I agree with this. Most prior military I know (myself included) are only good with a pistol because we usually train above what was originally taught to us. My former stepfather (retired Army) used to say a pistol is for fighting to your rifle.(probably borrowed in some iteration from someone else). Pisol markmanship just isn't a focus in the military. Now, that may have changed, but I doubt it.
Doesn't seem to have changed, according to discussions I've had with a number of firearms trainers who are current and former military.
Like I've said elsewhere a number of times: There are plenty of military folks who are good (or better than good!) shooters. The fact that they were in the military isn't why, though, for almost all of them. (Couple of specific small military groups excepted.)
It could be that the "Military service=good shooter" connection comes from those who have served, BUT also trained to increase the skills, (people like Pat MacNamara, Steve Reichert, Tim Kennedy, Jim Gilliland to name a few). It's the nature of some civilians to lay broad generalizations on military service, i.e., "Oh, you're in the military? Do you know my friend Steve?"
I think it is a combination of things, really. People like action stories, and we want the heroes to be skilled and brave and strong and etc. We WANT our law enforcement folks and military folks to be experts with weapons. That, coupled with the strong institutional attitudes about skills that people in the military and law enforcement have about their own people, comes together to produce a pretty solid mythos.
I don't think it is just a civilian reaction to generalize---it is a
human reaction to do so, particularly if part of that generalization is based on an attitude that is trained into the person (you are a soldier, you are expert, you are deadly, etc). It all comes together from many places.
Interestingly enough, it seems to happen EVEN IF people know better. For example, I'm pretty sure that several people here on this forum are Marines. And we know that all Marines are rifleman, first and foremost.
Right?
And yet....I'd bet that those Marines ALSO know of several Marines they had to deal with when they were in that were horrible shots and wouldn't be someone you'd want watching your back. Many? No, not at all. But...I'd bet every single Marine could think of at least one.
They KNOW that all military folks aren't equal in skill, and that certainly all aren't experts. But....at the same time the training about what it means to be a Marine, and the pride in being a Marine makes people react emotionally even when they already know better.
(I'm using "Marine" just as an example. This is true for literally any job, service, or calling in which skills are taught, and in which an esprit de corps forms, such as law enforcement, the military branches, firefighters, correctional officers, and so on. Part of that esprit de corp literally comes from the thought that merely being a member of the group means something special.)
Self-image and emotional needs create strong reactions.
Like I said, what's always been interesting to me is how a simple statement of "being in the military doesn't make you an expert pistol shooter" creates such a strong reaction, even though the people in the military KNOW the statement is true, because they all know plenty of people in the military who aren't expert pistol shooters, even if they believe they personally are expert pistol shooters--and even if they believe that their military training MADE them expert pistol shooters!
