How to properly beat a horse. Please allot 16 hours. This is mandatory.

[JohnnyE]

This is the perfect post for the entire thread.

Thank you for recognizing this.

I realize I had asked some pointed questions to understand how many, and to what extent, DD214-holders received training that is relevant to carrying on the streets of Maryland. I never opined regarding whether the DD214-holder training exemption should be left intact or repealed. In fact I do not recall, and I have read every post in this thread, anyone calling for repeal of the training exemption. My questions were designed to up my understanding as to how rooted in fact it is versus how rooted in politics it is. By this 501st post, I think it's clear.

I'll state clearly again for myself and as I think most others here believe: while training for carry on the streets of Maryland is good and should be voluntarily sought out by those who carry, it must not be required by the state as a precondition to the exercise of a constitutional right.

 

[CMSGT]

I had small arms training, rifle and pistol by a number of army/marine marksmen trainers they covered safety, cleaning and target training before I was 18. After that I received formal training in the Air Force with sidearm, rife and both semi and automatics training. Due to positions I worked over next 23 years of active service I was require to re-qualify many times to carry and use a firearm. With all the many times I had to have my finger prints taken background and financials checked I’ll be dammed if I will pay someone to tell me how to handle a firearm. This is one of the many reasons I relocated my firearms and person to a Free State in the South. So all the Dumb MF’s in DC/ Maryland can Kiss my A$$.

My experience also, having worked out of Hulburt Field and Andrews for several years each.

 

[lazarus]

I'm not sure I follow this line of thinking.

Consider you've got Joe Schmo who decides he wants to get a gun for self-protection, but he's never even held a real firearm before:
-- This man has never had any kind of training
-- This man has no clue what muzzle safety is
-- This man has no idea how to aim a gun
-- This man is not familiar with the sound or recoil of a firearm
-- This man is not familiar with even holding a real gun, much less controlling where it's pointed and when

Now consider your average Army soldier:
-- They spend a great deal of time learning how to safely handle and manage a weapon
-- They spend a large part of basic training carting a rifle around
-- If/when they point their weapon in the wrong direction, they get "corrected" for it
-- They spend time in classrooms learning about every aspect of the weapon - how it functions, how to clean it, how it comes apart, how it goes back together
-- They spend time in the classroom learning the basics of marksmanship - how to sight, trigger control, how to clear malfunctions, etc
-- They fire hundreds of rounds at the range to practice and hone marksmanship skills. This makes them very familiar with the sound, recoil, etc.
-- They have to qualify by shooting to a minimum standard or above - if they fail to meet this standard, they get recycled through BRM/Basic Rifle Marksmaship
-- They learn how to move while shooting/reloading
-- They partake in mock battles in order to know how to cover/conceal, and shoot accurately in the process
-- etc.

This is just basic training. Then, every year it's required by Army regulation to go to the range and re-qualify on your weapon. The average soldier gets a metric crap-ton more than 16 hours of training. How much more training should they have?

Someone with a DD214 has served a period of time honorably in the military. Even people with non-combat/REMF MOS's have much more experience safely handling a firearm that your average bear.

Regarding the training requirement of 16 hours for the MD W&C permit, that's a one-and-done proposition - you never have to re-take that training, so really, what's the difference?

Let's hypothesize that MD has always been a Shall-Issue state and Joe Bag-O-Donuts got his W&C permit 15 years ago and hasn't had a lick of training since then? How is it any different than the training a former soldier got back in the day?

I know that arguments will be made that a rifle isn't a handgun. Fine. Gun safety is gun safety - the same rules apply to handgun, rifles and shotguns. Once those things are drilled in - and they are drilled in during Basic Training - you never really forget the basics and fundamentals of gun safety.

Its a long series of posts, but if you read through them, many people have provided ample evidence that even if you served in the armed forces, you may have NEVER touched small arms in your life. Anything. Not a rifle, not a handgun. You might not have even handled a TOW, or hand grenade. Nor being given safety instruction on them. And certainly never received any training in Maryland self defense laws.

Yes, MANY arm soldiers have at least what you described. But plenty never have. Not once.

The point is, even service in the armed forces does not PROVE you have ever been taught to handle a gun at all.

And a DD214 really especially doesn't, as they are issued to all uniformed service members. A uniformed service member can be a former National Health Service officer. They do NOT receive any instruction on or about weapons. Full stop. One other member mentioned they know someone where MSP accepted a DD214 for training exemption. I also know (I assume it is a different person, but I don't actually know that) who also has a DD214 from their time with the national health service that MSP accepted as training exempt.

Also you are incorrect on Maryland's requirements. It is 16hrs of training and a qualification. Then at every renewal, you must do 8hrs of training and a new qualification. It is NOT one and done for Maryland.

No one should have to get training for a fundamental right.

But if we SHOULD have to get training, service in the armed forces, let alone a DD214 does NOT prove you have ever been trained. Your DD214 might say you are qualified on a firearm. And if the requirement is that you have been trained on a firearm and your DD214 has to say that you have been, great. There is some evidence of training and that seems fine. But Maryland also thinks that people should have to get continuing training and prove competency, which having a DD214 doesn't do at all.

I do respect service, but service should not equal special rights that the constitution says everyone should have. A pension, free medical care, free education, some respect, sure thing. More fundamental rights than someone else? No.

And if the training is "you need to know the state's self defense and carry laws", well then no one in the Military has gotten that from the military except maybe a JAG lawyer or certain MPs stationed in MD.

I am not jealous of a DD214 exemption to training. Fine, I am glad someone else doesn't have to get dragged through this crud that no one should have to do. But the mere existence of a DD214 proves nothing. But MGA decided to give that out as a privilege (probably through their also mistaken belief that a lot of guys here have shown that a DD214 = that person has been trained with guns). And I even understand why MGA did. And heck, it is actually that MGA said "service in the armed forces", but MSP appears to have just interpreted that as "show me a DD214". Which could be armed forces or uniformed services.

But I am really annoyed by the people who seem to think it makes sense why a DD214 or service proves they don't need training, or that they and everyone who has a magical DD214 are highly trained operators (yes of course I am exaggerating).

PS I have experience plenty of former army and marine infantry who do not display safe firearm handling and can't shoot for crap. And not just someone who mustered out 60 years ago.

 

[trickg]

PS I have experience plenty of former army and marine infantry who do not display safe firearm handling and can't shoot for crap. And not just someone who mustered out 60 years ago.

I've parsed out this part of your post because I've actually posted in this thread to this very point, and I agree - there are a number of folks in my current National Guard unit who are absolutely deplorable with their M4s - they struggle to zero and qualify, and they display very little familiarity with, or knowledge of guns at all. I mentioned the last time I was at Fort AP Hill working as a Range Safety for the day - even the questionable folks in my unit are downright geniuses compared to some of the boobs from other units I saw that day.

I learned something else just today - I didn't realize that not everyone who has a DD214 was in the Armed Forces. With that said, I do know that all 5 branches of the US Armed Forces currently incorporate weapons training into their basic training regimens, and with that in mind, while it may not be absolute, in most cases, someone with a DD214 has had at least 16 hours worth of firearms training. I'm an Army trumpet player for goodness sake, and I've had far more than 16 hours worth of weapons training.

While it's easy to pick gnat $h!t out of pepper and play devil's advocate, the point that I've made all along is that a DD214 is usually an indicator that a person has training and familiarity with weapons.

I'm also with everyone else though - I think the training requirement is BS.

 

[lazarus]

I've parsed out this part of your post because I've actually posted in this thread to this very point, and I agree - there are a number of folks in my current National Guard unit who are absolutely deplorable with their M4s - they struggle to zero and qualify, and they display very little familiarity with, or knowledge of guns at all. I mentioned the last time I was at Fort AP Hill working as a Range Safety for the day - even the questionable folks in my unit are downright geniuses compared to some of the boobs from other units I saw that day.

I learned something else just today - I didn't realize that not everyone who has a DD214 was in the Armed Forces. With that said, I do know that all 5 branches of the US Armed Forces currently incorporate weapons training into their basic training regimens, and with that in mind, while it may not be absolute, in most cases, someone with a DD214 has had at least 16 hours worth of firearms training. I'm an Army trumpet player for goodness sake, and I've had far more than 16 hours worth of weapons training.

While it's easy to pick gnat $h!t out of pepper and play devil's advocate, the point that I've made all along is that a DD214 is usually an indicator that a person has training and familiarity with weapons.

I'm also with everyone else though - I think the training requirement is BS.

Works for me :-)

 

[eruby]

This is the perfect post for the entire thread.

It is not the perfect post for the entire thread, because it doesn't say anything at all about mama, or trains, or trucks, or prison, or gettin' drunk.

 

[JohnnyE]

It is not the perfect post for the entire thread, because it doesn't say anything at all about mama, or trains, or trucks, or prison, or gettin' drunk.

...or that one time, at band camp...

 

[Blaster229]

...or that one time, at band camp...

*Banned* camp around here.

 

[swinokur]

Speaking as an alumnus?

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyE]

*Banned* camp around here.

I had to reinforce my status as a noxious 13'er.

 

[RoadDawg]

It is not the perfect post for the entire thread, because it doesn't say anything at all about mama, or trains, or trucks, or prison, or gettin' drunk.

Darlin? Izzat you?

 

[Tower43]

You are right, I withdraw my words. It was something was told in my youth, 50+ years ago, and for some reason it streamed out.

I would like to know, however, what percentage of those serving in uniform had training and duty that bears some resemblance to what W&C permit holders need to be prepared for.

You'll prolly never know a % like that, but would you like them to either a) remove the DD214 "loop hole" or restrict it to combat arms only? Or maybe even Verified handgun use only?
I mean, speaking for myself, my DD214 shows 0311 - Infantry, 0331 - Machinegunner, 8152 - Security Forces, 8154 - MCSF CQB Team; I have a certificate somewhere from Designated Marksman school... my DD214 shows 6th award rifle expert and 2nd award pistol expert.
I completed HTPO-08 From SCG International Risk, LLC (High threat protective operations - 8 day course) where we did ALOT of shoot/no shoot, protectee operations, and concealed carry stuff. Basic MCSF school has alot of shoot/no shoot as well.
I mean, we could require specific MOS's if people are worried that much about it..... OR just leave it be, and recommend fellow vets do some follow-on training to brush up. Hell, if they pay for the ammo, I'll do some follow up training with em.

Now all that above I got screwed because my unit didn't like me and processed my medical retirement as "General Under Honorable Conditions" so I can't use my DD214 to be training exempt, cause somehow all that training is nullified since it doesn't just plainly say "Honorable" (Now I'm gathering papers to go meet with a DAV lawyer to see about changing it, but until then I'll play MSPs/MGAs game)
I know my experience is not the same, even my combat time (2004-2006) were different from newer rules. It just is what it is. The other point being, what is it like less than 1% of the population is a combat arms direct action veteran? I mean do we really want to play the restriction game?

 

[Tower43]

One other point of order... we're assuming here that these 16 hr mandatory classes and 8 hr refresher classes actually provide truly functional knowledge. As garnered in that specific thread, these classes are essentially worthless anyway and just checking the box......

 

[Tower43]

What percentage of LEO have gone through a police academy and have annual qualification shoots and legal refresher training? 100% of them. Even the retired ones carrying under LEOSA have annual requals.

Arguments, like statistics can be used to prove any desired point. But anyone arguing that a DD214 qualifies a person in pistol-craft (or W&C in MD terms), is arguing from a faulty position.

Hundreds of thousands of honorably discharged service men and women never trained on, qualified on, or even touched a pistol during their time in the military. And no military pistol training covers the specifics of Maryland law.

I accept that the DD214 is exempt from MD law. I’m a constitutional carry mindset. But I’ll argue forever that a DD214 doesn’t always equate to any form of pistol training or familiarization of MD law.

You act like cops actually know all the laws in the area they're expected to enforce the laws.
Then explain why there are ACTIVE cops who think > 10 round magazines are illegal.
Cops who think 80% Guns are illegal
Cops who think all AR Pattern rifles are "assault rifles" and are illegal.
Many cops who think even with a permit, you can't print/open carry.

Most OIS Shootings show extremely poor marksmanship from the side of police. It's in fact rare that a cop gets it done with fewer than half a magazine.

MOST cops don't do anything other than the mandatory requal... that's it. In that requal, how much is UOF / shoot/no-shoot training? Vs just hitting the target (This is a real question, because I dont know their requal training standards). A buddy of mine recently graduated a police academy in state, and said they're woefully undertrained in UOF vs other aspects of the job.. perhaps they need longer academies to add more of that in?

 

[Tower43]

False.

Do other services not have at least the minimal initial firearms training?
I DO know that all Marines have to qualify on the M16 platform at a minimum..... so that statement is at least correct for Marines.

 

[mvee]

Do other services not have at least the minimal initial firearms training?
I DO know that all Marines have to qualify on the M16 platform at a minimum..... so that statement is at least correct for Marines.

My brother was a nuke in the Navy. He enlisted in 2002. They had some sort of firearm simulator in boot camp but he was busy getting eyeglasses or something on that day so he didn’t get to experience it at all. Before he got out as a Chief, he qualified with a pistol. He had to seek out that training, it was not required. He wasn’t a great shot.

It is entirely possible that someone could have gone through their military career without any gun training


I have had to do the Navy M9 qualification several times. I am a civilian so I don’t have a DD-214. I qualified as expert. I have to take the MD permit class

 

[rseymorejr]

It is not the perfect post for the entire thread, because it doesn't say anything at all about mama, or trains, or trucks, or prison, or gettin' drunk.

I was drunk the day my mom got out of prison too!

 

[Afrikeber]

Isn’t the Marines a part of the Navy? Bwahahahahaha

Just ******* with you brother.

The mens department

 

[JohnnyE]

You'll prolly never know a % like that, but would you like them to either a) remove the DD214 "loop hole" or restrict it to combat arms only? Or maybe even Verified handgun use only?
I mean, speaking for myself, my DD214 shows 0311 - Infantry, 0331 - Machinegunner, 8152 - Security Forces, 8154 - MCSF CQB Team; I have a certificate somewhere from Designated Marksman school... my DD214 shows 6th award rifle expert and 2nd award pistol expert.
I completed HTPO-08 From SCG International Risk, LLC (High threat protective operations - 8 day course) where we did ALOT of shoot/no shoot, protectee operations, and concealed carry stuff. Basic MCSF school has alot of shoot/no shoot as well.
I mean, we could require specific MOS's if people are worried that much about it..... OR just leave it be, and recommend fellow vets do some follow-on training to brush up. Hell, if they pay for the ammo, I'll do some follow up training with em.

Now all that above I got screwed because my unit didn't like me and processed my medical retirement as "General Under Honorable Conditions" so I can't use my DD214 to be training exempt, cause somehow all that training is nullified since it doesn't just plainly say "Honorable" (Now I'm gathering papers to go meet with a DAV lawyer to see about changing it, but until then I'll play MSPs/MGAs game)
I know my experience is not the same, even my combat time (2004-2006) were different from newer rules. It just is what it is. The other point being, what is it like less than 1% of the population is a combat arms direct action veteran? I mean do we really want to play the restriction game?

I said upthread that everyone should be exempt. There should be no governmental requirement prerequisite to enjoying a constitutional right! That DD214 holders are exempt is a good start.

 

[Blaster229]

I'll just say this. There's no reason for anyone who has a permit, now should have to wait 7 days.

I'll say it now because it'll be said 40 times if I didn't...
No one should have to wait 7 days. Blah blah blah.