The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 23, 2011, 07:02 AM   #76
Brevard
Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2011
Posts: 19
Quote:
CCW class should not be training. It SHOULD however require you to demonstrate safe and effective use of a firearm. Any of the stuff like has been mentioned in this thread - can't operate the safety, can't load the weapon, negligent muzzle control, can't hit the target at 5 yards, etc - should rate an instant failure.
This is what I meant to say, though it came out nothing like it . If you can't demonstrate simple safety measures (ex: keeping your gun pointed away from everyone in the class, or looking down the barrel after you pulled the trigger and nothing happened) then you do not need your CCP. I do however agree that it should not be taught in the class.

Would people feel the same about having a harder time getting a license if they were to say you have to have say 4 hrs of firearm training, before you took the class? Have a certificate that you present.

It is one more step to do but IMO at least we wouldn't be worried about someone shooting themselves or someone else AS MUCH
Brevard is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 08:12 AM   #77
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
One impression I get from reading this and other threads is that many believe the same thing that the anti-gun crowd believes, which is that guns are much too dangerous for ordinary people. By the same token, there is the common belief that the world in which we live is a very dangerous place. The anti-gun crowd believes fewer guns would be better, and the other side believes the opposite. I think some of the same exaggerations have been made by both sides to further their arguments.

And another thing, have firearms in general and handguns in particular, become more complicated in the last century? At one time, it was sufficient to include a little three page leaflet in the cardboard box the pistol came in. Today you get a 37 page booklet instead and that's just the ones that only have one language. It could at least be shorter if they didn't have those large and bold warning (in red) in two places on every page. Apparently even the manufacturer thinks their product is too dangerous.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 08:21 AM   #78
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
CCW class should not be training. It SHOULD however require you to demonstrate safe and effective use of a firearm. Any of the stuff like has been mentioned in this thread - can't operate the safety, can't load the weapon, negligent muzzle control, can't hit the target at 5 yards, etc - should rate an instant failure.
Thats all I am being a proponent of.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 08:46 AM   #79
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
One impression I get from reading this and other threads is that many believe the same thing that the anti-gun crowd believes, which is that guns are much too dangerous for ordinary people. By the same token, there is the common belief that the world in which we live is a very dangerous place. The anti-gun crowd believes fewer guns would be better, and the other side believes the opposite. I think some of the same exaggerations have been made by both sides to further their arguments.
Thats a false impression and a leading argument. I think most people arguing for training are arguing that people should be sufficiently trained to not be a menace.

With rights come responsibilities. If you're going to avail yourself of your 2nd Amendment Rights you should be responsbile and at least know how to handle the blasted thing.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 09:49 AM   #80
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
I learned how to handle blasters when I served in the militia. But I think you make my point.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:17 AM   #81
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
I'd proffer you're incorrect (again). Its not that guns are much too dangerus for ordinary persons, but instead, like a simple driving test, if you want to CHL you should have a minimum competence.


You have the right to bear arms. You have the responsibility to bear them safely if you're going to be concealed.

Frankly of we can have minimal tests for a driver's license, a license for concealed carry should have similar requirements of minimal competence.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:23 AM   #82
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
Isn't someone who can't hit a man-sized target at 10' (at the range with no stress) a menace?

I wouldn't want to be within 10k if a guy like that pulls his gun for defense and starts firing - the safest person in the whole area is going to be the person he's shooting at.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:35 AM   #83
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
If I were King, getting a CCW permit would be 4 hours of training which was 4 hours of training on local carry law, use of deadly force, testing on those subjects and then a proficiency test on what you'd already be expected to know on safe firearms handling, MAO for clearing yor weapon, and a live fire exercise at 15" where you had to put 6 rounds in 6"

If you can't operate the safety or go through clearing your weapon - you're a menace.

If you can't put 6 rounds in 6" at 5 yards you're a menace IMO.


I'd also fail people for all the things most gun competitions DQ people for - any unsafe behavior - breaking of the 4 rules, breaking the 180 at the line, and of course any ND/UD (unintentional discharge ?)

The thought that HB 822 could potentially let people roam the streets of Illinois who haven't met my high standards makes me cringe !
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:49 AM   #84
brickeyee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,342
Quote:
Wrong on the facts. VA requires a class. ZERO training is required.

Quote:
VA does not require any live firing to complete the requirements for a CHP. Both online and in class safety courses which do not require you to even hold a gun satisfy the "training" requirement to obtain a VA permit.
Quote:
I am however not incorrect on the fact that VA does not require you to have any range time in order to get a CHP in VA.
Quote:
what I posted the crux of my argument was that VA does not require any "training" on how to actually use a real handgun in order to obtain a permit.

You flop around like a screen door in a hurricane.
Quote:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln
brickeyee is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:52 AM   #85
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,355
Quote:
Frankly of we can have minimal tests for a driver's license, a license for concealed carry should have similar requirements of minimal competence.
Zincwarrior, can you or anyone else give me an ideal what "YOU" consider a "mimimual Competence test"??

Everyone is different. Alaska use to have standards for Armed Security Guards where as they had to attend a course for Armed Security Guards and pass a written and shooting test before they could be certified to be armed while working.

I conducted these classes but I would not sign off or certify anyone unless they scored at least 85% on both written and practiacl portions.

Some people have differernt standards, who's right. Who is going to write those standards, The guy who doen't want anyone to carry or the guy who wants everyone to carry.

Another point, everyone relates shooting to driving, Driving is not a protected right under the constitution, the right to carry is.

I'm all for training, but not mandentory training, a person has to WANT TO LEARN, and we should provide a zero or low cost venue so they can get that training.

Guess what? We do, the Civilian Marksmanship (then the DCM, or Division of Civilian Marksmanship) was started in the early 1900s to do just that. Then it was funded by the Dept of the Army with tax dollars, Since 1996 the DCM was changed to the CMP, and its totally funded by the sales of surplus arms and equipment, they use zero tax dollars. Its there, its free or low cost, available to every citizen of the US, but how many take advantage of it.

Some people don't care, some people do, testing and training isnt gonna make people care. Training and testing wont make one shoot better, it only makes them take the reqired training to pass the test, but without follow up accomplishes NOTHING.

You can't make people care, and trying so you want to violate the constitution. You want to make it mandantory then change the constitution.

If one watches the news you'll see there is going to be an up coming USSC case dealing with whether the Federal Government can force one to pay for something he doesnt want. Most of us agree with the states who are suing the feds to prevent forcing us to buy something, Yet we set here and try to push the same thing.

We gun owners want to protect our rights the constitution protects and then demand we have to pay for those rights.

I just don't understand this.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 10:56 AM   #86
WVsig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 30, 2010
Location: KY
Posts: 2,984
Watching an online video does not equal training my my book. If I watch a Magpul carbine DVD does that mean I have completed a Magpul training course? I don't think so.

My point is and always has been that VA does not require any real "training" in order to get a permit. YMMV
__________________
"Its a tool box... I don't care you put the tools in for the job that's all..." Sam from Ronin
The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced. -Frank Zappa
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.-Frank Zappa
WVsig is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 11:09 AM   #87
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
Virginia requires you to have liabability insurance if you own a car (whether or not you drive it). Is that constitutional? But it has nothing to do with whether or not you should have training on either car or firearms--or to vote. At one time, in some places, you (that is, some people) had to pass a test to be able to vote.

The Civilian Marksmanship Program was started to improve the shooting capabilities of those going into the army. What do you suppose the average age of participants is now?
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 11:41 AM   #88
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,355
Quote:
The Civilian Marksmanship Program was started to improve the shooting capabilities of those going into the army. What do you suppose the average age of participants is now?
I think I see where you are going with this, indicating that the age group of participants is us older guys. If I'm mistaken then I apologize. But the older ages is not the case in regards to the CMP.

Quote:
The great body of citizens shoot less as time goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among school boys and indeed all classes as well as the military
Teddy Roosevelt, 1903

In 1903 under the guidance and encouragement of Pres. Roosevelt Congress passed a bill creating the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, administered by the Division of Civilian Marksmanship.

In 1996 Congress chartered the Civilian Marksmanship Program, to replace the Army for administering the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice.

The Mission of the CMP "To Promote Firearm Safety and Marksmanship Training With an Emphasis on Youth"

That is the case, most of the CMP programs are geared toward the youth of this country.

As a side note, don't get hung up on the term "Rifle" in this post. Pistols are also included.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 12:24 PM   #89
8MM Mauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2011
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 450
40 Hours of training? Are you kidding? So only people with $2000 of disposable income should be able to CC?
I understand the consternation of people who see someone who can't seem to understand basic things about a handgun when they think that those people will be running around with a gun...but chances are, or at least it seems to me, that they probably won't practice with it and when time comes to defend their life with it they will be hopeless anyway and end up getting shot, and probably have the weapon stolen. A lack of proficiency, IMO is only a danger to themselves, unless they are absolutely crazy and decide to practice in an alley somewhere... who do you suppose will be hurt? Only themselves, the responsibility is on the individual.
That said, the reason I don't CC right now is twofold, one reason is because most of the places I go (school campus and work) don't allow guns, the other is the prohibitive costs of taking a safety class (about $150) and getting the license (last time I checked i think it was $110). I'm in school, I have a wife and daughter to feed, I don't have $250 for the requirements which exist now... In fact, I even have passed up the opportunity to buy several handguns at a great price, because I really don't see the point if I can't carry (I prefer a 12GA for HD)
What I m trying to get across is that requiring this kind of training would exclude a large number of people from being able to carry, it would take me two years to set aside that much money, assuming I had no car/truck or home disasters. I also want to stress that it is the lowest income bracket who is the most likely to be the victim of a violent crime!
Requiring this would exclude those people most likely to need it. IMO CC'ing a weapon should not be a rich man's game...at least not exclusively, us younger folks can't always rely on muscle you know, and us poor folks already have limited options when it comes to carrying a weapon, why on earth limit it more? You may as well eliminate it rather than restrict it like this IMO because you would remove the possibility for those who need it the most.
8MM Mauser is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 01:11 PM   #90
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
Quote:
A lack of proficiency, IMO is only a danger to themselves
I disagree.

The canary in the coalmine so to speak - that brings to light the existance of a situation of an idiot with guns - are kids.

That's why we have kids going trick or treating with a real 9mm.

My kids are training in firearms safety. I think one of the most important things for a child to see is what bullets do to objects... then it's no longer a video game or a movie but they have a feeling (hopefully) for the destructive capability of a firearm.

But anyway, most of the time when there is a child involved in a shooting there is an ignorant and untrained gun owner who owns the weapon.

I guess you're right about mostly being a danger to themselves otherwise - I sort of think of Plaxico Buress type incidents - or like the guy who just shot himself at Walmart last week. I guess history shows they are more likely to hurt themselves but logically I don't see why they're not a danger to the general public.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 01:20 PM   #91
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
If I were King, getting a CCW permit would be 4 hours of training which was 4 hours of training on local carry law, use of deadly force, testing on those subjects and then a proficiency test on what you'd already be expected to know on safe firearms handling, MAO for clearing yor weapon, and a live fire exercise at 15" where you had to put 6 rounds in 6"

If you can't operate the safety or go through clearing your weapon - you're a menace.

If you can't put 6 rounds in 6" at 5 yards you're a menace IMO.


I'd also fail people for all the things most gun competitions DQ people for - any unsafe behavior - breaking of the 4 rules, breaking the 180 at the line, and of course any ND/UD (unintentional discharge ?)

The thought that HB 822 could potentially let people roam the streets of Illinois who haven't met my high standards makes me cringe !
Texas is a longer course with more shots fired, but not far off. The instructor for our class confirmed that she never had someone fail the shooting part, or more precisely no one failed the second attempt she would have after. People who failed the first time did so by not following directions.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 01:32 PM   #92
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Zincwarrior, can you or anyone else give me an ideal what "YOU" consider a "mimimual Competence test"??
Sure thing. I'm not particularly inventive so I'll go with the Texas test.
1. A passing score on a shooting test of fity rounds at 3 yards, 10 yards, and 15 yards. Passing is 70% based on normal shooting scoring.

2. A demonstrated knowledge of "range rules."
-hand off trigger unless ready to fire.
-weapon always kept downrange and not pointed at any one.
-demonstrated ability to load/unload a weapon, and clear a jam or misfire.
-demonstrated ability to use safeties if any.

These are literally things I taught my then 8 year old daughter in the space of 30 minutes, including shoot time (and required complements and encouragement).

We're hitting stupidity level in thinking this can't bew achieved. Frankly if you can't do that, you shouldn't be able to breed much less be able to carry a concealed firearm.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 01:44 PM   #93
8MM Mauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2011
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 450
I was probably overstating it a bit by saying "only" a danger to themselves. But I also think that this is sort of a larger issue as well, people are going to be stupid, and we cannot legislate away freedom because some people are irresponsible with it. From the bottom of my heart I cannot understand people who underestimate firearms, I've been shooting with friends and family for 12 years and my own weapons + rental guns for 6 years and I still have a healthy fear of guns I always assume they are loaded unless looking at an empty chamber.

I once had a friend who thought it was funny to point a loaded shotgun at me, with the safety off! I reacted by stepping inside the gun's range (the muzzle was about two inches from my face) and giving him a square kick in his privates, with steel toes on. I had driven to the range that day and I told him we were leaving NOW! Never took him shooting again...

Point being, some people are dumb, my friend is dumb, but I don't think that means we should try and legislate his freedom of stupidity away...

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
8MM Mauser is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 01:53 PM   #94
WVsig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 30, 2010
Location: KY
Posts: 2,984
Quote:
I was probably overstating it a bit by saying "only" a danger to themselves. But I also think that this is sort of a larger issue as well, people are going to be stupid, and we cannot legislate away freedom because some people are irresponsible with it. From the bottom of my heart I cannot understand people who underestimate firearms, I've been shooting with friends and family for 12 years and my own weapons + rental guns for 6 years and I still have a healthy fear of guns I always assume they are loaded unless looking at an empty chamber.

I once had a friend who thought it was funny to point a loaded shotgun at me, with the safety off! I reacted by stepping inside the gun's range (the muzzle was about two inches from my face) and giving him a square kick in his privates, with steel toes on. I had driven to the range that day and I told him we were leaving NOW! Never took him shooting again...

Point being, some people are dumb, my friend is dumb, but I don't think that means we should try and legislate his freedom of stupidity away...
But at the same time when a dumb person causes harm to other people or their property because of their ignorance we should not attempt to diminish their responsibility or lessen their punishment which is exactly what you see a lot of the times on gun boards.

A CHP holder who harms or kills someone else with a gun due to their negligence needs to be prosecuted as the criminal that they are. IMHO
__________________
"Its a tool box... I don't care you put the tools in for the job that's all..." Sam from Ronin
The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced. -Frank Zappa
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.-Frank Zappa
WVsig is offline  
Old November 23, 2011, 04:12 PM   #95
8MM Mauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2011
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 450
I absolutely agree! Each and every individual should be prosecuted for harm they cause and had my buddy accidentally shot me I would hope that he subsequently spent a good long time incarcerated. I personally make no excuses and in fact would generally hold anyone with a cpl to a higher standard when it comes to safety.
Freedom to bear arms is NOT an excuse to hurt people, accidentally or on purpose.
8MM Mauser is offline  
Old November 24, 2011, 02:08 PM   #96
brickeyee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,342
Quote:
Watching an online video does not equal training my my book.
You are not making the decisions, so your book does not matter.

Last edited by brickeyee; November 25, 2011 at 09:57 AM.
brickeyee is offline  
Old November 25, 2011, 07:26 AM   #97
Brevard
Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2011
Posts: 19
Here it is suppose to be a 8 hr course. Depending on the size of the class and stuff depends on how it is divided up. Some do 8hrs, others say 9 or 10 and some up to 12 hrs, mine was 6hrs because it didnt take that long for everyone to get done with the shooting part. 40 rounds 1, 3, 5, 7 yards (10 each distance - 5 from the ready and 5 from after a holster draw) and you can miss 9. Some is only 30 rounds at 3, 5, 7 and you cna miss 9 I think you could miss like.

it is really easy here. Especially at 1yrd. Couldn't help make but to make s smilie face in the head of the silhouette target when I shot from there.
Brevard is offline  
Old November 25, 2011, 07:27 AM   #98
Brevard
Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2011
Posts: 19
Quote:
Watching an online video does not equal training my my book.
What about playing Call of Duty
Brevard is offline  
Old November 25, 2011, 09:51 AM   #99
Willie Lowman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Location: Uh-Hi-O
Posts: 2,398
^^ Only if you read posts from the Tactics and Training forum after you play.
Willie Lowman is offline  
Old November 25, 2011, 10:10 AM   #100
m.p.driver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 552
When i took my CCW class years ago the instructor asked what i thought.I told her that i learned more from the Army and from Crim Just at college.And that i was astounded by some taking the class that had no basic knowledge about firearms.
She replied that they teach everything required by the state of Ohio,and that to teach everyone, what she would find acceptable, would take a minimum of seven days of classroom and range time,and run each a thousand and up.
m.p.driver is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13413 seconds with 7 queries