If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:44:58 -0500, X ` Man wrote:

On 1/8/12 2:26 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:47:10 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Jan 8, 8:24 am, Happy wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 15:38:05 -0800 (PST), North wrote:
On Jan 7, 6:58 pm, Happy wrote:
Our U.S. Navy Ceremonial Guard Silent Drill Team was invited to compete in the International
competition in Norway . The Navy competed against military units from all over N.A.T.O. and won
first place. When you watch this video you'll see why they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgcGNDxuyoI

I'd rather see more intricate marching and less of the gun tossing.

The rifle tossing is a sight to behold and probably what helped them win. But...each to his own.
Here's something a little milder!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw1p9...eature=related

This works really well too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baYHn...ffAHTwkjXwAQAA

I wonder if those folks were pre- or post-Hitler?

Some folks might find this presentation of close order drill more to their liking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83hoU...eature=related

The 'military' aspect is somewhat subdued.


Far more interesting than the sailors with fixed bayonets.

To each his own...

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Jan 8, 1:26Â*pm, Happy John wrote:


Some folks might find this presentation of close order drill more to their liking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83hoU...eature=related

The 'military' aspect is somewhat subdued.

I thought that one comment was interesting...

"why do i live in Holland!!!! of course we have drugs and legal ho's
here. but i like cheerleaders more!"

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Jan 8, 1:26*pm, Happy John wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:47:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:
On Jan 8, 8:24*am, Happy John wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 15:38:05 -0800 (PST), North Star wrote:
On Jan 7, 6:58*pm, Happy John wrote:
Our U.S. Navy Ceremonial Guard Silent Drill Team was invited to compete in the International
competition in Norway . The Navy competed against military units from all over N.A.T.O. and won
first place. When you watch this video you'll see why they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgcGNDxuyoI

I'd rather see more intricate marching and less of the gun tossing.

The rifle tossing is a sight to behold and probably what helped them win. But...each to his own.
Here's something a little milder!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw1p9...eature=related

This works really well too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baYHn...st&context=G27...

I wonder if those folks were pre- or post-Hitler?


I'd say definitely post. Maybe not so much for their grandfathers
though....

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:44:58 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

On 1/8/12 2:26 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:47:10 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Jan 8, 8:24 am, Happy wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 15:38:05 -0800 (PST), North wrote:
On Jan 7, 6:58 pm, Happy wrote:
Our U.S. Navy Ceremonial Guard Silent Drill Team was invited to compete in the International
competition in Norway . The Navy competed against military units from all over N.A.T.O. and won
first place. When you watch this video you'll see why they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgcGNDxuyoI

I'd rather see more intricate marching and less of the gun tossing.

The rifle tossing is a sight to behold and probably what helped them win. But...each to his own.
Here's something a little milder!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw1p9...eature=related

This works really well too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baYHn...ffAHTwkjXwAQAA

I wonder if those folks were pre- or post-Hitler?

Some folks might find this presentation of close order drill more to their liking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83hoU...eature=related

The 'military' aspect is somewhat subdued.


Far more interesting than the sailors with fixed bayonets.

They just wanted to be Marines but it was too hard ;-)

All of this "8th and I" stuff is just fancy dancing, even when the
Marines do it

I still think it is more important to put firing pins in those M-14s,
take them out to the range and see if they can hit anything.

There is a select group of Marines that don't have to qualify with the
rifle each year, they are the members of the United States Marine Corps
Band, The President's Own. Everyone else from the Commandant down to the
lowliest private has to qualify with he rifle each year. It doesn't
matter if you are an infantry man, admin clerk, baker or a computer guy.
Everyone hits the range for qualification.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:54:35 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:44:58 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

On 1/8/12 2:26 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:47:10 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Jan 8, 8:24 am, Happy wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 15:38:05 -0800 (PST), North wrote:
On Jan 7, 6:58 pm, Happy wrote:
Our U.S. Navy Ceremonial Guard Silent Drill Team was invited to compete in the International
competition in Norway . The Navy competed against military units from all over N.A.T.O. and won
first place. When you watch this video you'll see why they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgcGNDxuyoI

I'd rather see more intricate marching and less of the gun tossing.

The rifle tossing is a sight to behold and probably what helped them win. But...each to his own.
Here's something a little milder!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw1p9...eature=related

This works really well too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baYHn...ffAHTwkjXwAQAA

I wonder if those folks were pre- or post-Hitler?

Some folks might find this presentation of close order drill more to their liking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83hoU...eature=related

The 'military' aspect is somewhat subdued.


Far more interesting than the sailors with fixed bayonets.

They just wanted to be Marines but it was too hard ;-)

All of this "8th and I" stuff is just fancy dancing, even when the
Marines do it

I still think it is more important to put firing pins in those M-14s,
take them out to the range and see if they can hit anything.

I 'spect the rifles have firing pins therein. And, only the best get into the service drill squads.
So, I imagine they can shoot.

I loved that M-14.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 01:56:23 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 17:58:18 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

Our U.S. Navy Ceremonial Guard Silent Drill Team was invited to compete in the International
competition in Norway . The Navy competed against military units from all over N.A.T.O. and won
first place. When you watch this video you'll see why they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgcGNDxuyoI

No, it is NOT on topic.

Sure it was. Navy guys drive boats - big boats.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:01:36 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

I loved that M-14.

===

Yes, great rifle. I had a chance to shoot an AR-15 recently and it
just doesn't compare although I'm sure it has its virtues.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:56:51 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:01:36 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

I loved that M-14.

===

Yes, great rifle. I had a chance to shoot an AR-15 recently and it
just doesn't compare although I'm sure it has its virtues.

I had a lot of chances to shoot the M-16, and it looks, feels, and shoots like it was made by Mattel
for kids.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:11:29 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:01:36 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

I loved that M-14.

I have an M1A (semi-auto M-14).
The selective fire model is really not useful enough to go through
the NFA hassles. To be useful you would have to make it as heavy as a
BAR, (the rifle, not the guy) ;-)
It may have been a mistake not to buy a real M14 in 1981 when I bought
this one tho. I could have had one for $1800 (vs the $600 I paid for
the M1A) and they go for about $20k now

Wow. I had no idea they were that valuable.

If it's Navy, it's on topic...right?
 

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:08:05 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:11:29 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:01:36 -0500, Happy John
wrote:

I loved that M-14.

I have an M1A (semi-auto M-14).
The selective fire model is really not useful enough to go through
the NFA hassles. To be useful you would have to make it as heavy as a
BAR, (the rifle, not the guy) ;-)
It may have been a mistake not to buy a real M14 in 1981 when I bought
this one tho. I could have had one for $1800 (vs the $600 I paid for
the M1A) and they go for about $20k now

Wow. I had no idea they were that valuable.

Ronald Reagan and Tip O'neil guaranteed that when they passed the 1986
firearms act, in fact raising the price of all Class III firearms. The
act froze the NFA machine gun registry at the number that were
currently registered and transferrable M-14s were fairly rare anyway
at that time. The reason why they were not overly expensive in the
early 80s was it was assumed the millions the US had here and
transferred to governments abroad would eventually work themselves
back here into the civilian market. That can't happen now because if
it isn't in the registry, it isn't going to be in the registry.

The ironic thing is in the same time frame (86 to present) the number
of NFA34 firearms in the hands of exempt police departments and
paramilitary agencies has exploded. It is possible that the average
beat cop might have a machine gun in his car and all of the special
weapons teams have them. The old standard of a cop in a uniform with a
pistol and maybe a shotgun has been replaced by masked men in combat
gear, carrying full auto assault rifles and submachine guns.

That doesn't mean they have the discipline to use them properly. Anyone
can stick the barrel of a machine gun around the corner of a building
and empty the magazine in a couple of seconds.