Both current vice presidential candidates have military experience. Republican JD Vance served four years in the Marine Corps and Democrat Tim Walz served 24 years in the Army National Guard. Last week, Vance accused Walz of “stolen valor,” a term that includes misrepresenting military service, rank, medals earned or duties and actions taken while on duty.

Strictly speaking, stolen valor is illegal. The Stolen Valor Act of 2013 makes false claims to the acquisition of a military award such as the Navy Cross or Silver Star, which are federal crimes. And there is an enhanced penalty for offenses related to the Medal of Honor. I am a former Marine Corps military lawyer and it seems to me that nothing Walz did or said even comes close to violating that law.

But Republicans, led by Vance, have raised several other criticisms of Walz’s service. First, they claim that he avoided the mission to Afghanistan with his Minnesota National Guard unit, retiring from the service in 2005. But Walz had informed his unit of his plans to retire from the Guard before an official announcement of a possible deployment was made. He said he wanted to run for Congress – and he did, winning a seat in 2006.

Second, Republicans claim that Walz inflated his rank after retirement by calling himself a command sergeant major, one of the highest ranks a soldier can attain. But Walz had actually achieved the rank of command sergeant major during his service. However, for technical reasons, including not having completed military courses, he retired with a lower rank, namely master sergeant. The fact that he had achieved the higher rank during his service makes his lower rank at retirement a minor difference without much significance.

What I find misleading is Walz’s statement that he carried weapons of war “in war.” He was talking about his support for banning military assault weapons when he told a group of voters, “We can make sure that those weapons of war that I carried in war are the only place that those weapons are.”

The sentence “I wore in the war” seems imply that he had been in combat situations. The Harris-Walz campaign later said he had “slipped of the tongue.” But even in that situation, I am not aware of Walz directly saying he had been in combat situations, or falsely claiming to have won a combat medal or badge. (Nor has Vance, by the way.)

Vance’s own military service was called into question. CNN’s Brianna Keilar asked whether Vance had the right to challenge the timing of Walz’s retirement since he himself was not a front-line Marine. In fact, Vance was a Marine “combat correspondent,” meaning someone who “had not seen combat,” Keilar said, adding, “The title combat correspondent gives a very different impression.” If you “dig a little deeper,” Keilar said, “he was a public affairs specialist.”

But that is, in my opinion, another meaningless distinction. Vance does not claim to be a war veteran, and he did serve in a war zone. Keilar herself walked back her initial criticism and later said on air that Vance and Walz’s military experiences had given them special insight into the hardships and challenges of military life – something that neither of the two presidential candidates can claim.

I find it amusing that Vance said the Marine Corps “asked” him to go to Iraq. Unless protocol has changed, I suspect he was “ordered” to deploy overseas, like me.

However, since neither candidate falsely claimed to have received an award for his wounds or bravery, and neither falsely claimed to be a war veteran, I am of the opinion that neither candidate is guilty of stolen bravery.

Whenever I hear someone falsely and substantially inflate their military performance, I am insulted and disgusted. Many, in fact most, who serve in the military never see combat action and do not receive valor awards. Many move on to other jobs before they are even deployed. Take my experience. Although I voluntarily joined the military, I would never have volunteered for service in Vietnam itself. I did serve during that war, but on Okinawa, where I was a military lawyer in the Marines. I also left active duty after my tour of duty ended in 1973, even though there was a shortage of lawyers in the Marine Corps, particularly in Okinawa.

So I I have great admiration for individuals like Walz and Vance who served voluntarily.

My childhood friend Lee Herron was a Marine who volunteered for the Vietnam War. Once there, he insisted on being sent to the front. He died on February 22, 1969, while He saved the lives of his comrades. He was posthumously awarded the prestigious Navy Cross. Military personnel like Herron belong to a class of their own, patriots and heroes.

If anyone were to falsely claim to have achieved anything like the status of a man like Herron, Senator John McCain, or Medal of Honor-winning Marine Colonel Wes Fox (Herron’s company commander), the public would and should be angry at the stolen heroism involved.

But the hair-splitting between Vance and Walz seems trivial in comparison. I suggest we drop the subject; aren’t there much more important issues to deal with?

David Nelson is a retired attorney from Houston.