1911Forum banner

Required "Qualification"

6K views 77 replies 32 participants last post by  IslayMalt 
#1 · (Edited)
Whether or not it should be required is discussed extensively in other threads throughout the forum. I'm just curious about the requirements in different states where they do exist and your opinions of those requirements.

For those in states that have a license to carry AND require range time as part of the course, what are the specifics of the range requirements. Do you feel they come close to showing evidence of proficiency with a hand gun?

Texas requires 50 rounds (20 at 3 yards / 20 at 7 yards / 10 at 15 yards) on a B-27 target using the 5-4-3 scoring method. 5 points for inside the 8 ring, 4 points for the 7 ring and 3 points anywhere else on the silhouette. A score of 70% (175 of a possible 250) is needed to get your license.

I think the 3 yard fire should be eliminated for 2 reasons. First this distance only shows that the shooter knows which way to point the muzzle and pull the trigger. Second, unless you are already at a raised pistol stance and ready to fire, you are not likely to get off a shot at this distance before your assailant can close the gap. This, imo, gives a new shooter false confidence that they could use a gun to defend themselves in any situation.

At least 3, and possibly 4, of the 20 people I went through the training with would not have qualified without the 3 yard line fire.

Over all, I think the requirements might demonstrate the shooter's ability to safely handle a gun and not in any way an indication of any level of proficiency.
 
See less See more
#58 ·
in PA. no class no test, just two people (not related) for them to call ( never been called ) no noticeable differences in gun accidental deaths, between other states, just the way I like it, except it would be better with no government limits on a constitutional right! Wimpy
 
#61 ·
Cappi, my friend, I would suggest that people very obviously DO figure it out somehow in States like, AZ ID, AK, KS, VT and the other 8 or so States with Constitutional carry, as well as places like WA and PA that requiere a permit, but no training... and they've been doing it for decades in some cases- with zero indication of greater rates of incidents. Whatever the source, be it self study or Uncle Ned, or something in between, it seems to work...

Since the reality is no documented increase in public safety, accident reduction, compliance with legal restrictions, what is the average student getting for his time and money?

Ultimately, either do something right or don't waste peoples time. Have a quantifiable standard, and be able to demonstrate that the standard has the desired effects, whqtever they may be... or be done with it. One cannot take 10 people from novice to any kind of "competent " (if the word actually meant anything) in 8 hours. 99% can figure it out on their own, or with Uncle Ned... and they present no greater risk than those with a State mandated "class". There's zero difference in performance based on incidents reported incidents.

Proponents of CC classes assume that people NEED such instrution, in a regulated environment. and gain something from the experiance that they can't get eleswhere- and they're correct. They get one thing- a "certificate" that the State requires. The biggest opponents of doing away with such requierments seems to be "instructors" that don'twant to take a financial hit; in NC they've actually lobbied against Constitutional carry.

I'd also suggest there's plenty, probably a significant majority, of "Uncle Neds" wearing CC "instructor" hats for beer money...
 
#64 ·
Ive heard as much... but there's far fewer people hunting now than in the 70s when hunter safety classes first were mandated. Theres a differnent gun culture, and hunting is a differnent culture than SD. And, in many places, such a class is only required for those under 18... not adults.

Its not really a similar comparison. Vastly differnent eras and purposes.

The correct question should be "Do State mandated CC classes reduce accidents, violations, or other incidents among those that lawfully carry?" Theres nothing to support the position that they do. Forget Constitutional carry for the sake I'd discussion; do permit holders with mandatory training have fewer problems than permit holders without? Nothing to support that either. Look at WA: shall issue carry permit since 1963, no training- no problems. No issues in PA either. Dozens of States require "training" for CC, but not OC... wheres the rational in that?

If the objective is "safety", than the class and permit should be required for ownership, not carry...

Like I said, just a bone thrown to the anti carry guys 30 years ago, and now propagated by those that profit from it.
 
#63 ·
And I thought Texas 'requirements' were laughable . . . . . . until I saw Florida's! The fact of the matter is that if you want to be proficient, that weight is entirely on your shoulders. You must want it enough to train and then maintain that proficiency. I don't do it as much as I used to but when I do, it's complete dedication to achieving the desired result. While I'm too darned old to be rolling around on the ground - I would expect a massive coronary trying to get back on my feet - but the vision is still there as are the reflexes and, thankfully, no tremors.
 
#65 ·
The training / instruction is not without value.

My course was more about how to NOT have to shoot people. And the legalities of legitimate self defense, good vs bad shoots, deescalation of bad situations, and the legal consequences of ANY shoot. Criminal & civil.

Plus there was that noted student who very much should not & was not passed until more safety was learned. That was certainly a benefit to them (& bystanders!)

So calling the course useless or pointless is not an accurate statement. And ANY range time, especially for newbies, is valuable.

I'm not here to defend May Issue states, I'm just defending the truth. I learned good intel on all my courses, initial & renewals.
 
#67 ·
I'll concede people do get something out of those classes....

I simply maintain that they CAN and DO get it elsewhere, at zero cost, and without being locked into an 8 hour class that has no unified or articulatable standards... as demonstrated in Constitutional carry or no-training permit States.

Perhaps a better way to put it is that its a poor value for the time and money invested for the vast majority of students. Society gains nothing. The individual can gain the same knowledge on their own, for free. So the process is rearranging deck chairs on the Titantic...

As a curiosity, was your class taught by a member of the CA bar or law school graduates...? If not, I'd seriously question his "qualifications" to teach law. Same with most classes in most States, they require a couple hours of instruction on State law... as often as not taught by Uncle Ned. 10 instructors will provide 10 answers to the same slightly complex question. More than once, I've seen "instructors" put out blatantly false or untrue information.

So yes, theres always SOME takeaway, its just not a good value...
 
#68 ·
I vetted my CCW instructor very carefully: He was the closest one to my house!

But he is retired LE and very much active in shooting sports. He also regularly testifies as an Expert Witness in gun/shooting related cases.

So, a lawyer? No. But he has quite a lot of working knowledge / first hand experience. Plus plenty of courtroom time.

So yes, he knows what he's doing.
 
#70 ·
I'm not sure what an "expert witness" in shooting cases is, or would be able to testify to- or how one becomes an "expert" in such things...

All jest aside, it sounds like you found a unicorn - the one in 1000 CC instructors that is actually pretty knowladgable on a varaity of relevant subjects...

My personal favorite was auditing a class, and an "instructor" put out that "no guns" signs have no force of law in NC, that if caught, that the worst was you could be cited for trespass if you didn't leave when asked.... in reality, its a violation of NC GS to carry in a gun free zone, its a crime, and its a firearms violation that disqualifies one from having a CCW for 3 years. First offense is a misdemeanor, second is a felony...

Tbe biggest problem I see, particularly when discussing law and legal issues, is that too many engage in hypotheticals and storytelling- or allow students to do so- and while they lack the experiance, skill, or education to provide comprehensive, intelligent, and correct answers, their egos compel them to simply fake it, and offer up what they think, regardless of its basis in reality. Doing so DOES help burn up time for the instructor without enough material to fill the required time....

A GOOD instructor won't facilitate or allow going down the rabbit hole of "what if..." except in the very broadest sense. A GOOD instructor isn't afraid to say "I don't know" and use a break to try to find the answer. A GOOD instructor controls the class...

The problem is, there's no "Angies List" for CC instructors, or any firearms instructors at all. Theres very few ways to vett ones qualifications or experiance, or ones ability to teach. There's no reallly stringent standard or requierment to become an "instructor ".... and the novice student has to try to figure out who, of the hundereds available, is "good"; rather difficult when one knows nothing about the subject - the reason one is seeking an instructor in the first place.

A lot of pain for somthing that 95%+ of the adult population can teach themselves, or do with a little help from friends or family.

Offer such classes, but make them voluntarily for those who prefer a more formal approach...
 
#69 ·
luckily AZ has no shooting requirements. pass a class that highlights the "shoot, don't shoot" laws and a few talking points and voila... send into DPS and you're done. I've seen classes that are 2 hours or less qualify. And there's no requalifying or anything for renewals. you just send in a check for $43 every 5 years
 
#71 ·
All BS aside, what it comes down to.

Is that with rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately there are way too many people out there that just do not get it.
 
#72 ·
I took my IL, CCL class at a great range out in the sticks. I think it was 5,7,10 yards (ten shots at each point). I needed to just hit the black part of a B-27 target with 70% of your 30 shots. You can use any type of pistol, but nothing with buck-shot. Of the 30 people in the class 10 were "gun guys or girls" the other 20 were new to pistols. The instructors were on-top of the dangerous students. The test was easy and fun, that's a great BIG target.
 
#73 ·
Tell ya what.....WE the PEOPLE, Do NOT need any more laws, restrictions, etc. that give the govt. MORE power to wield...show proficiency....I'm fine with it.....but there comes a point where we say, no only NO.....but HELL NO! We are SUPPOSED to be RESPONSIBLE citizens.
 
#75 ·
Georgia you must be breathing, 21 years old, and get "official" fingerprints where a county probate judge will request a criminal history records check and a background check on you. About 30 days later, law enforcement will finish its background check and determine whether you can receive a license.

Performance requirements for CC are stupid. I can see the logic of a firearms safety class periodically but I also see the need for a motorcycle safety refresher also - both should be optional and not required by law.
 
#76 ·
I'm not saying anyone here that teaches CCW fudges the requirements for fellow veterans, but I'm not saying I haven't heard of it.

No one makes you read Alexis de Tocqueville, Locke, Payne, or even the Constitution itself before you're allowed to exercise your first amendment; however, one could certainly arguing that infringements such as mandatory certifications and qualifications in the interest of fully exercising your second amendment rights imply that one could certainly require written and oral examinations lest your first amendment rights be abrogated. As we have those brilliant charlatans in Hollywood suggesting compassion for Isis, perhaps we should...you know none of those ponces would ever be able to come within fifty feet of a boom mic again.
 
#78 ·
Didn't see it, but thought I would throw in. States I've lived in it's never been an issue (only NV had any range time). But for personal use, I know firing with my right arm, by itself, is a fun time unless the target is 3 ft. Tremors, genetic and medical, have affected my right arm. Luckily I'm a lefty so I can deal strong side, single handed, without much problem. Maybe I should move from a full size 1911 to a .22 ... no idea. But I've always carried the same size and don't want to change. Looked into a couple outside ranges in NH and I had to 'qualify' singlehand both sides. Seemed stupid given NH's ccw laws.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top