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

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Bullfrog

    Active Member
    Oct 8, 2009
    10,589
    Carroll County
    I only waded into this mess to try to correct some misunderstandings and outright misinformation from a few posters, pushing the idea that everyone with prior military service was an expert with a rifle and a handgun, which is not true.
    To clarify, I'm not accusing anyone of false statements. I think they had their own training experiences and thought those experiences were common among all branches and also within their own branch during prior time periods, and that isn't the case.
     

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    11,121
    And what is used as documentation to determine the exemption? The Title of a DD214 is verbatim and in caps, "CERTIFICATE OF RELEASE OR DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE SERVICE". Once again, "If you know of any case where someone with a DD214 was rejected for the reason you believe, all ears".
    Do you know of anyone from the uniformed services that has applied and used a DD214?
     

    CMSGT

    Member
    BANNED!!!
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 2, 2022
    213
    Do you know of anyone from the uniformed services that has applied and used a DD214?
    Yes, I do. He is retired from NHS. Now, Once again, "If you know of any case where someone with a DD214 was rejected for the reason you believe, all ears".
     
    Last edited:

    trickg

    Guns 'n Drums
    Jul 22, 2008
    12,342
    Glen Burnie
    Thanks for the correction.

    I only waded into this mess to try to correct some misunderstandings and outright misinformation from a few posters, pushing the idea that everyone with prior military service was an expert with a rifle and a handgun, which is not true.

    I don't think this discussion serves any useful purpose. I probably should have let it go.
    I'll go one further than that. Not only are members of the US military NOT experts with both rifle and handgun, there are many who aren't really even proficient with a rifle.

    Keep in mind that I'm with the National Guard, and we tend to be regarded as weekend warriors, the last time I was at the ranges at Fort AP Hill, I spent a good part of the day after I qualified serving as a range safety for not only my unit, but for a couple of other units as well. Some of what I saw really had me shaking my head due to how bad some of these folks were. Part of the new qualification requires you to drop and switch magazines while moving to a new position. Time after time I saw pop up targets come up and go back down without a shot being fired because they were still trying to mentally manage the process of swapping magazines while moving to the new position. The shooter is given 5 seconds between mag 1 and 2, 8 seconds between mag 2 and 3 and 5 seconds between mags 3 and 4 before the next targets pop up. It should be more than enough time, but it clearly wasn't sufficient for a large number of folks that day.
     

    Blaster229

    God loves you, I don't.
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 14, 2010
    39,584
    Glen Burnie
    Here's who the state of Maryland says should be exempt from pistol training for a permit. A pimply faced, 18 year old blaster229 from 1984. Even if I never picked up a firearm since then.

    I'm just wondering what their justification is. Have we answered this at all? Other than just throwing vets a bone?
    f3044e13a693080e9184699364cd92ff.jpg
     

    mikem623

    Junior Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 8, 2016
    91
    Carney
    Having followed this thread since the beginning, it has left me totally bewildered. 1) Do not believe that mandatory training should be required to exercise a constitutional right. This decision should be left up to the individual. This system has worked well in the Constitutional Carry States. 2) It is easy to see why the Libtards of this state have been able to deny us our rights for so long. We bicker among ourselves because some individuals have an easier path to securing a W&C permit. We should be happy for their luck. But no, we complain that someone got something that we didn't. It's unfair. Get over it, life is unfair. As the right to carry was settled by SCOTUS, one day this issue will be corrected. Our strength is the 2A community standing together.
     

    TheBert

    The Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 10, 2013
    6,189
    Gaithersburg, Maryland
    Here's who the state of Maryland says should be exempt from pistol training for a permit. A pimply faced, 18 year old blaster229 from 1984. Even if I never picked up a firearm since then.

    I'm just wondering what their justification is. Have we answered this at all? Other than just throwing vets a bone?
    f3044e13a693080e9184699364cd92ff.jpg

    I am still mystified as to how you can get an "First Class Badge" for throwing a hand grenade.
     

    rambling_one

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 19, 2007
    6,127
    Bowie, MD
    Having followed this thread since the beginning, it has left me totally bewildered. 1) Do not believe that mandatory training should be required to exercise a constitutional right. This decision should be left up to the individual. This system has worked well in the Constitutional Carry States. 2) It is easy to see why the Libtards of this state have been able to deny us our rights for so long. We bicker among ourselves because some individuals have an easier path to securing a W&C permit. We should be happy for their luck. But no, we complain that someone got something that we didn't. It's unfair. Get over it, life is unfair. As the right to carry was settled by SCOTUS, one day this issue will be corrected. Our strength is the 2A community standing together.
    It’s a message falling on deaf ears.
     

    BurkeM

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 8, 2014
    889
    Baltimore
    Tankers were issued handguns not M16's and probably others who worked in confined areas.
    No. Tankers were issued the M-3 Grease gun, Thompsons, and M-1 carbines for the longest time.
    From 1917-the 1980's, only officers and NCO's (tank commanders- TC) in the armored units were issued the 1911.

    After the M-9 Beretta was introduced, the majority of Armored Crewmen (Tankers) still carried the M-4 carbine or the M-3 Greasegun for a long time, while only TC's received a handgun-and many armor units never received enough M-9's to issue to every TC.

    The Armor School doesn't teach tankers anything about handguns. Basic and Armor School are combined and require 15 weeks of your time- they teach the rifle (M-16 / M-4), the main gun (120MM), the .50 Cal (M2), the medium machine gun (M240) coaxial and pintle mounted, but not the handgun. They teach vehicle maintenance for the Abrams engine, track repair, and other essential tasks for operating the Tank. Driving skills, basic tank gunnery, radio operating techniques, and - naturally, drill and ceremony.

    There's no time in 15 weeks to teach handgun skills.
     

    BurkeM

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 8, 2014
    889
    Baltimore
    Millions of US citizens and resident aliens have served in the 6 military services over the past 100 years. It's reasonable to presume that roughly 1 million Veterans live in Maryland or the nearby states (DC, DE, PA, WV, VA) and perhaps 8-% of those Veterans have a DD-214 stating "Honorable discharge."

    NOBODY in the General Assembly cared what training those veterans received when the majority Party drafted the FSA of 2013.

    It's completely pointless to debate "how qualified" any individual veteran is (or isn't) for purposes of obtaining an HGP or HQL.
     

    LeadSled1

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 25, 2009
    3,919
    MD
    Here's who the state of Maryland says should be exempt from pistol training for a permit. A pimply faced, 18 year old blaster229 from 1984. Even if I never picked up a firearm since then.

    I'm just wondering what their justification is. Have we answered this at all? Other than just throwing vets a bone?
    f3044e13a693080e9184699364cd92ff.jpg
    Was so expecting a pistol badge in there somewhere.
     

    Blaster229

    God loves you, I don't.
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 14, 2010
    39,584
    Glen Burnie
    Was so expecting a pistol badge in there somewhere.
    Never ever shot one, even though we had 1911's and were a mechanized unit. Go figure. Maybe my fat ass CO who denied my transfer to the AMU just didn't believe in "killy" pistols and guns? LOL
    Pistols weren't even a thing in basic.
     

    LeadSled1

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 25, 2009
    3,919
    MD
    Never ever shot one, even though we had 1911's and were a mechanized unit. Go figure. Maybe my fat ass CO who denied my transfer to the AMU just didn't believe in "killy" pistols and guns? LOL
    Pistols weren't even a thing in basic.
    This is the truth. It is crazy what some people get to experience and/or work with and others don’t in the same MOS and sometimes even the same platoon.
     

    Crazytrain

    Certified Grump
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 8, 2007
    943
    Somewhere nearby
    Folks, veterans with DD-214s should absolutely be exempt from this training requirement. Period. Hard stop. Don't try to argue otherwise.

    On the other hand, you folks that didn't serve, well, you should be exempted to.

    The training requirement is what is wrong here, not the exemptions.

    (folks SHOULD get trained...it's the responsible thing to do...but like lots of things, the government has no business requiring it).
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 22, 2009
    50,279
    Bel Air
    Folks, veterans with DD-214s should absolutely be exempt from this training requirement. Period. Hard stop. Don't try to argue otherwise.

    On the other hand, you folks that didn't serve, well, you should be exempted to.

    The training requirement is what is wrong here, not the exemptions.

    (folks SHOULD get trained...it's the responsible thing to do...but like lots of things, the government has no business requiring it).
    Exactly. The DD-214 exemption just shows they aren’t serious about training as a safety measure.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    261,173
    Messages
    6,652,687
    Members
    30,390
    Latest member
    Sparkey9901

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom