between military and civilian communities that prompted such questioning.

When the military transitioned to an all-volunteer force, society collectively agreed it would pay to have a small section of the population train, fight, and, if called upon, bear the costs of war. The U.S. benefits from this force. However, the system has created a rift that causes individual citizens to misunderstand one another.

Communities and institutions are built on trust, including between the American people and the military. If there is no trust or communication between these two sects of society, it can create an awkward tension where each group doesn’t understand the other or how to interact with it. (U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. Cecil Elliott II)

Trust forms the foundation for all communities and institutions, including between the American people and the armed forces. If no confidence or communication exists between these two sections of society, tension results. Each doesn’t understand the other, nor does it know how to interact together.

So, what is the solution?

I honestly don’t know. Writers and editors have spilled barrels of ink on the topic of the military-civilian divide. Does bridging the gap fall upon the shoulders of the military and veterans or the civilian community?

It takes a mutual effort from both sides at the individual level. I explain my experiences to those with no military background while listening to where they’re coming from, and I try to understand how they view the military and veteran community.

While this divide is not a novel topic, I hope this article is a drop in the bucket of experiences that both combat and noncombat veterans have had with civilian communities who don’t fully understand the military or the costs associated with service. I also encourage civilians with no military background to describe their experiences with the military and veteran community.

The solution requires more veterans, military, and civilians to come forward to tell their stories and highlight this issue. If we want trust between these two parts of society, we must be willing to have head-on discussions and acknowledge disconnects requiring more dialogue.

Back to Top