RNS Reader SailorCurt of the Captain of a Crew of One Blog read Tuesday’s QotD and commented on what it said with his first hand knowledge.
I can vouch for that. We have marksmanship quals in the Navy but they have nothing to do with becoming qualified to carry a firearm in the line of duty. They are only for “bragging rights†and a ribbon or medal.
To qualify to use a weapon on duty, one only needs to complete “fam fire†or familiarization training with the weapon. Basically, if you can describe the purpose and use of the safety features, load it, operate the controls and make it go “bangâ€, you are qualified. No need to be able to put steel on target.
Most of our “fam fire†qualification shoots consisted of seeing if you could hit the water from the deck of the ship.
Your United States Navy marksman: trained to “Minute of Ocean†accuracy.
Now granted, this is the Navy and not the Army or the Marines, but standards is standards is standards, and it is sad. I say that because, with the arrival of a second carrier group in the Gulf, I can forsee one of our ships there getting boarded. Don’t tell me that it can’t happen. It is highly unlikely, but it can happen.
On a different note, SailorCurt also attended an pro-rights, “Prosecute Bloomberg” rally in Virginia on Wednesday. He has a tale of his day there and numerous pictures.
Check-check it!
But having been on Subs (SSN 707) All I qualified for was shotgun. Which works nice for bouncing off deckplates and bulkheads to shoot around corners. Plus the longest distance that we would have to cover one enemies were onboard would be about twenty feet with the average around seven. But belive me, it is har to board a sub and way too easy to defend even with MOO. Granted we did have Berettas and 16’s as well as a M60, But I was pissed when we got rid of the 1911s and M14s. If you clip someone with a 9 or 5.56 at close range you might not get another shot, but a .45 or 7.62 would help alot more in that arena.
My sister’s ex served in the Navy, me I served in the Army. One day I went over with my AR15 to do some shooting. That is where I learned he had never been trained to fire a M16 let alone any other weapon while in the Navy. I was shocked, because I assumed the in the military, regardless of branch, this was basic task for service members. I was wrong, but feels that this should change.
Michael, there really is no need for everyone to be trained on firearms on a carrier or sub. We have other worries before small arms (that is why we give the nice Marines rides so that they protect our stuff and let me play cards) So if every one should be trained the same, then you should have been trained in the operation of an S5W and S8G reactor plant and steam plant. No, did not have the extra two years of training for that? I am proficiant in alot of arms (if not spelling) but trust me you do not want thew average Nuke with a loaded weapon. It is better for then to run the plant. I do however see the need in the Marines and the army. Not so much in the Navy and airforce, capitolization is intended 🙂
But trust me I was severly distraught that the five rounds of .22 from a .22 converted 1911 was all that we did in boot camp.