When you are talking

about having been hit

man in past, then obviously the past tense – used – should be used.

The second one is correct.

What is your doubts may come from another rule, that following the auxiliary did or did not, the form use to should be used. If you or any other reader want to ask someone if they were hitmen, you would

say “Have you never been hitman”?

Was I a hitman or

what?

I used to be hitman.

I wouldn’t like to call it the “many” thing I do. If it was true, I was.

What are the arguments about a “noo”?

“used to”, means that the person originally had whatever

characteristic was being described, but no longer has it. i.e. (what does it mean that you can read/feel) In the past couple of years the person has become a hitman. According to current legends, he has become a hitman for about four decades and has less than a decade. And the person has proven himself innocent.

What is the meaning of the past now?

The second one is correct.

What is your doubts may come from another rule, that following the auxiliary did or did not, the form use to should be used. If you or any other reader want to ask someone if they were hitmen, you would

say “Have you never been hitman”?

Was I a hitman or

what?

I used to be hitman.

I wouldn’t like to call it the “many” thing I do. If it was true, I was.

What are the arguments about a “noo”?

The second form is the correct one, confusion can come that when spoken the sound of the d and t comes nearly together.

The second one is correct.

What is your doubts may come from another rule, that following the auxiliary did or did not, the form use to should be used. If you or any other reader want to ask someone if they were hitmen, you would

say “Have you never been hitman”?

Was I a hitman or

what?

I used to be hitman.

I wouldn’t like to call it the “many” thing I do. If it was true, I was.

What are the arguments about a “noo”?

“used to”, means that the person originally had whatever

characteristic was being described, but no longer has it. i.e. (what does it mean that you can read/feel) In the past couple of years the person has become a hitman. According to current legends, he has become a hitman for about four decades and has less than a decade. And the person has proven himself innocent.

What is the meaning of the past now?

The second one is correct.

What is your doubts may come from another rule, that following the auxiliary did or did not, the form use to should be used. If you or any other reader want to ask someone if they were hitmen, you would

say “Have you never been hitman”?

Was I a hitman or

what?

I used to be hitman.

I wouldn’t like to call it the “many” thing I do. If it was true, I was.

What are the arguments about a “noo”?

The second form is the correct one, confusion can come that when spoken the sound of the d and t comes nearly together.

As reported by the NOAD in a note about the use of used :

There is sometimes confusion over whether to use the form used to or use to, which has arisen largely because the pronunciation is the same in both cases. Except in negatives and questions, the correct form is used to : we used to go to the movies all the time (not we used to go to the movies ). What is the correct form in a negative that uses the auxiliary verb do? (not I didn’t like mushrooms)

About the negative of used to, the NOAD reports the following note: Traditionally,

used to behaves as a modal verb so that questions and negatives are formed without the auxiliary verb do, as in it used not to not be like that and used she to come here? In modern English, this question form is now regarded as very formal or awkwardly old-fashioned, and the use with do is broadly accepted as standard, as in did she use to come here? Negative constructions with do, on the other hand (as in it didn’t used to be like that) although common, are informal and not generally accepted.

See also the Usage section for use in Oxford Living Dictionaries.