Help me out here. I could be way off, and I will no doubt offend somebody during this post, which I apologize for, but this has been bugging me for hours.
So I'm watching The Peoples Court today, and one of the plaintiff's described herself as "a disabled veteran." I always picture war veterans to be old men, which I realize with the gulf war and with the "war on terror" that image needs to be amended, and this woman looked to be about forty. But, hey, I don't judge. She also looks completely able-bodied.
Judge Milian is reading my mind because she asks the woman how she became a "disabled veteran." So, the woman said that she did six years of "active duty" working in "a field" (not THE field, A field) and that she was injured during physical fitness drills at various points in the six years.
Does this make her a DISABLED VETERAN? She was never in combat, never served on a line...so does she, and I'm honestly asking here, get categorized at the same level as someone who got his arm blown off in a combat zone?