# Handgun and rifle for medical officer?



## helijamie (14 Nov 2009)

I am a new (almost) member of the Health Services Primary Reserve List. I am an orthopaedic surgeon and will very likely spend two months in Kandahar next year. My basic training will be in the spring.

From what I understand I carry a Browning HP handgun. Am I trained on a rifle as well? Will I ever be asked to carry a rifle in Afghanistan?

The reason I ask is I just completed my CRFSC and CFSC. I would like to get familiar with some of these firearms before I go to basic training.

In the past I did quite a bit of skeet shooting but I have never fired a rifle or handgun.

What is the exact model of Browning High Power in use? Can I supply my own weapon if it is the same model in use by the military? 

Thank you for your replies.


----------



## aesop081 (14 Nov 2009)

helijamie said:
			
		

> I would like to get familiar with some of these firearms before I go to basic training.



Not required. Basic training will teach you what you need to know.



> Can I supply my own weapon if it is the same model in use by the military?



No.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Nov 2009)

Speaking from personal knowledge... you will be trained on the weapons you're required to handle as part of you basic training, and your deployment training. That being said, you will be issued both a rifle and pistol to go into theatre. You will carry the pistol as your day-to-day item.


PM me for any more info you might need about gearing up for KAF.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Nov 2009)

helijamie said:
			
		

> I am a new (almost) member of the Health Services Primary Reserve List. I am an orthopaedic surgeon and will very likely spend two months in Kandahar next year. My basic training will be in the spring.



Good to have you on board.

Unless you have a (Resricted) Possession and acquisition License and belong to a shooting range there isn't much chance of you getting practice on your own.

It's generally frowned on to get training before training (if that make's sense).

One option you could look at (I'd recommend after basic training) is going to a reserve unit that has a 'F.A.T.S' system, explain your desire to them and they may put you on the system for a little while. It's basically a weapons training system. You use all the weapons we use in the Canadian Forces (actually not sure about pistol?) and it's hooked up to a air system with lasers and a big screen.  
You can work on conventional ranges like laying down in a field shooting at targets improving your shooting habits.
You can also be run through scenarios such as people coming towards you with a knife, people threatening hostages (patients?), a convoy coming under attack and you dismounting from your vehicle.  If anything it'll introduce you to aiming and shooting at something that resembles a human being.


----------



## SeanNewman (14 Nov 2009)

I have asked some CF medics on the question of morality and carrying weapons overseas (not just in KAF, but on patrol, etc) because of the WW2 image of medics having the big red cross and not ever shooting.

Well, to a man they have all told me that the main reason they carry their C7 is to protect the lives of their casualty(ies) if they have any.

However, if you are being shot at and nobody has been hit, expect to perform in the role of infantry shooting back until your medical skills are needed.


----------



## medicineman (14 Nov 2009)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> I have asked some CF medics on the question of morality and carrying weapons overseas (not just in KAF, but on patrol, etc) because of the WW2 image of medics having the big red cross and not ever shooting.



I think my Grandfather might refute that image if he were still around - he fought in South-East Asia against the Japanese in the Second World War .  The British medics started carrying Tommy guns because the enemy didn't care one bit about the GC...incidentally, in Europe towards the end, medics were given the option of carrying sidearms, since the Germans didn't feel they had alot to lose by engaging "non-combatants".  While the vast majority didn't, the option was still there.  Personally, I've never really given it a second thought, since I'm pretty useless to someone if I get hurt because I can't fight back or can't keep them from getting hurt worse because they themeselves can't fight back.  Medics are wonderful targets - nothing worse for morale when the person that will keep you alive if you get smacked is taken out.  I see nothing immoral about protecting myself or my patients - quite the opposite, I feel it's immoral NOT to do the utmost to protect myself or those that can't do it for themselves.

 :2c:

MM


----------



## aesop081 (14 Nov 2009)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> However, if you are being shot at and nobody has been hit, expect to perform in the role of infantry shooting back until your medical skills are needed.



http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/4-02-4/appa.pdf

For the US perspective, which is consitent with international law.


----------



## PMedMoe (14 Nov 2009)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> However, if you are being shot at and nobody has been hit, expect to perform in the role of infantry shooting back until your medical skills are needed.


Umm, don't think so.  Only in defense of ourselves or our casualties.

We already had a big honking discussion about this elsewhere.

CDN Aviator posted the link:



> Use of arms by AMEDD personnel for other than protection of themselves or their patients violates the GWS provisions governing the protected status of AMEDD personnel and results in the loss of protected status.


So, yeah, by all means, ask your medics to shoot at the enemy if they're not otherwise engaged with casualties and you'll be out some medics as they will no longer have protected status.


----------



## Dissident (14 Nov 2009)

If you are from the Greater Vancouver area, send me a private message once you are done basic training. I can help you in a few different ways.

This said, your chances of having to use any weapons are slim to none. Not that it should stop you from being proficient with them. There is a level of comfort attached with knowing how to defend yourself.

On TF1-07 I did some shift from time to time in the Role 3 MMU to guard local nationals and security risk being treated by the staff. Before someone hurts the staff, they would have to deal with an MP. I even attended some surgeries just in case the patient woke up from anesthesia mid operation.


----------



## ballz (14 Nov 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Not required. Basic training will teach you what you need to know.



I'd argue with that... I would recommend anybody to learn some basic rifle theory before heading to basic training. They pretty much don't teach you how a rifle actually works at the Mega, other then playing an outdated (not the information obviously) 15 minute video. The training was way too focussed on the drills themselves, and there were 3 NDs, 2 of them directly because of this, on my course this summer.

If the drills were followed correctly, the 3 NDs wouldn't have occured, but the reason these 2 people didn't follow them correctly wasn't because of their incompetance, but simply because they were never taught, and never understood, the "why's" of the proper sequence in the drills.


----------



## aesop081 (14 Nov 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> I'd argue with that...



Go ahead if you wish........They key part of your post is here :




> If the drills were followed correctly, the 3 NDs wouldn't have occured,



I had only ever fired a .22 once as a kid before i joined. I learned the C7 drills the same way they are taught today. I followed them as instructed and , wouldnt you know it, i have never had an ND.


----------



## PMedMoe (14 Nov 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I learned the C7 drills the same way they are taught today. I followed them as instructed and , wouldnt you know it, i have never had an ND.


Me too.  Sort of like applying your brakes when stopping a vehicle.  I don't need to know _how_ they work, just that they do and I have to use them when I want to stop.


----------



## medaid (14 Nov 2009)

O...K... I guess I shall come in and add something of fact? 

Physicians and Nurses who commission in to the H Svc PRL will undergo a modified basic. This is all you need to know. You will complete your course with a little less jacking, because the H Svc realises that you are an asset, and will not beast you like the rest of the Army, Navy, or Airforce, does. You will still be expected to learn military leadership, drill and ceremonial, how to teach, how to conduct small party tasks, how to behave like officers in the CF, and so forth. You just do it with less jacking, and little less time taken away from your primary duty as health services professionals. 

Your training WILL also include the C7, 9mm side arm, and whatever other small arms the H Svc has thought would be good to train you on now. However, I can see you reciving nothing more then the TOETs on C9, C6, SRAAW (L), SRAAW (M), and grenades.  (For those of you who didn't know Medical Units DO conduct testing on the TOETs of the above mentioned weapon systems annually at the Fd Amb level)

If you want to know MORE helijaime feel free to PM me. I've sent more then 1 clinician through to basic in my time with the Fd Amb. Welcome aboard Doc.

Now... for the rest.... 

Petamocto your info is more then FLAWED:

During the Battle of Sogel 1942 a medical unit not only picked up arms, it fend off the attack of German units on their medical station until they were relieved by armoured units. They not only took weapons off of the wounded, they CAPTURED enemy combatants. 12 (Vancouver) Field Ambulance is the unit that perpetuated the 12 Canadian Light Field Ambulance, and became the ONLY Canadian medical unit and medical personnel to actively engage in battle with the enemy. Guess what? They did it ALL wearing Red Crosses on their sleeves, and they did damn well all to protect the lives of their patients. A true example of medics under fire, not only did they defend themselves superbly, they also neutralized the very cause of the threat to their lives and the lives of their patients. 

A medic would NEVER fire their weapon as an infanteer in the engagement of the enemy. It is the BIGGEST no no in the H Svc field. 

Ballz I have to say this. Your experience in the CF is WAY too little for you to be commenting on training doctrine, and how the troops were trained. If there was an ND you cannot blame it solely on the training system, you have to also blame the soldiers that made the mistake. Honestly? in a Platoon of 30 you had 3 NDs? If that was 1 per soldier, 3 soldiers, that's 1% so... the training worked because somewhere along the lines the soldiers neglected to pay attention or as a whole the Pl failed them because no one ever bothered to offer them help. Think about that as a future leader in the Forces.

I will echo what CDN Aviator and MOE said... out of my service time albeit no where NEAR as long as theirs, the only time I've seen NDs were because the drills weren't followed. The soldiers fracked up by not paying attention to instructions and as a direct result NDd. Plain and simple. 

You be the judge of that.


----------



## ballz (14 Nov 2009)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Ballz I have to say this. Your experience in the CF is WAY too little for you to be commenting on training doctrine, and how the troops were trained. If there was an ND you cannot blame it solely on the training system, you have to also blame the soldiers that made the mistake. Honestly? in a Platoon of 30 you had 3 NDs? If that was 1 per soldier, 3 soldiers, that's 1% so... the training worked because somewhere along the lines the soldiers neglected to pay attention or as a whole the Pl failed them because no one ever bothered to offer them help. Think about that as a future leader in the Forces.
> 
> I will echo what CDN Aviator and MOE said... out of my service time albeit no where NEAR as long as theirs, the only time I've seen NDs were because the drills weren't followed. The soldiers fracked up by not paying attention to instructions and as a direct result NDd. Plain and simple.
> 
> You be the judge of that.



Absolutely my time in is petty, but I'm not the only person on here that thinks it's being taught wrong. Soldiers just as experienced as any of you have said on here basically the same thing I'm saying. If I thought I was a lone voice about this against a bunch of experienced soldiers I'd hold my tongue but I'm not.

First I'll say the "brakes on a car" analogy is rediculous. But I could add that you might want to know how they work if something went wrong with them while you were cruising downhill at 100km/h. Much like you will want to know how your rifle works if you're in the field being shot at and it stops working. Also, what happens if your stuck and pick up something other then a C7? You don't know the drills for it so you can't use it?

I'm not sure how your numbers are working but it was 3 of about 45 at that point, which is 6.7%, and only over a period of only 10 days in the field! That is FAR too high.

Now, as for the 2 specific ones in question, it's not because they didn't listen, or put in the effort. They passed their weapons test before they were ever allowed to use rounds, so the CF did certify them as a adequately capable with a rifle. But any time they DID screw up while learning, they were just screamed at to "put the weapon on safe, remove the magazine, tilt the rifle to the right, cycle the action, tilt the rifle to the left, pull back the cocking handle and check the chamber, release the cocking handle, aim at a safe point, put the weapon on repetition, and fire the action" in bout .3 seconds.

Sorry, this doesn't teach them anything, even if the instructor did slow it down so they might even be able to follow. And I'm not blaming the specific instructors. They under specific instructions too.

But if somebody took the 10 seconds to explain why you take the magazine out before you start cycling the action, and why its so serious if you don't, they probably would have "learned" the proper sequence of the drill, instead of just memorizing it for the test, and then have it forgotten 6 weeks later (no weapons handling in between) when we went out into the field. If they learned it, they wouldn't have forgotten it. But nobody's going to "learn" sequences if they don't understand.

As for trying to point the finger at my poor leadership skills, that's laughable. We were in classes of 7-8, and worked in sections in the field. I did everything I could to emphasize rifle theory with those in my sphere of influence, and before the weapons test I put it out there for anybody that was having trouble to come to my room with their rifle, and I did work with 4 people at that. However, there's only so much I can do and so much I can observe of 45-50 peers in those environments. Also, since your so adament that we shouldn't learn rifle theory and only learn rifle drills, and take everything at face value from the instructors, I suppose in a perfect world the whole platoon would be working from zero knowledge and not capable of teaching their peers anything about a rifle.

Oh, and in the course critique our platoon unanimously decided that we would have liked more emphasis on theory. We might not have experience but that should count for something, or why would the CF ask?

But enough of that that's another argument for another thread. In any case, somebody should not be discouraged to learn some beforehand.


----------



## PMedMoe (14 Nov 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> First I'll say the "brakes on a car" analogy is rediculous. But I could add that you might want to know how they work if something went wrong with them while you were cruising downhill at 100km/h. Much like you will want to know how your rifle works if you're in the field being shot at and it stops working. Also, what happens if your stuck and pick up something other then a C7? You don't know the drills for it so you can't use it?


If my brakes fail while going downhill at 100 km/h, I'm not gonna give a damn how they work, it won't really help then.  BTW, it's *ridiculous*.   

If my weapon stops firing, I check it and perform IA *drills*.  Still no requirement of knowing how the weapon works.

There is foreign weapons famil on pre-deployment training, although, I doubt I'd be picking up another one, given my trade.

I understand what you are saying.  When I did basic, we got in depth lectures on the weapons, with the exception of the 9mm which was only displayed to the whole platoon.  Imagine my surprise to find out I was "qualified" on it.     However, _if_ people perform their *drills* properly, there should be no reason for an ND.

As far as training before BMQ, fill your boots, just be prepared to do things as the instructors say, regardless of your level of experience.


----------



## ballz (14 Nov 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> BTW, it's *ridiculous*.



I'm just going to ignore commenting on the fact that you were able to find a spelling error in my post completely because it's completely unrelated to anything we're talking about.



			
				PMedMoe said:
			
		

> If my weapon stops firing, I check it and perform IA *drills*.  Still no requirement of knowing how the weapon works.



If those are the 3 stoppage drills we learned on BMOQ, there's more that can go wrong with a rifle than a loose magazine, empty magazine, or a blockage in the chamber. Those are the only scenarios we were taught how to remedy.



			
				PMedMoe said:
			
		

> There is foreign weapons famil on pre-deployment training, although, I doubt I'd be picking up another one, given my trade.



Well then thumbs up for that.



			
				PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I understand what you are saying.  When I did basic, we got in depth lectures on the weapons, with the exception of the 9mm which was only displayed to the whole platoon.  Imagine my surprise to find out I was "qualified" on it.     However, _if_ people perform their *drills* properly, there should be no reason for an ND.



Absolutely, the drills performed properly will work every time. And since you understand what I am saying, you understand why learning, rather than memorizing, is much more effective to help candidates and all soldiers alike perform their drills properly every time. As of this summer, there were no in-depth lectures on the weapons.



			
				PMedMoe said:
			
		

> As far as training before BMQ, fill your boots, just be prepared to do things as the instructors say, regardless of your level of experience.



Absolutely.


----------



## PMedMoe (14 Nov 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> I'm just going to ignore commenting on the fact that you were able to find a spelling error in my post completely because it's completely unrelated to anything we're talking about.


Lighten up, man, that's why I used a smiley!


----------



## ballz (15 Nov 2009)

Sorry I had one of those Friday nights :-X and now I'm full of pi$$ and vinegar today haha.


----------



## aesop081 (15 Nov 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> there's more that can go wrong with a rifle than a loose magazine, empty magazine, or a blockage in the chamber.



You think i would have learned that over the years. Thanks for clearing that one up.   :

There should be a civie course that you take before BMQ, one where you would learn absolutely everything, just so you dont have to actualy learn at BMQ.

I even managed to learn the C9, C6, .50 cal, C5, Carl G, M72, M203...all taught by the military no less.........without prior experince and more importantly....without army.ca. All that without a single incident !!

Wonders never cease.


----------



## ballz (15 Nov 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You think i would have learned that over the years. Thanks for clearing that one up.   :
> 
> There should be a civie course that you take before BMQ, *one where you would learn absolutely everything, just so you dont have to actualy learn at BMQ.*
> 
> ...



You should try to wander off what I've been saying a little further... I like my apples green and my oranges orange thanks. This is one dead horse now.


----------



## Greymatters (15 Nov 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> Absolutely, the drills performed properly will work every time. And since you understand what I am saying, you understand why learning, rather than memorizing, is much more effective to help candidates and all soldiers alike perform their drills properly every time. As of this summer, there were no in-depth lectures on the weapons.



I think your viewpoint might be influenced by your career.  If I read correctly, you are a medic or medical trade, in either trade of which you receive detailed lessons on all subjects.  You might have been expecting the same in-depth teaching when you got your weapons lessons.  

However, the weapons qualification is usually a one-day course, most of it behind hands-on physical skills.  There is no time for ballistics theory, history of firearms, or coaching skills, or battlefield tactics for hand-held weapons.  

If a particpant really wants to know more details, there are always lots of training manuals around that a motivated soldier can get ahold of and do more training on their own time so they wont forget their drills, or they can go to the library to learn more details about weapons and how they work. 

Overall, lack of details shouldnt prevent learning to complete the simple drills, and, despite the appearance of complexity, weapons safety is enhanced by remembering three important rules.

1) Finger off trigger unless you intend to fire at a target or person.
2) Weapon on safe unless you intend to fire at a target or person.
3) Dont point it at anyone unless you intend to shoot them.

Following these three simple rules prevents a lot of ND's, but it takes individual practice of IA's to make sure none occur at all.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Nov 2009)

You could pay $8499 and head down to blackwater and take one of their CP courses before doing basic training. 
You'll look like a high speed low drag gunfighter (and piss everyone off with your 'ya well in black water..) comments.


Asking about learning to use something before hand isn't always a bad thing.  

That why we have "PRE-plq" classes. (I learned to give drill before taking my course because you're expected to show up basically knowing how)
Lots of people study up before embarking on courses.  An officer cadet at my unit laid waste to a whole forest printing up pams and lesson plans and shit for his officers course. Before my TCCC couse started  I paid out of my own pocket and redid the st johns ambulance first aid course.

As far as C7's go, it's just not a good idea.  It's not very hard to learn how to use a C7. Couple of hours and you're relatively proficient at the drills. In the CF we extend it a few days with various classes.

It's best to go in, get instruction, learn the army way and then get further training.   If you get instruction from elsewhere you can't guarantee the quality or accuracy of what you're being taught.

ONE big issue with teaching weapons drill's on basic training however is that it won't always be combat arms or 'shooters' teaching drills.  Or even support soldiers whom are proficient with weapons as many of them are.  Sometimes you get instructors who haven't touched a weapon in years or whom themselves have been taught bad drills/ethics..  (Don't really worry about this or that, you'll get a pistol to carry in KAF, you'll never use it)


----------



## ballz (15 Nov 2009)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> I think your viewpoint might be influenced by your career.  If I read correctly, you are a medic or medical trade, in either trade of which you receive detailed lessons on all subjects.  You might have been expecting the same in-depth teaching when you got your weapons lessons.



No I'm en route to infantry, which could also explain why I want to know it inside out / am of the opinion that everybody should.

Anyway, DEAD HORSE PEOPLE! :nod:


----------



## Zoomie (15 Nov 2009)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Physicians and Nurses who commission in to the H Svc PRL will undergo a modified basic.


Not always true - we had a doctor and a nurse on my BOTC - equal amounts of beasting handed out to all.  



> Your training WILL also include the C7, 9mm side arm, and whatever other small arms the H Svc has thought would be good to train you on now. However, I can see you reciving nothing more then the TOETs on C9, C6, SRAAW (L), SRAAW (M), and grenades.



None of these weapons systems are covered on any version of BOTC/BOTP


----------



## gcclarke (15 Nov 2009)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Not always true - we had a doctor and a nurse on my BOTC - equal amounts of beasting handed out to all.


Were they commissioning into the Health Services Primary Reserve List? Or were they joining the reg force? If not, then MedTech's statement is not in any way invalidated by your anecdote. 


> None of these weapons systems are covered on any version of BOTC/BOTP


Again, unless you've been involved with the modified basic training given to MOs and NOs joining the Health Services Primary Reserve List, then it's entirely possible that you just aren't aware of a version of BMOQ that covers these weapons.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Nov 2009)

There's sure a pile of people running around in circles, pissing in each other's corn flakes. Perhaps when someone decides to go get the official policy, and post it with links, we'll open this back up. Until then, you'll all have to find another subject to do your one-upmanship in. Enough 'personal' opinion has been posted here.

Locked (until the above criteria is met)

Milnet.ca Staff


----------

