Is it possible for a civilian to be more proficient with a firearm in combat situations than a trained member of the military?
>>27940186
Yes.
Im not a solider, but Im going to assume that actually firing your weapon is a small part of the job.
how dumb are you-the thread
>tfw born civilian
>tfw will never be as arms on fire as born military boiz
>>27940212
>than a trained member of the military?
More proficient with a firearm, sure.
More proficient in combat, very unlikely. That whole communication thing is pretty key to not getting ded. Teamwork makes the dream work and assorted faggotry.
If you're talking 1v1 IRL, whoever gets shot first is usually going to have a bad time.
>>27940186
Yes. Contrary to what the recruiters show in videos, most servicemembers aren't operator-level experts with their weapons and tactics. Most outside of combat arms don't even do tactical training but twice a year.
>>27940203
Miniscule depending on MOS & paygrade
>>27940186
I was in the navy not like army or anything. But what I what I learned from bootcamp is that the whole stress enviroemnt of "DO THIS KNOW DO IT THIS WAY OR YOU DIE". Gives you over time this second nature ability of just following motions.
For example, a group of marines coming under fire automatically:
-seek out cover
-supressive fire
-flank
Which sounds reliable but all you know what to do is what you have been taught
Where as a civilian being trained the same thing, could have multiple ways of doing something, akin to guerilla warfare.
>>27940186
What if I told you that both members of armed services and people in the civilian population are capable of similar skills, strengths, and weaknesses? What if you baited me with your stupid thread?
>>27940353
>Which sounds reliable but all you know what to do is what you have been taught
>Where as a civilian being trained the same thing, could have multiple ways of doing something, akin to guerilla warfare.
PMCs who are former SOF operators
Also SAD SOG is on par with DELTA.
Any fresh-faced infantryman can be outclassed by a large amount of personnel.
The modern soldier has to carry a ton of shit, the armed civilian can have just have to carry a gun and a backpack.
A civilian with a battle rifle can ambush soldiers with assault rifles, firing a few times from the distance, and then getting the fudge out of there.
>>27940186
PMC guys who get picked off the street often times may not be very professional in how they act but can be about as combat effective if they don't get shot in the face for the first few weeks.
>>27940186
Yes. Experience is experience. There are cold-rice and rat-meat eating, sandal wearing skinny little fucks in Syria with more combat experience than an 11B who has sat in barracks contemplating suicide until he ETS's.
Eh its more or less a difference in mentality.
Really the most important thing ingrained in the military is the ability to function under high stress, being able to take the shit and continue working like a machine, never questioning because it's not your job to.
The military makes soldiers but not warriors, not necessarily.
A citizen can have the same ingrained into them, it just takes a stronger will, to be able to fight, to push your own body, to follow your regiment and keep doing it over again even though you know its perfect.
Its that same soldier mentality. Unwavering, unshaken, mechanical operation.
This is the basis that forms combat effectiveness with firearms and from there, you can teach a competent shooter.
So is it possible? Most definitely. Both methods require the user to be able to take the pressure and practice till their shoulder is raw from shooting depending if you're teaching sweep, breach and flanking methods and tactics, or pure marksmanship.
On one hand, the military has the war industry behind it and years of competent trainers. On the other, the Civilian market pumps out better quality tools and the information is there, like for Marksman, all the knowledge and learning need to be a Modern Sniper is out there, in every sense of the words "Modern Sniper", you just won't have the Military's logistics and trainers behind you. But this comes back to the civilian version of things where you will have to train more and harder to be equal but this is their greatest strength as they can also be better because of their wider access to tools and ability to train more.
And when it comes down to it, the first two weeks of actual combat makes anybody who survives, a functional and competent shooter.
>>27940186
Is this the thread where guys who never had the balls to serve convince each other that they're totally as tough as guys who did?
Here you go:
Yes, a bunch of civilians can practice and train and become more proficient in squad-level combat tactics than trained soldiers or Marines.
No, they will never even be a fraction as tough because the hobbyists never actually consider that their precious little lives might be on the line, unlike the soldier or the Marine.
YES. Civilians shoot for fun, soldiers shoot so the sergeant doesn't yell at them.
In the military, guns are kept under lock and key.
You think that shooter in Fort Hood was dumb? Military bases are gun free zones!
The troops need more gun rights!
>>27940267
This
Most people are just fodder so the brass can be like ''oh a dude died over there, better send some arty''
