• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297, *567*]

Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

It's not his weapon. It's government property. And recruits voluntarily give up rights protected under the Constitution.

You just summed up my argument.

Even the military is wise enough not to let everyone handle a weapon.

But, you went straight past stupid when you claimed that recruits give up their constitutional rights.

Military Legal Rights | Your Military Rights | JAG Defense
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

It's not his weapon. It's government property. And recruits voluntarily give up rights protected under the Constitution.

Incorrect. Disagree, show us the applicable law under the UCMJ and the contract that every recruit signs where they cede their rights under the Constitution.
The only "voluntary" restriction of those rights is part of the oath we take and the fact that we must abide by the UCMJ. A good example would be if one were arrested by civilian authority...then you still have the same rights as any other citizen. The UCMJ only applies to military matters, just like company rules and regs only apply top company matters. When you get a security clearance or sign an NDA, you voluntarily agree to some restrictions on your rights, that doesn't mean you gave them up.

Firearms that a recruit owns are NOT government property...they are his personal property.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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 or was dropped...and survived the merciless hazing we'd have given for being such a dipstick.

You DO know the difference between a personal items and government issued items, right?

Also, Marine recruits check out their government issue rifles long before they ever set foot on the range...unlike the Navy, Marines don't drill with fake guns. :lol: By the time a recruit gets to his rifle range phase, he is well acquainted with his firearm, how to maintain it, how to march with it, how to hump it and how to run with it till he pukes...and after. :mrgreen:

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.
 
Last edited:
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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?
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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. :confused:

This is about mandatory training BEFORE ownership of a firearm....which OBVIOUSLY includes handling. I guess you could have someone else pick up the firearm you just bought, take it home and lock it up where you could never touch it until you got trained...and of course as a RESPONSIBLE gun owner you would NEVAR think about handling it so you could learn to clean it, assemble/reassemble and dry fire/practice basic gun handling, before going to any formal training. Of course not...that's why I'm a jarhead and you're a squid I guess.

Training is great, I highly recommend to to everyone who wishes to own and use firearms. Where we differ in on this wacky notion that training should be required before being allowed to purchase or handle. The only instruction needed to purchase and handle a firearm takes about 5 minutes...even a silly sailor can pick it up.

Finally, Semper fi, buddy. Someone here is bound to take our jarhead/squid digs as personal attacks...not understanding that its just how bruthas from different muthas communicate. :peace
 
Last edited:
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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?

It sounds like you want a citizenry that follows military orders.

84izi.jpg
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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. :confused:

Nice try Jarhead. :lamo

Marine recruits carry empty weapons until they reach the range, just like the Navy.

 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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. :confused:



Beer+Marines= bad, very bad!

Instant asshole, just add alcohol!

:lol:
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.

Bubbleheads were the worst
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

Nice try Jarhead. :lamo

Marine recruits carry empty weapons until they reach the range, just like the Navy.


Well you finally admitted that we had and handled our weapons long before we were issued ammo at the range...as I have said all along. This notion you were trying to peddle that we could not "handle" our weapons was gawddanged funny.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

Beer+Marines= bad, very bad!

Instant asshole, just add alcohol!

:lol:

That's why we're called Uncle Sam's Misguided Children!
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.


I got to party with some Aussie sailors in da PI. They were from the Melbourne, which was their one and only aircraft carrier at the time. Them boys could drink...and if one of their mates passed out, they'd wait for the shore patrol truck to be spotted, carry him out and toss him in the back while the truck was still moving. Sometimes they missed...:lamo

But what was really crazy was how many of them jumped into s__t river going after one of the boat girls. Yuck.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.

Of course it does. That is just silly
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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?
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

If we lost more freedom's and training became a requirement for gun ownership how much would that decrease accidents and reduce crime?

Enough to make it worthwhile. It's a test.....if you can't pass it maybe you should not have a gun
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

Enough to make it worthwhile. It's a test.....if you can't pass it maybe you should not have a gun
So you're not really sure IF or HOW it would impact any numbers beyond hoping it will.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

Of course it does. That is just silly

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.
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

So you're not really sure IF or HOW it would impact any numbers beyond hoping it will.

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
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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.

Yep....it's not perfect. So? Lol
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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?
 
Re: So you want to protect your home huh? [W:297]

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?

No such data or documentation has ever been required before we set up mandatory training in lots of other areas. That is just silly
 
Back
Top Bottom