IBTS

[Prototype]

Consider this hypothetical scenario of a reservist,

A soldier receives 25 MINUTES of 9mm pistol training as part of a 3hr training night.

There was no time alloted in the TP to complete all required lessons as outlined in the PAM.

This weekend he is expected to shoot a 9mm PWT.

When he gets a negligent discharge, can he be held accountable?

We are going to the range this weekend, I hope this scenario is hypothetical.

I was his instructor.

 

[dangerboy]

As part of the training did he complete and pass the 9mm weapons handling test?

 

[PMedMoe]

I'm quite sure that the handling test (formerly TOETs) can be done on the 9mm in 25 minutes.  How do I know?  Because we did it yesterday.

If they've passed the weapons handling test, and it's done again at the ranges, there shouldn't be an ND.

 

[FDO]

If they are doing IBTS, as far as I know, they have already completed BMQ and SQ and they are now doing what we in the Navy call "Refresher Training" that's done on a yearly basis. This being said the Soldier is "trained in the use" and is only having a refresher done. Therefore 25 minutes should be morre than enough to bring back all the training they've had previously. And if they have an ND, they should be run!

 

[dangerboy]

That brings up a good point was this 25 minutes of training that the soldier received inititial training or was it refreasher training?

 

[FDO]

Prototype said IBTS. That's refresher training.

 

[Roy Harding]

...
When he gets a negligent discharge, can he be held accountable?

We are going to the range this weekend, I hope this scenario is hypothetical.

I was his instructor.

Reading between the lines - it appears that, as his instructor, you don't think he's been properly trained (for whatever reason - lack of time being the reason you seized upon).

The other's have brought up valid questions (initial or refresher training).  I want to know why, if you - as his instructor - have significant doubts regarding his training, are you allowing him to attempt the PWT in the first place?  Shouldn't your recommendation to the C of C be "more training required"?

 

[George Wallace]

A couple of points:

1.  9 mm BHP is not part of BMQ Pt 1, nor BMQ Pt 2.  C-7 is the wpn that they are tested on. 

2.  9 mm BHP would be a Unit Trg responsibility.

3.  If the member is "deemed capable" by the instructors giving the training, there should be no problems with them live firing on the range.  If the instructors feel the person is in any way "unsafe" to fire, then don't allow them to fire.  Simple.

4.  If the member has a "ND" on the Firing Point, it will be up to the Range Staff to review the incident and make the decission on whether or not to Charge the individual.  Consideration will have to be taken into account of how much training and experience the individual has with that wpn.  Is/would a Charge be necessary or productive?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Consider this hypothetical scenario of a reservist,

A soldier receives 25 MINUTES of 9mm pistol training as part of a 3hr training night.

There was no time alloted in the TP to complete all required lessons as outlined in the PAM.

This weekend he is expected to shoot a 9mm PWT.

When he gets a negligent discharge, can he be held accountable?

We are going to the range this weekend, I hope this scenario is hypothetical.

I was his instructor.

To add to what GW posted.

5.  If the mbr feels they don't know what they are doing, they can say so, request additional trg. 

6.  If you, as an Instr, feel the mbr isn't competent, have another NCO or someone who will be an ARSO on the range do the Wpn Handling test with the pers in question.

7.  EVERYONE is responsible for safety.