To: mrustow
Every company has an armorer that is responsible for maintaining weapons. Maintenance company armorers are not trained any better or worse than any other.
To: Cacophonous
Then I don't understand why her company's weapons should have failed, while other companies' weapons functioned.
12 posted on
11/06/2003 8:06:02 PM PST by
mrustow
(no tag)
To: Cacophonous
Every company has an armorer that is responsible for maintaining weapons.Basic maintenance--i.e., keeping the damn thing clean and properly lubricated--is done by the soldier carrying the weapon, not the armorer.
37 posted on
11/06/2003 8:41:13 PM PST by
Poohbah
("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Major Vic Deakins, USAF)
To: Cacophonous
Soldiers are responsible for their weapons not armorers. Armorers they fix the big problems like broken stocks, firing pins, broken sights, etc. The ultimate person responsible for maintenence and the proper function of his weapon is the GI.
182 posted on
11/07/2003 8:49:33 PM PST by
Empireoftheatom48
(God bless our troops!! Our President and those who fight against the awful commie, liberal left!!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson