If you can't shoulder a rifle and know the scope is mounted backwards you shouldn't be commanding a US Navy Destroyer

https://www.foxnews.com/us/us-navy-warship-commander-relieved-duty-following-image-him-shooting-rifle-scope-mounted-backward

Probably wondering why the target looked so far away.

I didnt read the article, but hope that he was relieved of command for reasons other than the stupid picture.

While i enjoyed laughing st him as much as the next guy, i dont necessarily expect a destroyer captain to know much about small arms any bit as much as i expect somebody who can fire a rifle to be able to captain a destroyer effectively.

I would bet big money this has nothing to do with that picture and everything to do with inappropriate relations with a subordinate

I hope they did an investigation and found out more than what I imagine went down: He came out to observe the small arms fire. He was asked if he wanted to shoot - he stepped in and popped off a few rounds with a rifle that one of the Gunner's Mates handed him. Probably wondered why it was so difficult and handed it back. These COs need to be experts in Aegis - not a 5.56.

You would be shocked at how little military members, across all services, know about smaller caliber weapons.

True story. I enlisted in the Army right out of HS when my dad was a Navy officer. So I get to Basic and they already know my dad is Navy and that immediately became my nickname from my drill sergeants. ANYTHING I did wrong was blamed on the Navy.

So we get to basic rifle marksmanship and I couldn't hit the red side of a barn. Understand that I grew up on Navy bases with a dad that didn't grow up with guns and a mom that also grew up on Navy bases. There were no guns of any kind in our house and I had never shot anything, ever. And it showed. 10 days in and it was a coin toss at 25 meters with a M16. lol

So on day 11 Sgt Firse goes down range with me to see that I'd hit 4/10. The conversation goes like this:

Sgt Firse: ******* Navy! That's just ****ing awful!
Me: Yes it is Drill Sergeant.
Sgt Firse: You know what your problem is Navy?
Me: No, Drill Sergeant.
Sgt Firse: Your problem is in the Navy y'all have these giant ****ing 16 inch rounds and you don't gotta know what the **** you're doing to kill somebody with a 16 inch round. Here in the Army we have these little bitty 5.56 millimeter rounds. You gotta know what the **** you're doing to kill somebody with a 5.56 millimeter round and you don't know what the **** you're doing do you, Navy?
Me: No, Drill Sergeant.
Sgt Firse: Navy, I want you to picture the son-of-a ***** you hate the most and I want you to kill him.
Me: Yes, Drill Sergeant.

Next time around I go 7/10, best yet.

Sgt Firse: Well I'll be damned Navy! What did you do?
Me: I pictured the son-of-a-***** I hated the most and I killed him.
Sgt Firse: Who did you picture?
Me: You, Drill Sergeant.
Sgt Firse: I can't make you do pushups on the shooting range but when we get back to the barracks you owe me pushups but good job!

Never shot less than 7/10 again and qualified 34/40 which was the only time a qualified below expert. By time I'd been in a year I hit 38+ consistently but it was sure ugly in the beginning!

bowhuntr said:

---

I hope they did an investigation and found out more than what I imagine went down: He came out to observe the small arms fire. He was asked if he wanted to shoot - he stepped in and popped off a few rounds with a rifle that one of the Gunner's Mates handed him. Probably wondered why it was so difficult and handed it back. These COs need to be experts in Aegis - not a 5.56.

You would be shocked at how little military members, across all services, know about smaller caliber weapons.

---

It really is amazing at how many don't know anything really, other than what they were taught in basic. Most rarely even fired a weapon after basic because 80 something percent of .mil roles are not combat oriented.

But rest assured, those folks will absolutely brag about being former military when anything guns related is discussed and lemmings automatically believe everything they say because most folks have little clue what actually happens in the service with most roles. Not everybody was a scout sniper or seal or delta operator.

Breggy Popup said:

---

Guess the Navy thought the photo was bad optics.

---

This is a masterpiece.

Got any more of those "backwards scopes" for them to demonstrate?

Replaced by a transsexual.

It's almost like China owns the DNC and is architecting our demise.

bowhuntr said:

---

I hope they did an investigation and found out more than what I imagine went down: He came out to observe the small arms fire. He was asked if he wanted to shoot - he stepped in and popped off a few rounds with a rifle that one of the Gunner's Mates handed him. Probably wondered why it was so difficult and handed it back. These COs need to be experts in Aegis - not a 5.56.

You would be shocked at how little military members, across all services, know about smaller caliber weapons.

---

I finally saw this video. There's a lot of accuracy in the above. Called my BIL who is a navy Captain (ret) and he's sure it was up just an excuse and diversion. The skipper didn't mount that scope so he didn't make the mistake, was handed the rifle, he knew he was being videotaped so he's not going to go ballistic and dress down the sailor while being filmed. He's not a conspiracy theorist type but he's not convinced it wasn't a set up (or maybe a joke on the skipper). His response was "ok, funny, I'm going to show you I'm still a badass and hit that target anyway." Seeing who he was replaced with sure is telling (that transition (pun intended) needed something diversionary).

To whoever wrote the "bad optics for the Navy" he busted out laughing and said he was going to use that.