Posted on Apr 13, 2016
Should the saying "every Marine a rifleman" be changed?
112K
1.35K
404
79
77
2
A commonly thrown around term is "Every Marine is a rifleman" I strongly disagree with this statement as I am an 0311 Rifleman. I do agree that every Marine is expected to know how to shoot and qual annually with a rifle. Doesn't mean they're a rifleman. What does everyone else think?
Posted in these groups: 
Marines
Political Correctness
Marines Political Correctness
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 200
3
3
0
3
3
0
I can only comment on the other part of that statement "Every Marine and Soldier is a Rifleman and Every Sailor is a Fireman". Contrary to Popular Opinion, Steel Ships Burn and Burn very well so every Sailor better have some Basic Firefighting Skills and Better have put out one Mass Conflagration Fire in Bootcamp like I had to. Of course it was the Last time I had to Thank God (The Only Real one I got to deal with while in Navy Blue was a Forest Fire at a National Park).
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I like this idea a lot. I think it should be taken to its true meaning though. Everyone in the Corps should complete infantry basic and qualify to be a rifleman. Then you retrain them to do the other things. This would ensure that every one of your Marines actually is a rifleman. I don't think we could get there, but damn...that would be the best you could ask for.
(3)
(0)
COL (Join to see)
I think then...and only then...is every Marine truly a rifleman. And there's a bonus. It's pretty darn tough to get through ITB. Not the hardest school in the military. It isn't Ranger School or BUDs, but it would still weed people out.
(2)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
It is a mind set. No Marine has an excuse if it comes down to defending the perimeter. And they know they can't make an excuse. "Boo hoo, no one ever showed me."
That may happen in the other services, but not in the Marines.
I am reading right now, "Miracle at Belleau Wood." Boot camp was eight weeks long in 1918. Three weeks were spent on the rifle range. It's been a mind set for a long time.
In the book, a German sergeant whose unit was facing the Marines wrote, "The Americans are savages. They kill everything that moves."
Walt
That may happen in the other services, but not in the Marines.
I am reading right now, "Miracle at Belleau Wood." Boot camp was eight weeks long in 1918. Three weeks were spent on the rifle range. It's been a mind set for a long time.
In the book, a German sergeant whose unit was facing the Marines wrote, "The Americans are savages. They kill everything that moves."
Walt
(2)
(0)
SGT David Emme
Sir, there is a reason why I tried to do as much training as I could in the field, go to every range I could go to as my job permitted (never shirking a range or opportunity to train), why I got on that .50 CAL on that fateful day even though B-nutz begged and pleaded with me to let him gun (because the Marine in an Army uniform just would not allow it).
(1)
(0)
GySgt David Andrews
Rifleman defention is someone skilled with a rifle. An infantryman is a person in the infantry.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
No it shouldnt im a prior Marine and its the truth. If you look at maximum effective range point target of M16 and M4 Marines are the only ones out of basic training capable of doing so. Secondly regardless if you go through MCT or SOI you get trained on basic infantry tactics. Headquarters elements do train with infantry units in the fleet, so I would say yes keep it
(3)
(0)
LCpl Tad Cunningham
That's a very valid point, I just think that billet wise. Every Marine is not a Rifleman.
I.e. I am an 0311 Rifleman however my billet is in the S-3 so I consider myself a rifleman by MOS, not by billet. So someone who works in say S-1, not only isn't filling the billet of Rifleman, but also isn't holding the MOS. I screw with a lot of computer stuff between being in the COC and in the office. Doesn't mean I consider myself data just because I know how to work computers. Much like every Marine isn't a rifleman just because they know how to shoot. I would agree that every Marine knows how to operate a rifle though.
I.e. I am an 0311 Rifleman however my billet is in the S-3 so I consider myself a rifleman by MOS, not by billet. So someone who works in say S-1, not only isn't filling the billet of Rifleman, but also isn't holding the MOS. I screw with a lot of computer stuff between being in the COC and in the office. Doesn't mean I consider myself data just because I know how to work computers. Much like every Marine isn't a rifleman just because they know how to shoot. I would agree that every Marine knows how to operate a rifle though.
(0)
(0)
Capt Mark Strobl
LCpl Tad Cunningham - Based upon what you just said in response to SSG (Join to see),
1.) I should have a 3rd MOS (0302), and
2.) You're not a rifleman any more than the S-1 (0151's)... or any less, for that matter.
1.) I should have a 3rd MOS (0302), and
2.) You're not a rifleman any more than the S-1 (0151's)... or any less, for that matter.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
2
2
0
If you're a Marine you are a Rifleman. That was true in 1775 and it's true today.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Read a few history books on WW2 and the Vietnam War, where cooks and others support troops had to take up weapons when the shite hit the fan. They had to become riflemen.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
That statement is true throughout the military services an Air Force cook is a "rifleman" if the need arises. Everyone has a specific skill but all are required to take up arms when needed. That saying doesn’t mean everyone has the same skill level a dedicated rifleman, that has a much more in-depth knowledge of combat tactics. When I was in Iraq our FOB had Army, Navy and Air Force on perimeter protection and fire teams.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I always thought that EVERY serviceman was expected to serve as a rifleman when the need arose...but then I'm 86 years old, and from the "old school"!
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google