Posted on Mar 18, 2015
Do you believe that if you can't shoot, you're useless to the military?
20K
78
71
4
4
0
So we all know that there are many many aspects to making a military function like a well oiled machine. We have our grunts, we have our admin, and we have everything in between going all the way from the bottom of the totem pole on up.
But let's not forget that we ARE a military, created for one purpose and that is to protect and defend our nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. This is usually done with fire power and almost anyone, regardless of MOS, can be deployed to fight along side the grunts. I know many that have done just that. The large majority, however, will never ever see a deployment, much less actual combat.
So my question(s) more specifically is(are) this: Does shooting ability really matter for those in a non-combat related MOS? Do you or others you know treat it as another check in the box in order to pick up rank? Does it matter if your unit is non-deployable? If you can not shoot (especially in a non combat MOS), what use can you really be to the military? Should you still be allowed to serve and just do your 'day job' or should you be forced out?
But let's not forget that we ARE a military, created for one purpose and that is to protect and defend our nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. This is usually done with fire power and almost anyone, regardless of MOS, can be deployed to fight along side the grunts. I know many that have done just that. The large majority, however, will never ever see a deployment, much less actual combat.
So my question(s) more specifically is(are) this: Does shooting ability really matter for those in a non-combat related MOS? Do you or others you know treat it as another check in the box in order to pick up rank? Does it matter if your unit is non-deployable? If you can not shoot (especially in a non combat MOS), what use can you really be to the military? Should you still be allowed to serve and just do your 'day job' or should you be forced out?
Posted in these groups: 
Shooting (Sport)
Combat
Shooting (Sport) Combat
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 43
8
8
0
Every military member should be proficient at their "weapon system."
For Marines that's the M16 and all it's variants plus whatever else we pick up.
The Army has roughly the same philosophy, however, if you were to take a random Soldier and put him on the Marine Rifle range, would he pass? (when I was in, they didn't shoot at 500) For us, that means they can't shoot.
For the Air Force, their weapon system is not necessarily small arms. It is often multi-million dollar pieces of equipment. They are not Ground Forces, and expecting them to be able to engage in Ground Combat is as unreasonable as expecting a random Marine to be able to do what they do.
The Navy is much like the Air Force. They are not Ground Forces.
However, anyone that is going to be in a Ground Combat Area, needs to be at least Familiar, if not Proficient with the common small arms weapons we use. Enough that they are not a liability to those around them.
Not being able to shoot doesn't make you useless, it just means you will be used for suppression fire. Not being safe with the weapons we carry, makes you useless, and a liability.
For Marines that's the M16 and all it's variants plus whatever else we pick up.
The Army has roughly the same philosophy, however, if you were to take a random Soldier and put him on the Marine Rifle range, would he pass? (when I was in, they didn't shoot at 500) For us, that means they can't shoot.
For the Air Force, their weapon system is not necessarily small arms. It is often multi-million dollar pieces of equipment. They are not Ground Forces, and expecting them to be able to engage in Ground Combat is as unreasonable as expecting a random Marine to be able to do what they do.
The Navy is much like the Air Force. They are not Ground Forces.
However, anyone that is going to be in a Ground Combat Area, needs to be at least Familiar, if not Proficient with the common small arms weapons we use. Enough that they are not a liability to those around them.
Not being able to shoot doesn't make you useless, it just means you will be used for suppression fire. Not being safe with the weapons we carry, makes you useless, and a liability.
(8)
(0)
A1C (Join to see)
Most of the Air Force actually works on the ground, the majority of maintence and preparing aircraft happens before it takes off. When we deploy we still need to be able to defend our shop, on the ground. While the majority of our mission is happening in the air, we do still need to know how to fire a weapon on the ground.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS Pretty certain any Soldier worth their salt would be able to hit the 500 meter target if given the opportunity and training beforehand. Not as if we cannot shoot. We're just trained to a different standard.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
A1C (Join to see) Which is exactly why I said "However, anyone that is going to be in a Ground Combat Area, needs to be at least Familiar, if not Proficient with the common small arms weapons we use. Enough that they are not a liability to those around them."
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SSG (Join to see) I'm not saying you wouldn't. I was using it to highlight the point that each service trains to a different standard (as you said), and more specifically that we do so for a reason.
Expecting you to fire at 500 without training is unreasonable. Saying you can't shoot because you aren't trained to our standard, even though you are fully proficient with the weapon would be just as asinine. It's all a matter of context. The question was too vague, which my response was tailored around.
Expecting you to fire at 500 without training is unreasonable. Saying you can't shoot because you aren't trained to our standard, even though you are fully proficient with the weapon would be just as asinine. It's all a matter of context. The question was too vague, which my response was tailored around.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Our purpose as an organization is to kill. Maybe you're not totally useless if you can't shoot (maybe), but you sure as hell cant be a part of the Main Effort.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/what-is-the-most-important-military-skill
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/what-is-the-most-important-military-skill
(6)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
?? Capt Richard I P.. Last time I checked, spears had only one pointy end and you're supposed to put that end toward the enemy -- which, if you're surrounded, shouldn't be all that difficult to do. Just sayin' ; )
(1)
(0)
Sgt Steven White
Wars are won....and lost because of logistics. You don't need a trigger finger to get the beans band-aids and bullets where they need to be. An expert marksman cant do squat without supply.
(0)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
And expert logisticians can't win wars without marksmen. But logisticians can be hired in from other industries, marksmen can't.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I believe that with the changes in the way wars are now fought, that everyone in the Army should at least be able to qualify as a Marksman. That is the standard or was when I was in. Today there are no real declared front lines or rear areas. Everyone must be able to defend where they are. At any point can't the rear area become a main combat area and vice versa.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google