Navy officer to face charges for returning fire during terrorist attack here

[NavyC5]

Originally Posted by Craig

I was a Navy Nuke, I got to shoot about every three years; I was never going to stand armed watch. There were guys fresh out of boot camp and sub school that had nearly no training, their were some we were afraid would shoot themselves. The joke was they had to "qualify" small arms to be eligible to begin the topside watch quals. There were more senior people waiting to get off the topside watch rotation. So when they went to the range to qual or requal, once the senior guys put enough on their targets, they would start filling the target of the "boot" next to them so they could begin to qual.

I guess the moral of the story is: Not everyone needs to be handling a gun, even in the military.

Very true. Back when I was stationed in San Antonio, one of my Airmen put a .357 Sig round thru his hand and foot. Yes you read that right, one bullet...two hits. If you can figure out how he did it, you're better man than me. I still can't figure it out.

[markids77]

Since at any point any member of our armed forces might find the need to "stand and deliver" your comments sadden me. Competent weapon handling and marksmanship might be a "last resort" requirement for sailors or aviators, but they all damned sure should be ready for that event!

[NavyC5]

Originally Posted by markids77

Since at any point any member of our armed forces might find the need to "stand and deliver" your comments sadden me. Competent weapon handling and marksmanship might be a "last resort" requirement for sailors or aviators, but they all damned sure should be ready for that event!

I agree that all should be trained , the truth is most jobs in the military don't require weapons proficiency. "As needed" training is the norm. I currently have 100+ Airmen working for me. All are basic weapons trained and receive additional training should duty requirements dictate. However most of them simply do not have the skills to carry on a daily basis.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

I agree that all should be trained , the truth is most jobs in the military don't require weapons proficiency. "As needed" training is the norm. I currently have 100+ Airmen working for me. All are basic weapons trained and receive additional training should duty requirements dictate. However most of them simply do not have the skills to carry on a daily basis.

What does that say about the average person carrying if military people don't have the skills?

[markids77]

I find that incredible, although I could have guessed how poorly things were being run when I saw photos of civilians guarding recruiting offices... while leaning against light poles balanced on one foot with their rifle dangling from a sling. Any shooter worth their salt would have three rounds in said fool's chest before he got both hands on his gun. Our leaders are failing those who volunteer to serve.

[NavyC5]

Originally Posted by Thomas

What does that say about the average person carrying if military people don't have the skills?

I never said they don't have the skills. All members of the military are provided basis weapons training. Safety, marksmanship, etc. I said, if they are moved into a position where carrying a weapon is or may be required, they are provided additional and refresher training.

[NavyC5]

Originally Posted by markids77

I find that incredible, although I could have guessed how poorly things were being run when I saw photos of civilians guarding recruiting offices... while leaning against light poles balanced on one foot with their rifle dangling from a sling. Any shooter worth their salt would have three rounds in said fool's chest before he got both hands on his gun. Our leaders are failing those who volunteer to serve.

Agree 100% However for that to happen additional training for the majority of service members would be required. Congress won't pony up the money.

[markids77]

Originally Posted by Thomas

What does that say about the average person carrying if military people don't have the skills?

I consider myself an average Joe... no military service and a self taught marksman. I shoot GSSF indoor league matches and can outshoot 80 percent or better of the LEOs or active service I go up against. Special forces/SWAT/US Marshalls get paid to practice... they win every time. The rest myself or a couple other average Joes handle.

Skill sharpening requires repetition. Do anything often enough with a coach to ensure proper technique and everyone who is legally able to own a gun can be a safe; proficient shooter.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by markids77

I find that incredible, although I could have guessed how poorly things were being run when I saw photos of civilians guarding recruiting offices... while leaning against light poles balanced on one foot with their rifle dangling from a sling. Any shooter worth their salt would have three rounds in said fool's chest before he got both hands on his gun. Our leaders are failing those who volunteer to serve.

Let's keep things in perspective please. I'm very proficient with a firearm. But surely you would agree that it was more important to our mission that I be proficient in the maintenance and operation of a nuclear power plant, so I could help deliver a vessel that had more arsenal than all but five of the worlds countries inside its hull, to the doorstep of whatever threat we were facing at the time.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Thomas

What does that say about the average person carrying if military people don't have the skills?

It doesn't say anything relevant at all.

[Grey Ghost]

Originally Posted by markids77

Our leaders are failing those who volunteer to serve.

I did the selective service thing, but everyone told me to stay away from peace time military duty. I've also been told by several military people the last war the US had any intent on winning was WW2. Poor leadership, decision making, politics, etc...have killed too many volunteer military members.

Originally Posted by Craig

Let's keep things in perspective please. I'm very proficient with a firearm. But surely you would agree that it was more important to our mission that I be proficient in the maintenance and operation of a nuclear power plant, so I could help deliver a vessel that had more arsenal than all but five of the worlds countries inside its hull, to the doorstep of whatever threat we were facing at the time.

I have a friend doing the same Navy nuke job now. He seems happy and enjoys his job. Just returned from a patrol. I think his second patrol.

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Craig

Let's keep things in perspective please. I'm very proficient with a firearm. But surely you would agree that it was more important to our mission that I be proficient in the maintenance and operation of a nuclear power plant, so I could help deliver a vessel that had more arsenal than all but five of the worlds countries inside its hull, to the doorstep of whatever threat we were facing at the time.

If Mrvette had been president during your watch, you would have actually delivered that payload.....all of it.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

If Mrvette had been president during your watch, you would have actually delivered that payload.....all of it.

It's a war we would win; wouldn't be much left at the end, so "win" probably isn't the right word.

[island14]

Originally Posted by NavyC5

Very true. Back when I was stationed in San Antonio, one of my Airmen put a .357 Sig round thru his hand and foot. Yes you read that right, one bullet...two hits. If you can figure out how he did it, you're better man than me. I still can't figure it out.

That should be required training for Politicians..

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by Craig

It doesn't say anything relevant at all.

K

Thanks.



Hey Craig. What exactly did you do in the Navy Nuke program? Maintenance or Operations? Retired Navy? Did you go into the commercial Nuclear Power generation?

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by Waco

Is there a reason you're being so antagonistic? This is why VB is slowly dying...

I suppose you gotta blame someone.

Never mind Duke's meltdown. Right? RIGHT?

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Thomas

K

Thanks.



Hey Craig. What exactly did you do in the Navy Nuke program? Maintenance or Operations? Retired Navy? Did you go into the commercial Nuclear Power generation?

Saw where you were going, didn't think it relevant...YMMV.

I was a sailor so ops and maintenance. I didn't retire, I got out with nothing but an interest in getting a mechanical engineering degree. I'm in commercial construction. I didn't stay in nuclear power because I knew it meant a lifetime of continuous training and qualifying; I was tired of that.

[markids77]

Originally Posted by Craig

Let's keep things in perspective please. I'm very proficient with a firearm. But surely you would agree that it was more important to our mission that I be proficient in the maintenance and operation of a nuclear power plant, so I could help deliver a vessel that had more arsenal than all but five of the worlds countries inside its hull, to the doorstep of whatever threat we were facing at the time.

I suggest that both things carry equal import. It is impossible to man your battle station if the opfor has killed all on board, or captured them. Close combat is highly unlikely inside a carrier or sub, but then so were the attacks on 9/11. The "rules" have changed and our military is not changing in lock step.

[syf350]

so have we found out if this story is real or not?

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by Craig

I didn't stay in nuclear power because I knew it meant a lifetime of continuous training and qualifying; I was tired of that.

You nailed that one on the head. I've been in for almost 12 years now. Training is absolutely endless.