On 2/25/2018 3:25 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 14:41:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 2:08 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/25/18 1:33 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/25/2018 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:05:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:43:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:46:21 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:03:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/24/18 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:17:42 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge

I would grant that exception to anything that has an age limit
on it.



Charles Whitman was honorably discharged from the Marines. Lee
Harvey
Oswald received a hardship discharge from the Marines. Timothy
McVeigh
was honorably discharged from the Army.

Obviously, an honorable discharge wouldn't catch all the deviants.
But how many of them used the
weapons under discussion to shoot kids in the schools under
discussion?

Well Whitman used a rifle to shoot students but it was a bolt action,
as was Oswald's., McVeigh didn't use a gun at all and racked up a much
higher death count. I am not really sure what point they are making in
an AR 15 rant. It really sounds more like my argument that banning ARs
is pretty meaningless.

Ask Harry. It was his rant against an honorable discharge.

I tend to ignore his anti military rants. I understand that if he had
served, that would be all we heard about.



It's obvious Harry knows very little about the military other than
what he's been told or heard.Â* He has already proven how easily he is
influenced by others.Â* He parrots daily the latest DNC talking points.



My point was that a honorable discharge shouldn't by itself be the
qualifier for obtaining a firearm. The discharge in the cases I cited
was not an indicator of decent behavior going forward. An age qualifier
of 21 plus a good quality background check are more significant.


I've lost what the original proposition was but I don't disagree with you.


I had proposed a higher age requirement, at least 21, unless the individual had an honorary
discharge DD 214.



I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 15:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 3:25 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 14:41:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 2:08 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/25/18 1:33 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/25/2018 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:05:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:43:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:46:21 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:03:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/24/18 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:17:42 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge

I would grant that exception to anything that has an age limit
on it.



Charles Whitman was honorably discharged from the Marines. Lee
Harvey
Oswald received a hardship discharge from the Marines. Timothy
McVeigh
was honorably discharged from the Army.

Obviously, an honorable discharge wouldn't catch all the deviants.
But how many of them used the
weapons under discussion to shoot kids in the schools under
discussion?

Well Whitman used a rifle to shoot students but it was a bolt action,
as was Oswald's., McVeigh didn't use a gun at all and racked up a much
higher death count. I am not really sure what point they are making in
an AR 15 rant. It really sounds more like my argument that banning ARs
is pretty meaningless.

Ask Harry. It was his rant against an honorable discharge.

I tend to ignore his anti military rants. I understand that if he had
served, that would be all we heard about.



It's obvious Harry knows very little about the military other than
what he's been told or heard.* He has already proven how easily he is
influenced by others.* He parrots daily the latest DNC talking points.



My point was that a honorable discharge shouldn't by itself be the
qualifier for obtaining a firearm. The discharge in the cases I cited
was not an indicator of decent behavior going forward. An age qualifier
of 21 plus a good quality background check are more significant.


I've lost what the original proposition was but I don't disagree with you.


I had proposed a higher age requirement, at least 21, unless the individual had an honorary
discharge DD 214.



I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 15:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 3:25 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 14:41:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 2:08 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/25/18 1:33 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/25/2018 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:05:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:43:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:46:21 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:03:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/24/18 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:17:42 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge

I would grant that exception to anything that has an age limit
on it.



Charles Whitman was honorably discharged from the Marines. Lee
Harvey
Oswald received a hardship discharge from the Marines. Timothy
McVeigh
was honorably discharged from the Army.

Obviously, an honorable discharge wouldn't catch all the deviants.
But how many of them used the
weapons under discussion to shoot kids in the schools under
discussion?

Well Whitman used a rifle to shoot students but it was a bolt action,
as was Oswald's., McVeigh didn't use a gun at all and racked up a much
higher death count. I am not really sure what point they are making in
an AR 15 rant. It really sounds more like my argument that banning ARs
is pretty meaningless.

Ask Harry. It was his rant against an honorable discharge.

I tend to ignore his anti military rants. I understand that if he had
served, that would be all we heard about.



It's obvious Harry knows very little about the military other than
what he's been told or heard.Â* He has already proven how easily he is
influenced by others.Â* He parrots daily the latest DNC talking points.



My point was that a honorable discharge shouldn't by itself be the
qualifier for obtaining a firearm. The discharge in the cases I cited
was not an indicator of decent behavior going forward. An age qualifier
of 21 plus a good quality background check are more significant.


I've lost what the original proposition was but I don't disagree with you.


I had proposed a higher age requirement, at least 21, unless the
individual had an honorary
discharge DD 214.



I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.


Kiddy cruise. Join the navy reserves while in high school. When you
graduated, went to basic and 2 years duty. Then discharged. At least
when I was in high school.

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 15:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 3:25 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 14:41:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/25/2018 2:08 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/25/18 1:33 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/25/2018 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:05:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:43:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:46:21 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:03:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/24/18 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:17:42 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge

I would grant that exception to anything that has an age limit
on it.



Charles Whitman was honorably discharged from the Marines. Lee
Harvey
Oswald received a hardship discharge from the Marines. Timothy
McVeigh
was honorably discharged from the Army.

Obviously, an honorable discharge wouldn't catch all the deviants.
But how many of them used the
weapons under discussion to shoot kids in the schools under
discussion?

Well Whitman used a rifle to shoot students but it was a bolt action,
as was Oswald's., McVeigh didn't use a gun at all and racked up a much
higher death count. I am not really sure what point they are making in
an AR 15 rant. It really sounds more like my argument that banning ARs
is pretty meaningless.

Ask Harry. It was his rant against an honorable discharge.

I tend to ignore his anti military rants. I understand that if he had
served, that would be all we heard about.



It's obvious Harry knows very little about the military other than
what he's been told or heard.Â* He has already proven how easily he is
influenced by others.Â* He parrots daily the latest DNC talking points.



My point was that a honorable discharge shouldn't by itself be the
qualifier for obtaining a firearm. The discharge in the cases I cited
was not an indicator of decent behavior going forward. An age qualifier
of 21 plus a good quality background check are more significant.


I've lost what the original proposition was but I don't disagree with you.


I had proposed a higher age requirement, at least 21, unless the
individual had an honorary
discharge DD 214.



I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.


We lost one in basic. Medical discharge. He told them about a bad
shoulder and they still enlisted him. Doing a push-up shoulder
separation.

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 13:42:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/25/2018 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 11:14:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/25/2018 10:58 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:

Today's Navy includes more extensive training in firearms evenÂ* in
basic training.


How extensive?


Certainly not as extensive as the Marines or Army recruits but more than
I experienced back in 1968. Navy recruits today must qualify with a 9mm
(Glock) and a shotgun, although according to my son and son-in-law they
also used a M4.

https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/navy-weapons-qualification-course.html

All of the Coasties I see on the water are carrying a sidearm and you
have to qualify to do that.



My grandson recently passed his qualifications for boarding team member.
The qualification process is more than just being issued a Glock with
authorization to carry it. It's more like attending a police academy,
learning all the pertinent laws and rights of those boarded.

He's currently underway on his cutter doing drug intervention patrols.
Just left GTMO and a liberty call in San Juan. Should be back home in
April sometime. Looking forward to hearing of his adventures.

Yeah those guys doing drug interdiction are hard core. I have dealt
with both. The guys who ride along with the sheriff on holiday patrols
(BUI and life jackets) wear a side arm. The night the guys in the RIB
rolled up on us in the dark they had 1 guy with an M16, a guy with a
shotgun, a guy on the M60 and the coxswain with a sidearm.
They started feeling pretty silly when it was two 60 year old guys, on
the "Butt Ugly" with a little black dog. They tried to say we couldn't
have come from where we said we did but then decided they were done
with us after a wet Dachshund mix had boarded them and was "marking"
all of their stuff. They threw the dog back on my boat and said we
could go. They followed us for a while until we disappeared into that
place we could not have come from.

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 14:08:54 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/25/18 1:33 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/25/2018 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:05:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:43:52 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:46:21 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:03:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 2/24/18 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 07:17:42 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge

I would grant that exception to anything that has an age limit on
it.



Charles Whitman was honorably discharged from the Marines. Lee Harvey
Oswald received a hardship discharge from the Marines. Timothy
McVeigh
was honorably discharged from the Army.

Obviously, an honorable discharge wouldn't catch all the deviants.
But how many of them used the
weapons under discussion to shoot kids in the schools under
discussion?

Well Whitman used a rifle to shoot students but it was a bolt action,
as was Oswald's., McVeigh didn't use a gun at all and racked up a much
higher death count. I am not really sure what point they are making in
an AR 15 rant. It really sounds more like my argument that banning ARs
is pretty meaningless.

Ask Harry. It was his rant against an honorable discharge.

I tend to ignore his anti military rants. I understand that if he had
served, that would be all we heard about.



It's obvious Harry knows very little about the military other than what
he's been told or heard.Â* He has already proven how easily he is
influenced by others.Â* He parrots daily the latest DNC talking points.



My point was that a honorable discharge shouldn't by itself be the
qualifier for obtaining a firearm. The discharge in the cases I cited
was not an indicator of decent behavior going forward. An age qualifier
of 21 plus a good quality background check are more significant.

I think the honorable discharge was to avoid the age limitation, not
the background check, although I doubt any of the ones you mention
could not buy a gun in Md or Ma based on what we knew about them
before their crime was committed.

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 15:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I had proposed a higher age requirement, at least 21, unless the individual had an honorary
discharge DD 214.



I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.

Anyone who signs up at 18 for a 2 year hitch (and 4 inactive). You get
your DD214 after the 2 years. I got mine after a year (+5 active
reserve) and I was only 19.

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 23:02:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:


I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.


Kiddy cruise. Join the navy reserves while in high school. When you
graduated, went to basic and 2 years duty. Then discharged. At least
when I was in high school.

That was pretty much everyone who was drafted when that was a thing
and the 4 years after your 2 "in" was inactive reserve.
Unfortunately they "extended" a lot of those guys in the late 60s,
exploiting that inactive reserve clause. The guys in the grass were
usually 2 and out if they didn't re up but there were a lot of support
USAF and maybe even navy guys with critical skills who had to do the
whole 6 year nut.
I was in a 1 year reserve program that got extended by a month (13
months active duty), putting me pretty much in the same VA category as
a 2 year guy. I never used any of it.

wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 23:02:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:


I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.


Kiddy cruise. Join the navy reserves while in high school. When you
graduated, went to basic and 2 years duty. Then discharged. At least
when I was in high school.

That was pretty much everyone who was drafted when that was a thing
and the 4 years after your 2 "in" was inactive reserve.
Unfortunately they "extended" a lot of those guys in the late 60s,
exploiting that inactive reserve clause. The guys in the grass were
usually 2 and out if they didn't re up but there were a lot of support
USAF and maybe even navy guys with critical skills who had to do the
whole 6 year nut.
I was in a 1 year reserve program that got extended by a month (13
months active duty), putting me pretty much in the same VA category as
a 2 year guy. I never used any of it.


I transferred out of my reserve unit 5 days before the general volunteered
the wing for active duty with the Pueblo crisis. He got another star and
all the rest of the unit pretty much got screwed.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 05:24:36 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 23:02:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:


I wonder how many service members are discharged before turning 21
anyway, but I understand your point. Military service matures most.


Very few, I'd reckon.


Kiddy cruise. Join the navy reserves while in high school. When you
graduated, went to basic and 2 years duty. Then discharged. At least
when I was in high school.

That was pretty much everyone who was drafted when that was a thing
and the 4 years after your 2 "in" was inactive reserve.
Unfortunately they "extended" a lot of those guys in the late 60s,
exploiting that inactive reserve clause. The guys in the grass were
usually 2 and out if they didn't re up but there were a lot of support
USAF and maybe even navy guys with critical skills who had to do the
whole 6 year nut.
I was in a 1 year reserve program that got extended by a month (13
months active duty), putting me pretty much in the same VA category as
a 2 year guy. I never used any of it.


I transferred out of my reserve unit 5 days before the general volunteered
the wing for active duty with the Pueblo crisis. He got another star and
all the rest of the unit pretty much got screwed.

We had a Lt Cmdr who resigned his commission in the USCGR because he
had decided the Coast Guard was going to call up a unit and the unit
they were most likely to call was the ORTAUG ("ship augmentation" deck
apes) in Washington DC.
In the end he screwed up. They never called up any units
It was really silly anyway. The only CG units in Vietnam were river
patrol boats and pretty much all of the reserves were there to provide
manpower on Navy vessels. There was no shortage of those Navy guys and
they would probably have wanted the guys in the ORTEL anyway
(Electronic rates).
They had more volunteers for the river boats than slots so that was
not going to be a thing.