Lenmcharristar 10,283 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Would you say that combat experience trumps training in all cases? In the scenario that we are talking about here then yes ...... what about redundant ex hit men? From certain places 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
socks 32,253 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Would you say that combat experience trumps training in all cases? In the scenario that we are talking about here then yes ...... what about redundant ex hit men? From certain places[/quoteThat's a rediculous statement ... However what would an ex hit man know about the chaos of battle ....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lenmcharristar 10,283 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Would you say that combat experience trumps training in all cases? In the scenario that we are talking about here then yes ...... what about redundant ex hit men? From certain places[/quoteThat's a rediculous statement ... However what would an ex hit man know about the chaos of battle ....... prob quite a bit, not me btw, but hit men have shown they've got the minerals haven't they? I know a few soldiers come back from conflict and from killing they can't cope with it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
socks 32,253 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Your average gang member or psycho has the minerals to pull the trigger that's the easy bit ... Staying calm enough to make a difference and potentially stop a terrorist when there's chaos all around you and bullets and grenades are going off ... That's a different ball game all together ........ 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lenmcharristar 10,283 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 The judas is needed then, shoot them in the Back haha Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 31,426 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 (edited) That's not old school at all! Anybody with a shred of intelligence and real experience has learnt that. I haven't meant to suggest that a civilian trained rigorously is just as effective in combat as a veteran infantry soldier who's probably seen a lifetime of violence and firefights. However, is it unreasonable to say that you could select and train civilians through a sufficiently rigorous regime to produce something of a similar standard to that of a soldier, police firearms officer etc? Obviously the proof of the pudding is in actual combat and I'm not denying that without this final test of a person you can't say whether they are a success or not. But if training and selection weren't proven to be greatly successful factors in producing competent combatants(?) then we wouldn't invest so much in it. I'd stress too that when I say 'similar standard' I mean in terms of ability to deal with a typical civilian situation, not a typical military one. I still stand by what I have said that a lot of what an infantry soldier is taught would be overkill for a civilian concealed carry permit holder. Surely in this debate the line has to be drawn at what is really necessary to at least not make things worse? And I can't get my head past the evidence of real life examples of CCW being implemented in foreign countries, when we look at these real life examples it's very hard for me to say that trained and tested civilians are the headless chickens that you, socks and the majority of the British public seem to think. Its not a case of headless chickens holding guns that would worry me its the headless chickens who could possibly end up holding those guns.....i mean where would the line be drawn here in terms of numbers.....could anyone sufficiently qualified take to the streets with a gun ?....we could end up with more people carrying than not,where does that end.....a duel at 10 paces ?......or are we to assume that these licence holders are simply impeccable human beings who deal with any and every situation peacefully,even between each other.......while it all sounds fine and dandy in your average tree lined street what about the deepest darkest council estates where 8 out of 10 people wont be allowed a gun anyway do those communities still play by the old rules. I just think theres far more questions than answers to something like this......however i like to think i know when to talk and when to listen and the likes of Socks/Chris Jones sound like they have a lot better understanding of this sort of caper than me so i,ll bail out now.......interesting stuff anyhow Edited November 18, 2015 by gnasher16 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JDHUNTING 1,817 Posted November 18, 2015 Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Regard training, what is a soldier... he's simply a trained and selected civilian. I see no difference here. If we can select and train civilians to soldier then we can do the same for a militia of concerned and responsible citizens. Second paragraph was in reference to bill and Ben scenario 1, where Ben had already been attacked. I was differentiating between when is a legitimate time to draw a weapon and when isnt. There's that many scenarios now I'm getting confused. The difference is a soldier has been personally and carefully selected by good experienced experts in the field....people we pay and trust to make those selections..........compared to someone who paid to do a training course. It was a simple scenario......a man was being threatened by a little man whos armed or a big man whos not armed who is the biggest threat to pull his gun on. Their not really all that carefully selected though are they, I went to sign up before my 16th birthday id been in bother with the law and just expelled from school and they would have had me in no probs but for an old knee injury. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.