Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > SPECIALTY FORUMS > Calgunners in Service
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Calgunners in Service This forum is a place for our active duty and deployed members to share, request and have a bit of home where ever they are.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-10-2021, 5:27 PM
Yute Yute is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 277
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default How does one change MAWP regulation?

This is likely a complete pipe dream, but how would one go about getting legislation change to allow NG/Reserves in CA to get a MAWP?

Here's the issue - with the roll out of TC 3-20.40, rifle qualification scores have plummeted.

Most non-combat arms units' only range time is once a year during their annual qualification. Even with the new practice tables, it has not be sufficient to increase qualification numbers. It is frankly terrifying particularly since we are expecting Guardsmen to be ready to respond to civil disturbance missions at any time.

We are in a sad state of affairs where Soldiers have to take readiness in their own hands. Specifically, we need Soldiers to be training outside of drill time on rifles that replicate their issued equipment, not rifles with disabled functionality.

So, how do we accomplish this? Find state senators to sponsor legislation? Start a petition? Reach out to an advocacy group?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-10-2021, 5:50 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,422
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Needs to be legislative on the CA end.

With a (D) supermajority, anything that might be favorable to any gun owner is unlikely to get out of its first committee.

.mil could order that such guns ARE necessary, and order commanders to so certify. Current military attitudes suggest that is also pretty unlikely.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-10-2021, 6:31 PM
Yute Yute is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 277
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Thanks Librarian.

It would be less gun owner legislation and more one of public safety. Does CA really want a significant number of Guardsman not qualified on their primary weapon system?

The company level commanders I've informally talked to are pretty supportive - mainly because rifle qual rates directly affect them.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-11-2021, 8:12 AM
Snoopy47's Avatar
Snoopy47 Snoopy47 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,615
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

The far greater problem with personal range practice for the random NG/USAR soldier is not the weapon platform. You can practice all you want with a castrated AR15. Nothing is stopping you. I argue, if you put 50 rounds a week through an AR15 wearing all your gear and gasmask and figure out how shooting really works in those conditions you'd be head and shoulders above your peers.

Where the problem comes in is the course of fire, and being able to practice all the shooting positions and scenarios we are now evaluated for.

Pretty much all your generic public ranges will only permit you to shoot from a bench. That's our problem. Not that you can't use a regular M16/M4.

With weapons qualification plummeting doesn't change the fact that our shooting proficiency was still what it was. We didn't magically get any worse with our weapons, we merely now how bad we will be when placed in those scenarios.

The challenge is, when in full battel, getting down on the sights for a proper sight picture before letting lose any shots. If one can do that, then generally the shots will be "good enough" for a passing score.
__________________
Before there was Polymer there was Accuracy.

Last edited by Snoopy47; 10-11-2021 at 9:47 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-11-2021, 9:46 AM
Snoopy47's Avatar
Snoopy47 Snoopy47 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,615
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Also, if you read the regulations for the new marksmanship standards:

1) Units with access to a simulator with the qualification tables/scenarios WILL NOT BE ISSUED TRAINING AMMUNITION.

Now, I suppose saying a unit does or doesn't have access to a simulator is very subjective. So it's probably not hard for a unit commander to make the case they don't have the proper access to a simulator, trained operators, or there are scheduling conflicts.

But, if it were still my command I'd bend over backwards to get simulator access so we can crank out a lot more qualification iterations and get valid scores uploaded into DTS.

You can just keep going, and going, and going up to the last minute, run folks through again and again and again that didn't pass. No brass clean up, no lengthy delays between iterations clearing shooters and then controlling them back out to their lanes, no calling in a hot range, not screwing around with individual rifle problems etc...

*****
The only thing that matters is getting current qualification scores in DTS. Those are simply key strokes on a computer, and to cover one's ***** make sure there are valid signed off score cards that support that, and to cover that level make sure the scores were earned in accordance with regulations, which in this case the path the least resistance is the simulator with approved scenario tables run by a trained operator.
__________________
Before there was Polymer there was Accuracy.

Last edited by Snoopy47; 10-11-2021 at 9:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:49 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy