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

[OldBrokenGrunt]

You both are pissing on each others spit shinned boots.

Lmao!!!

Fair enough.

Blaster229- bygones be bygones?

 

[JohnnyE]

Your attempt to generalize is quite frankly well, I'll just stop there. I guess you haven't been paying much attention to the news from the sandbox for the last 25 years. Law of war, Rules of Engagement, extensive briefings and debriefings, every unit has a JAG lawyer on the staff, command and NCIS investigations on ANY use of force incident. Heck even in pre-GWOT days there was lots of training regardless of branch of service.

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.

 

[clandestine]

I have spent a lot of time in carry classes. A MD W&C Class will cover MD State law, but it wont cover other State Laws that honor the Maryland W&C Permit. It's pretty ignorant to think any class could cover the complexity of state laws x50 .

There are sides to the 2A and mandatory training people are not on the right side.

 

[T. Schuler]

So let's say a veteran with a DD214 gets his/her first MD CCP. In 2 years that CCP will expire. Per the law, as I understand it, at that time a renewal will be for 3 years but an 8 hour training class will be required. Being a veteran with a DD214, is the class still necessary? Inquiring minds want to know.

Ditto. Also a veteran with a DD214. I wondered the same thing. Any thoughts?

 

[OldBrokenGrunt]

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.

I will try to articulate this better.

Every combat arms soldier to deploys to a combat zone gets a ****-ton of briefs on use of force. We have JAG lawyers briefing us what we can and cannot do. We have the rules very clearly stated and we understand the consequences if we **** up.

What exactly do you think a HCP holder is going to face here that someone from the sandbox wouldn’t be adaptable too? Honest question and not trying to be confrontational.

 

[Inigoes]

Ditto. Also a veteran with a DD214. I wondered the same thing. Any thoughts?

If 8 hours of training is required for a renewal. Let the permit expire. Start procedure for a new initial carry permit.

Problem solved.

After looking at § 5-306. The exemption applies for the renewal also.

Message - Maryland Code and Court Rules

govt.westlaw.com

 

[trickg]

They’re called pants.

Actually, chaps serve a whole different purpose - by design they are made from heavy leather so that a rider can ride through brush without getting their actual pants and legs torn up.

Definition - chaps:

1. leather pants without a seat, worn by a cowboy over ordinary pants to protect the legs.

Anyone who says "assless chaps" is an ignoramus. IMO.

 

[E.Shell]

Actually, chaps serve a whole different purpose - by design they are made from heavy leather so that a rider can ride through brush without getting their actual pants and legs torn up.

Definition - chaps:

1. leather pants without a seat, worn by a cowboy over ordinary pants to protect the legs.

Anyone who says "assless chaps" is an ignoramus. IMO.

This goes against everything I have learned here.

 

[trickg]

This goes against everything I have learned here.

well...ya know....

 

[RoadDawg]

Actually, chaps serve a whole different purpose - by design they are made from heavy leather so that a rider can ride through brush without getting their actual pants and legs torn up.

Definition - chaps:

1. leather pants without a seat, worn by a cowboy over ordinary pants to protect the legs.

Anyone who says "assless chaps" is an ignoramus. IMO.

If they are seriously calling it that… I agree.
However, the term is often bandied about around here, as a joke. So those folks get a break.

ETA: I have, on occasion, seen some chaps that had very nice asses in them. and as the song says… “oh that girl looked nice”.

 

[CMSGT]

Ahhh. The good ol veteran "sandbox chest thump".
Never gets tiring thanking yourself for your service, does it?

Is there really a need for passive aggressive insults?

 

[lazarus]

Actually, chaps serve a whole different purpose - by design they are made from heavy leather so that a rider can ride through brush without getting their actual pants and legs torn up.

Definition - chaps:

1. leather pants without a seat, worn by a cowboy over ordinary pants to protect the legs.

Anyone who says "assless chaps" is an ignoramus. IMO.

MY chaps have an ass.

 

[swinokur]

We got 2 hours of pistol training on 1911.

It was 1970

 

[Blaster229]

Is there really a need for passive aggressive insults?

Sure. Who cares about what you did "In the sandbox" that bears no relation to anything training wise when it comes to this course. Take the exemption and be the grey guy.


Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyE]

I will try to articulate this better.

Every combat arms soldier to deploys to a combat zone gets a ****-ton of briefs on use of force. We have JAG lawyers briefing us what we can and cannot do. We have the rules very clearly stated and we understand the consequences if we **** up.

What exactly do you think a HCP holder is going to face here that someone from the sandbox wouldn’t be adaptable too? Honest question and not trying to be confrontational.

Thank you for sticking with me on this. I understand what you say regarding those who deploy. When I took pause to think about it, rather than fall back on some old misguided comment I heard years ago, I understand how very much on point the training and experience of service men and women deployed in those roles can be to what goes on here. My thoughts turn to the question of what percentage of DD214 holders have occupied such roles? While there are others who did not deploy yet nevertheless got meaningful training and experience, MP's for instance, what of sailors on a carrier who maintain aircraft, Air Force aviators, etc. I have no grasp as to how many DD214 holders had training and experience that translates to W&C life, and how many do not. Hell, when my pop was in the USAF, as a 2nd Lt. he worked in a personnel office, and went out as a Capt. as second in command of the food service corps at a stateside airbase. None of that is on point. He sure did eat well, however.

 

[trickg]

Ahhh. The good ol veteran "sandbox chest thump".
Never gets tiring thanking yourself for your service, does it?

I guess it depends on your perspective. I have a nephew who has fired hundreds of thousands of rounds, if not over a million, half of which have been in combat doing things we never hear about in places where we don't officially have any troops. Places where he can't even really say where he was because it's still classified. He's a stone-cold killer, and that's not an exaggeration.

I'd say he's probably better than your average bear when it comes to handling and using guns.

 

[CMSGT]

I will try to articulate this better.

Every combat arms soldier to deploys to a combat zone gets a ****-ton of briefs on use of force. We have JAG lawyers briefing us what we can and cannot do. We have the rules very clearly stated and we understand the consequences if we **** up.

What exactly do you think a HCP holder is going to face here that someone from the sandbox wouldn’t be adaptable too? Honest question and not trying to be confrontational.

Above in red... Every deployment I was sent on, included a use of force briefing. Not all, but some included use of force against civilians. Also most annual qualification training did the same to some degree.

Constitunial issues aside, I still like the idea of legal responsibility training for those individuals whom are new to W&C, along with occasional refresher training.

 

[Blaster229]

I guess it depends on your perspective. I have a nephew who has fired hundreds of thousands of rounds, if not over a million, half of which have been in combat doing things we never hear about in places where we don't officially have any troops. Places where he can't even really say where he was because it's still classified. He's a stone-cold killer, and that's not an exaggeration.

I'd say he's probably better than your average bear when it comes to handling and using guns.

Great. If he came steam rolling in here thumping his chest about winning the war, I'd say the same thing. But if he's the guy you say he is, we wouldn't know.

No one cares for the course. Everyone gets it. This stupid thread should be locked.
But you know what's great? Someone who has never picked up a pistol, will get their permit just as a former D Boy will get his.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

 

[RoadDawg]

Above in red... Every deployment I was sent on, included a use of force briefing. Not all, but some included use of force against civilians. Also most annual qualification training did the same to some degree.

Constitunial issues aside, I still like the idea of legal responsibility training for those individuals whom are new to W&C, along with occasional refresher training.

For what you and others did while in that sand box. I care, and thank you all.

 

[CMSGT]

Sure. Who cares about what you did "In the sandbox" that bears no relation to anything training wise when it comes to this course. Take the exemption and be the grey guy.


Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Opinion noted.. It's all good. I don't speak much about my service, unless asked. However, I doubt you have the information needed to make much of any operation/training comparison/factual comments.

However, if you go back and read post #137, you may just be able to comprehend my position on training.