I would submit that there is some disparity in this rank structure, E-4 is fine, WO-1 is fine as you have to be a senior NCO to apply to Warrant.
The O-1 bothers me as that qualifies a 1st day officer that was a college student the day before yesterday. I would submit O-1E (for prior enlisted) and O-3 for regular officers.
Food for thought.
Cheers,
Craig6
Just a thunk.
Craig,
Yes, I’d admit that 0-1E would be better (I was a E-6 mustang myself). In trying to define length of experience all would be required to Pass a minimum Four day Defensive Handgun course or equivalent (Dr Piazza’s Front Sight Firearms Training Institute, has offered free courses to RAMDSA applicants) upon first application of RAMDSA and where they shoot over 800 rounds within 4 days (some of the best training I ever had!) . The experience and length of service was more for additional confidence in these RAMDSA officers to carry in “No Gun Zones” like HR-218 Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA).
Thanks for your input and the politicians will be the ones who decide what they’ll accept for criteria?
Bob
Do you have a pdf of your proposal that I can email to my senators? I feel that Josh Hawley and Roy Blunt might both like it
On experience I would submit that I have known hundreds of sailors that have NEVER handled a firearm. I know that in the USMC that annual qualification is a minimum standard for advancement, Not sure about USA, USAF or USCG.
On length of service I would consider the standard 4 year enlistment or standard 4 year Commission pay back to be minimum. That nets you E-4 and O-3 respectively.
On a mandatory training I think you would be better to exactly enumerate the requirements which must be attained. As soon as you say “similar to” a for profit gun course you are pre opening a can of worms. Participants shall qualify in accordance with current OPNAV Blah, MARFOR Blah, USATRADOC Blah etc standard pistol qualification. Failure to qualify will require remediation with an in depth pistol course that meets “Pick a 3 or 4 letter club” standards for initial practical weapons qualification.
I also noticed and in most CCW courses that I have monitored it is incumbent of the student to learn "Shoot “Don’t Shoot” and the laws of armed response. THAT needs to be a part of it.
Remember this will be Federal and Federal Law is the MINIMUM standard, states can require higher but never lower standards. States have Castle Doctrine, others have Stand your Ground yet others have Duty to Retreat. This HAS to be addressed or it will be seen as an infringement of states rights for things not specifically enumerated in the Constitution even if you go down the Interstate Commerce Clause road.
I can see a state like CA, MA CT, NY, NJ etc making the criteria so restrictive that even Federal permit holders will be barred from carry as well as most of their LEO. NJ has a prohibition against hollow point ammo and magazines over 10 rounds in VA I have none.
I love your idea and would like it even better tied to a national drivers license and voting card but that would just muddle the waters. I guess I am wanting it succeed and am throwing out obvious roadblocks that can be addressed prior to deployment.
Cheers,
Craig6