Thank you for your comments. There was a lot of “spray and pray” with the M-16. I remember about two days of training on sighting the M-16, and most guys did not get it. I was a city kid, but had fired a .22 in Boy Scouts and could follow directions and I was adequate as marksman, and zeroed my sights on the first try.
There were a number of excellent marksman in the U.S. Army in Europe during World War II, but I would not be surprised to hear that the standard of marksmanship was low, or lower than it should have been.
“....that the standard of marksmanship was low, or lower than it should have been.”
That subject has been widely discussed and ground into dust with no resolution. Three of my now deceased uncles were in Europe for WW2. They were all excellent shots, raised country boys. It was their position that anyone who was a lousy shot got lots of attention until they improved. Two were buck sgt. and the third was a four striper. Not sure what the real truth is. There is even an contention that many front line troops in WW2 never fried their weapon in combat - who knows.
I believe, that in theatre and closer to the front, a man learned to adjust the sights. It may be a matter of realizing that one must overcome the business of waiting for orders: “I’ve got to get smart, fast.” A shift to smart personal initiative. And, marksmanship improved by encountering somebody who made the effort to teach what they had learned. The standard of marksmanship was better than average, for a veteran in theatre.