- Joined
- Jan 13, 2016
- Messages
- 38,083
- Reaction score
- 22,575
- Location
- Norfolk Virginia area.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It's not his weapon. It's government property. And recruits voluntarily give up rights protected under the Constitution.
It's not his weapon. It's government property. And recruits voluntarily give up rights protected under the Constitution.
BS
A recruit Marine doesn't touch a firearm until a DI can trust him with it.
Where is the recruit's constitutional rights when this happens?
BS is on your part. As a DI I had no control whatsoever over whatever firearms my recruits own personally. None, zip, nada. The only exception would be if some dipstick did somehow manage to arrive on the bus with his personal weapon. In that case it would be taken and checked into the armory until after he graduated.
This notion that a recruit cannot own a personal firearm is laughable. Do you have any ideal how many firearms I owned during the time I was in boot? Hell I owned my first AR15 when I was 16 years old...not being dumb as a rock I didn't try to take it to boot, but when I went to most of of other duty stations afterward (excluding some short TADs,) it and a few other pieces went with me.
Owned as a civilian, and handling weapons in the military …………………..you keep going there.
If the military can pick and choose for reasons of safety, then why is it too hard for you to understand the civilian population side of the issue?
Owned as a civilian, and handling weapons in the military …………………..you keep going there.
If the military can pick and choose for reasons of safety, then why is it too hard for you to understand the civilian population side of the issue?
As I mentioned earlier, Marines are issued their weapons early in boot camp and handle them daily...long before they ever get to the range for live fire. Just because you squids were limited to fake guns until you could prove you wouldn't shoot your eye out doesn't mean Marines suffered the same indignity. Of course, you guys got beer machines in the barracks and we didn't.
As I mentioned earlier, Marines are issued their weapons early in boot camp and handle them daily...long before they ever get to the range for live fire. Just because you squids were limited to fake guns until you could prove you wouldn't shoot your eye out doesn't mean Marines suffered the same indignity. Of course, you guys got beer machines in the barracks and we didn't.
Beer+Marines= bad, very bad!
Instant asshole, just add alcohol!
:lol:
The Marines on liberty were much more well behaved than the sailors.
I know this from 10 years on Amphibious ships.
I saw more Marines carrying sailors back to the boat than I did sailors carrying sailors.
Nice try Jarhead. :lamo
Marine recruits carry empty weapons until they reach the range, just like the Navy.
Beer+Marines= bad, very bad!
Instant asshole, just add alcohol!
:lol:
The Marines on liberty were much more well behaved than the sailors.
I know this from 10 years on Amphibious ships.
I saw more Marines carrying sailors back to the boat than I did sailors carrying sailors.
Owned as a civilian, and handling weapons in the military …………………..you keep going there.
If the military can pick and choose for reasons of safety, then why is it too hard for you to understand the civilian population side of the issue?
Well for one thing, it's their property and they arent charging the recruits.
Also, are you claiming that the military has discovered the correct amount of training that leads to no accidental discharges or other safety-related injuries or damage?
Because otherwise we are back to the fact that no amount of training prevents gun crime OR accidents.
If we lost more freedom's and training became a requirement for gun ownership how much would that decrease accidents and reduce crime?Of course it does. That is just silly
If we lost more freedom's and training became a requirement for gun ownership how much would that decrease accidents and reduce crime?
So you're not really sure IF or HOW it would impact any numbers beyond hoping it will.Enough to make it worthwhile. It's a test.....if you can't pass it maybe you should not have a gun
Of course it does. That is just silly
So you're not really sure IF or HOW it would impact any numbers beyond hoping it will.
Except that I provided examples of people with lots of training that commit suicide, leave guns around for their kids to shoot each other, accidentally shoot other people, etc. Cops.
So you are still wrong.
Ok so you can not offer an data on how training will reduce accidents an crime other than you get a tingling sensation thinking about it?I am as sure as I am for other training that we require. Training is required for lots of things. No one says prove to me it will save lives. Lol
Ok so you can not offer an data on how training will reduce accidents an crime other than you get a tingling sensation thinking about it?
Do you have documentation of a state instituting training programs and seeing the reduction you claim will happen?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?