Yes already new the answer to this one.
But while in the forces how many times did you see dick next to you do something so stupid you thought bugger that could have been me us?!
Don't get me wrong here any body who serves to protect hats off in my book...but not all are trained the right way!
If you have been tought in one envorment dose not mean that you can't retrain for a new envroment.
Just to throw my 10c on the Military training discussion.
Not all military are fully trained in the art of war. All are trained during basic, but at a basic level. After that most would be lucky to fire their rifles more than a couple times a year, at the most.
Just because someone has "got some time up" it dosn't mean they are jungle fighting snipers that fly Wokkers, jumping out of C130's while firing their cruise missles. More than likely they are mechanic's, cooks, blanket counters etc that go to work just like Mr Civi
1/2 of them have to reminded that the sharp end is the bit that the bullets comes out of
Had a funny conversation with a cop mate at one stage about him being qualified to use handguns, AR15s etc on duty if necessary but couldn't go shooting in his own time as he didn't have a licence. Good bugger with his head on the right way, think I'd still trust him more than most people with a gun.
A very interesting thread, with some very divided opinions...
Doesn't matter what role you have. In the Army for example so many civilian safety rules are pointless and not practiced that I think teeth arms especially have a different approach to safety. And would go as far as saying they would come out of the service as complacent.
I did.
If you sweep someone with a pistol in ipsc you are likely DQ and considered a safety risk.
You could be firing it to cover a withdrawal toward someone running straight back at you in the military especially during training.
Dunno about now as it may have changed but certain members of a patrol would be locked and loaded with safety off and auto selected for weeks on end whilst moving. If you are doing your job properly you would sweep other members of your team countless times.
I never gave it a second thought, it was a requirement.
My point being, soldiers are not imo, going to automaticly have better safety standards than civilians that have high standards.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Do what ya want! Ya will anyway.
The range of what we think and do is limited by what we fail to notice. And because we fail to notice that we fail to notice, there is little we can do to change; until we notice how failing to notice shapes our thoughts and deeds
"No politics or religion" - gosh I wonder why that rule came about
Getting back to the original idea of the thread - I'm curious as to whether this series of media releases will be sustained or will die out - I think that what works is to just smile and wave, provide facts where possible and not engage with the wingnuts - all of this will be forgotten in a few weeks
Hmm still not getting the point, don't care about military training, been there done that and I know what you are on about.
But how many of the wantabee shooters get hold of a sks and a 100 rounds and haven't a clue of ANY form of training, only 1 hour of a safety talk that got them their FAL.
I would love to see 1/2 a day on a range as part of the FAL process in place of the 1 hour safety talk. Surely that's got to help ???
1) What difference does it make whether a "wannabe" shooter gets and sks, a jw15 or whatever?
2) Who is going to run this half a day on the range?
3) Whose range are you going to use? Some towns and rural areas have no range.
4) How is your half a day on the range going to stop people from shooting at each other in the field, when the range is nothing like the bush?
5) Who's going to pay for all this?
Bookmarks