Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 483

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/99/5061499/html/domains/twincitiescarry/forum/includes/bbcode.php on line 112
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3824: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/bbcode.php:483)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3826: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/bbcode.php:483)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3827: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/bbcode.php:483)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3828: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/bbcode.php:483)
Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive • View topic - Shooting qualification requirements discussion
 
  Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Tue Apr 20, 2021 7:26 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Shooting qualification requirements discussion 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 1:39 am 
On time out
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:18 pm
Posts: 1689
Location: 35 W and Hiway 10
Mark regarding the comment about .22 for quals.

This is off topic a bit, but it applies in the way I see the process being changed above and beyond the law.

I have taught a few women and one very old man enough about shooting using only a .22 because thats what they were able to handle to shoot the number of rounds needed to learn. Frankly, I could see using an airsoft or water pistol, (yup, a squirt gun) to see if they could manage to handle a weapon shaped object with enough dexterity to be considered safe.

Why? because safe gun handling is safe gun handling, and forcing someone who has either horrible Rheumatoid Arthritis or other crippling ailment to keep pounding away with a centerfire does nothing.

My mom has several replaced knuckles and her hands ache all the time, I know if she had to she could get the shots off to stop someone who was breaking in, but she would be in pain for a week from the recoil, (last time she did fire her gun with factory loads, it was a week before she said it was ok again.) but I guarantee that she can shoot, and shoot well.

One woman who is her friend in Florida has very bad osteo porosis (sp) and shooting a defensive gun might break bones, but she can manage the 17 S&W she owns and her S&W19 if the occasion arose, but shooting a .22 is all she needs to keep her skills up to snuff.

The carry bill is designed above all else to give the weakest of us the full protection of armed self defense. While managing a stove pipe, or doing a tap, rack and shoot might be good skills to know, the basic one is point and shoot.

If you only own a .22, you still have the same right to self defense as anyone. Maybe we don't want to think that its ok, but a .22 the shooter can manage, beats anything they can not, and do not keep with them.

Gun handling is gun handling, no matter what you have in your hands, the law asks for a demonstration of the skills needed. As far as I can see, that could be determined by the candidate picking up the weapon, and firing one shot on target and keeping hold of the weapon.

I have been thru four classes now, three thru Bills, and on from another source, two of the courses at bills consisted of 100 rounds of fire. At both, there were several people who were exhibiting classic signs of being beaten up by their guns. Flinching, eyes closing, difficulty repeatedly trying to action clearing drills etc, were all showing up.

At the last class where I accompanied a friend thru, the instructor understood that my friend was quite feeble. The basic skills, attention to details like muzzle control, manipulation of the controls, ability to safely load and unload, and safe the weapon were shown very clearly, so that with just a few rounds actually fired, there was no doubt the candidate was being pushed to their physical limits, yet going further was not going to needed.

Lets look at it from another point outside of the classroom. Next time you go to the gunshop, watch the counter interaction between prospective customer and the weapon. Where does the person grab the weapon? Do they maintain perfect muzzle control? Do they look around and see where people are so they can maintain the safety of the weapon while looking at it. Do they put the booger hook on the bang switch willy nilly? IF its a DA gun, do they start snapping the trigger like a kid with a cap gun, or is there a method to the madness? Do they drop the mag without pointing the gun at the salesman's belly? Frankly, I have a feeling you could almost do the skills part of a permit test based simply on how a person reacts to being presented with a weapon.

I do not see the permit class as being a firearms skills training class. It is a legal skillls training class. The individual is there simply to prove that A) they will understand and comply with the MPPA's legal requirements. B) that they understand the constraints on when the law says it is legal to use lethal force and C) to allow the individual to demonstrate that they are aware and capable of displaying the rules of safe gun handling and competency with the weapon.

The law does not care about how you use a holster.

The law does not care if you choose to carry a pistol or revolver.

The law does not care if you can shoot 90% bulls-eyes, or only 1, as long as competency and safety are demonstrated.

The Law does care if you understand about drinking and carrying.

The law does care about understanding reluctant participation.

The Law does not care if you carry a .22 or a .50 DE, as long as you show proficiency.

I do not care if the Anti's get satisfied with "education" I care that if Mrs Doe gets woken up with someone smashing a brick thru her patio door to gain entrance, that she has the skills to pick up that bedside gun and get a round on target. I care about the Citizen who has to work late in a stop and rob, that they are able to get the means to protect themselves as easily as they can. Bad Guys do not take classes from Clint Smith or Todd Jarrett. WHile a lot of us "gunnies" would like to take more classes, the base fact is that the average Citizen as a right to self defense. Obstructing that by requiring more than the law requires is not in our favor.







I am not saying advanced training is a bad thing at all, I just do not think its the intent of the law as written to require one to do the forward one and half, with a twist, while drawing, shooting three, reloading, and firing two more into the x ring of an olympic 10 metre airgun target.

_________________
molan labe


Last edited by 1911fan on Mon May 11, 2009 2:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 2:16 am 
Journeyman Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:08 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Savage
I concur. Finally, a statement I can agree with in its entirety.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 6:09 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:59 am
Posts: 434
Location: Twin Cities
1911fan wrote:
Mark regarding the comment about .22 for quals.

This is off topic a bit, but it applies in the way I see the process being changed above and beyond the law.

I have taught a few women and one very old man enough about shooting using only a .22 because thats what they were able to handle to shoot the number of rounds needed to learn. Frankly, I could see using an airsoft or water pistol, (yup, a squirt gun) to see if they could manage to handle a weapon shaped object with enough dexterity to be considered safe.


Airsoft is much closer to acceptable for me than a squirt gun is. At least with some of the higher quality airsoft guns, you can still load a magazine, cycle the action, etc. A good one will even have the look and feel of a real gun. Super soakers do not. The law calls for the "successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise." This is admittedly a vague statement, so it is currently left up to us as instructors to determine what constitutes an "actual" shooting qual. Personally I feel that requires the use of live ammunition.

Quote:
My mom has several replaced knuckles and her hands ache all the time, I know if she had to she could get the shots off to stop someone who was breaking in, but she would be in pain for a week from the recoil, (last time she did fire her gun with factory loads, it was a week before she said it was ok again.) but I guarantee that she can shoot, and shoot well.

One woman who is her friend in Florida has very bad osteo porosis (sp) and shooting a defensive gun might break bones, but she can manage the 17 S&W she owns and her S&W19 if the occasion arose, but shooting a .22 is all she needs to keep her skills up to snuff.


My usual requirement is a little stricter than some other instructors. As part of that I require the use of a .380 handgun or larger. Now, that being said, I also fully believe that everyone not prohibited by law should be able to receive a carry permit. If someone came to me with health concerns, and legitimate reasons that they should not, or could not fire 40 rounds of a load that large, I would ABSOLUTELY allow them to qualify with a .22LR. Let's be honest, while it isn't the best defensive load out there, it's still better to carry a .22 than nothing.

Quote:
The carry bill is designed above all else to give the weakest of us the full protection of armed self defense. While managing a stove pipe, or doing a tap, rack and shoot might be good skills to know, the basic one is point and shoot.


Point taken. That being said, I believe that it is also my responsibility to make sure my students are as well prepared for what may happen both on the range, and during a defensive shooting as possible.

Quote:
If you only own a .22, you still have the same right to self defense as anyone. Maybe we don't want to think that its ok, but a .22 the shooter can manage, beats anything they can not, and do not keep with them.

Gun handling is gun handling, no matter what you have in your hands, the law asks for a demonstration of the skills needed. As far as I can see, that could be determined by the candidate picking up the weapon, and firing one shot on target and keeping hold of the weapon.


It very well could be. That would be your call to make when instructing your students. However, personally, I'd much rather be able to claim that they passed a 40 round shooting qualification, both two handed and single handed, at three different distances, repeatedly displayed signs of safe gun handling, range etiquette, and loading/unloading techniques. Just my personal preference though.

Quote:
I have been thru four classes now, three thru Bills, and on from another source, two of the courses at bills consisted of 100 rounds of fire. At both, there were several people who were exhibiting classic signs of being beaten up by their guns. Flinching, eyes closing, difficulty repeatedly trying to action clearing drills etc, were all showing up.


A week ago I took an AR-15 course, and I can guarantee you that by the end of the course, I was showing signs of gun fatigue as well. Personally I feel that a good course is one that puts me through my paces, to the point where I'm starting to tire, to become sore, to get that natural flinch, and then forcing me to push through it.

Good for you for choosing to continue your education though.

Quote:
At the last class where I accompanied a friend thru, the instructor understood that my friend was quite feeble. The basic skills, attention to details like muzzle control, manipulation of the controls, ability to safely load and unload, and safe the weapon were shown very clearly, so that with just a few rounds actually fired, there was no doubt the candidate was being pushed to their physical limits, yet going further was not going to needed.


And that is one of those special cases where good instructors recognize it, and adjust accordingly. Special cases do exist. Sometimes exceptions to the rules need to be made.

Quote:
Lets look at it from another point outside of the classroom. Next time you go to the gunshop, watch the counter interaction between prospective customer and the weapon. Where does the person grab the weapon? Do they maintain perfect muzzle control? Do they look around and see where people are so they can maintain the safety of the weapon while looking at it. Do they put the booger hook on the bang switch willy nilly? IF its a DA gun, do they start snapping the trigger like a kid with a cap gun, or is there a method to the madness? Do they drop the mag without pointing the gun at the salesman's belly? Frankly, I have a feeling you could almost do the skills part of a permit test based simply on how a person reacts to being presented with a weapon.


There are some shops i don't go to any more, because the patrons can't seem to keep their guns pointed in a safe direction, instead of at me. I agree that you can tell a lot about a person by how they handle a gun in the store. That being said, I don't think it constitutes an "actual shooting qualification exercise". IANAL, but that is my personal take.

Quote:
I do not see the permit class as being a firearms skills training class. It is a legal skillls training class. The individual is there simply to prove that A) they will understand and comply with the MPPA's legal requirements. B) that they understand the constraints on when the law says it is legal to use lethal force and C) to allow the individual to demonstrate that they are aware and capable of displaying the rules of safe gun handling and competency with the weapon.



The law does not care about how you use a holster.

The law does not care if you choose to carry a pistol or revolver.

The law does not care if you can shoot 90% bulls-eyes, or only 1, as long as competency and safety are demonstrated.

The Law does care if you understand about drinking and carrying.

The law does care about understanding reluctant participation.

The Law does not care if you carry a .22 or a .50 DE, as long as you show proficiency.


The law doesn't care about many aspects of safe gun handling, maintenance, and proper carry etiquette, but I do, and I make a personal choice to pass that along to my students. They are almost always extremely grateful that I do. You're right, at its core a carry permit class is not a general gun skills course. That being said, it isn't uncommon that you'll get someone in your class who hasn't handled their gun in years, or is completely new to shooting. I don't feel that an extra couple hours every two years, so that I can cover things at the basic level is asking too much. Once again though, you're right. This is not required by law.

Quote:
I do not care if the Anti's get satisfied with "education" I care that if Mrs Doe gets woken up with someone smashing a brick thru her patio door to gain entrance, that she has the skills to pick up that bedside gun and get a round on target. I care about the Citizen who has to work late in a stop and rob, that they are able to get the means to protect themselves as easily as they can. Bad Guys do not take classes from Clint Smith or Todd Jarrett. WHile a lot of us "gunnies" would like to take more classes, the base fact is that the average Citizen as a right to self defense. Obstructing that by requiring more than the law requires is not in our favor.



Just as an exercise, let's think about what "instruction in the fundamentals of pistol use" includes. At its very least it could be "grab the gun and pull the trigger". I could choose not to go over loading, unloading, malfunction clearing, etc, and simply get to the "use". I personally feel that loading, unloading, malfunction clearing, safety rules, range etiquette, etc need to be included in my "fundamentals" section. For this class, I also include a section on holster selection as well, because I believe it to be a fundamental of using a firearm for public self defense. Do I exceed my bounds? Perhaps. Do I feel bad about it? Not at all.




Quote:
I am not saying advanced training is a bad thing at all, I just do not think its the intent of the law as written to require one to do the forward one and half, with a twist, while drawing, shooting three, reloading, and firing two more into the x ring of an olympic 10 metre airgun target.


You're exaggerating obviously, but point taken. That is why there is a large range of instructors out there to choose from. [/u][/i][/b]

_________________
“...whoever rescues a single life earns as much merit as though he had rescued the entire world”
-The Talmud

Protect yourself and the ones you love.

NRA Certified Instructor
MADFI Certified Instructor


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 7:25 am 
The Man
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
I don't think there's any question that one shot with a .22 at one foot is legally sufficient -- it is -- or that it is, by and large, a bad idea. (I'm not saying that Paul does that, as he doesn't).

I also think, as I've said, that a few rounds with a borrowed .22 isn't a legitimate qual. I'll not go into that right now; been there before.

But Paul does raise a legitimate issue, albeit indirectly. Under what circumstances is it not only legally sufficient, but reasonable, to choose a .22 for a qual?

I'll tell you about a time when I did -- knowing, full well, that the Coconut Charlie types will go all aha! Rosenberg's done a qual with a .22, so there's no reason that I shouldn't do all mine that way. Screw them.

Had a guy take a private class because of his hearing problems. He's got a horrible case of tinnitus, and is getting treatment for it -- but sitting in a classroom with other folks talking around him is painful, and the idea of all those banging sounds out on the range sent his MD into (entirely understandable) conniptions.

So, yeah, we shot his qual with a .22 -- and I bought some subsonic ammo, to keep the sound even lower. I arranged with Roger to use the range for a few minutes -- just the two of us; no loud sounds -- and we went in with him wearing as much hearing protection as I could arrange.

Thirty rounds later, we were done (he did great; he'd shot a fair amount as a kid, and hadn't developed the bad habits that far too many experienced shooters do) and I told him how he could practice with major-caliber ammo without dealing with sounds much greater than that*; he's going to consult with his MD and decide if he can do that. Fine by me.

Yes, if he ever has to shoot for real, he's going to (at least) do horrible violence to his hearing, but he's got the right to sacrifice his hearing for his wife and kids, if it comes to that.

Now, I'm sure that some people <s>with their heads up their</s> with less than great understanding will say that's the same thing, more or less, as running twenny-'leven folks through a ten-round qual with a pre-loaded, borrowed .22 for the convenience of the instructor . . .

But they're just plain wrong.


_________________________
* Short form, in case anybody needs to replicate it: remarkably squibby-but-safe low-velocity handloads in a revolver; outdoor range; lots and lots and lots of hearing protection.

_________________
Just a guy.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 8:18 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
nmat and Joel covered most of it for me. :lol:

The practical point of the qualification is to demonstrate a degree of proficiency with a handgun. Would the single-shot pre-loaded .22 suffice under the law? Probably, but (and this is, as always, IMO), it does a disservice to the trainee and to the carry community that has to live under the law.

In an ideal world, we wouldn't need the piece of paper / plastic / whathaveyou in order to carry, as the only qualification would be "US Citizen". Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world. Having come from Wisconsin, I'm EXTREMELY grateful to David, Joe, and the rest for getting the MCPPA passed. Trust me, there are many Wisconsin residents that would chop off a finger in order to have the law that we do. Yet, it is far from perfect.

The political reality is that we must live under the law, and we must consider the ramifications of our actions. I don't want to imagine the outburst from CSM if a DGU would occur, and the prosecutor would say in open court, "Let me clarify this. The only shooting qualification you actually had to pass in order to carry a loaded, chambered firearm on the street was to fire 10 shots from a gun that is often used to teach brand-new shooters how to fire a gun?" Ouch.

Yes, there are people limited to a .22lr, and that's fine. I think any instructor worth their salt could recognize those students without difficulty, and I would certainly have no problem with that person using a .22 to qualify. My grandparents would be lucky at their advanced age to handle even that much recoil.

Using a .22 to buck the system just gives me the creeps. I love my .22, and I shoot it a LOT. I'm accurate enough with it to score multiple hits wherever I want in very short order. I'm still not going to use it to qualify.

I entirely appreciate that we shouldn't have to worry about these things, but as we live in a highly litigious nanny-state, the reality is that we do. :cry:

-Mark


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:40 am 
On time out
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:18 pm
Posts: 1689
Location: 35 W and Hiway 10
Not picking on you personally, but you have popped up some of my pet Peeves. I see many others who do the same as you, but I want to try to keep it simple

Quote:
Nmat wrote.

Airsoft is much closer to acceptable for me than a squirt gun is. At least with some of the higher quality airsoft guns, you can still load a magazine, cycle the action, etc. A good one will even have the look and feel of a real gun. Super soakers do not. The law calls for the "successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise." This is admittedly a vague statement, so it is currently left up to us as instructors to determine what constitutes an "actual" shooting qual. Personally I feel that requires the use of live ammunition.



frankly, you are adding to the law, as written. Not that I wholly disagree with you, but is it in the law, if a airgun will get you the same charges as a powder and primer gun for discharge in the city limits, the argument can be made that shooting is shooting.


Quote:
My usual requirement is a little stricter than some other instructors. As part of that I require the use of a .380 handgun or larger. Now, that being said, I also fully believe that everyone not prohibited by law should be able to receive a carry permit. If someone came to me with health concerns, and legitimate reasons that they should not, or could not fire 40 rounds of a load that large, I would ABSOLUTELY allow them to qualify with a .22LR. Let's be honest, while it isn't the best defensive load out there, it's still better to carry a .22 than nothing.


Again, the law does not say that. You are adding to the requirements the law as written. You are adding in personal prejudices to the equation.




Quote:
Point taken. That being said, I believe that it is also my responsibility to make sure my students are as well prepared for what may happen both on the range, and during a defensive shooting as possible


I don't care about the range. I would say 50% of the people I teach to shoot will never shoot at a range, except for quals, 25% will shoot at the farm or up to the lake, but another 25% will not shoot again until quals.
shooting is a lot like riding a bike, if you did it as a kid, you can do it as an adult, there maybe some wobbling and shaking, but your gonna get it done. Same thing with a Model 10 HB in the bedstand, it can stay there for 40 years until that one time its needed. Teaching range etiquette is not the job of the P2C class instructor. It is only your responsibility if a student starts to demonstrate a complete lack of gun skills, which would then show, incompetency. Take that student aside, do not waste the classes time on that one.


Quote:
It very well could be. That would be your call to make when instructing your students. However, personally, I'd much rather be able to claim that they passed a 40 round shooting qualification, both two handed and single handed, at three different distances, repeatedly displayed signs of safe gun handling, range etiquette, and loading/unloading techniques. Just my personal preference though.


This is for your liability insurance. All that the law would require, would be safe gun handling and a display of shooting. Everything else is arbitrary.


Quote:
A week ago I took an AR-15 course, and I can guarantee you that by the end of the course, I was showing signs of gun fatigue as well. Personally I feel that a good course is one that puts me through my paces, to the point where I'm starting to tire, to become sore, to get that natural flinch, and then forcing me to push through it.


Well, you like that, for a great many people looking for a carry permit, getting them to develop a massive flinch is not a good thing. I love shooting, as do (I would expect) you. Many people do not, and only want to be good enough to A) Not shoot their family B) not shoot themselves and C) shoot the bad guy.

The extra classes I have taken are with my students who feel uncomfortable sitting in a class of people they do not know, and who for some other reasons, might be uncomfortable in the surroundings.


Quote:
I said
Quote:
Lets look at it from another point outside of the classroom. Next time you go to the gunshop, watch the counter interaction between prospective customer and the weapon. Where does the person grab the weapon? Do they maintain perfect muzzle control? Do they look around and see where people are so they can maintain the safety of the weapon while looking at it. Do they put the booger hook on the bang switch willy nilly? IF its a DA gun, do they start snapping the trigger like a kid with a cap gun, or is there a method to the madness? Do they drop the mag without pointing the gun at the salesman's belly? Frankly, I have a feeling you could almost do the skills part of a permit test based simply on how a person reacts to being presented with a weapon.


There are some shops i don't go to any more, because the patrons can't seem to keep their guns pointed in a safe direction, instead of at me. I agree that you can tell a lot about a person by how they handle a gun in the store. That being said, I don't think it constitutes an "actual shooting qualification exercise". IANAL, but that is my personal take.


My point exactly, there is gun handling and shooting, but I am willing to bet a good dinner that if you lay a gun on the counter, and the person in question does all the good and right things about muzzle control, weapon status, function check, trigger finger control, room awareness of the others around him vis a vis the muzzle, etc, that person is NOT going to fail your shooting skills test. I am not saying that meets the test standards, but the correlation between the two has to be pretty darn high.


Quote:
The law doesn't care about many aspects of safe gun handling, maintenance, and proper carry etiquette, but I do, and I make a personal choice to pass that along to my students. They are almost always extremely grateful that I do. You're right, at its core a carry permit class is not a general gun skills course. That being said, it isn't uncommon that you'll get someone in your class who hasn't handled their gun in years, or is completely new to shooting. I don't feel that an extra couple hours every two years, so that I can cover things at the basic level is asking too much. Once again though, you're right. This is not required by law.


Again your adding to the law, I would have no trouble with a straight and simple quals test, where someone showed some tentativeness or errors, being told, "Hey, why don't you let me run the other four or ten thru real fast, and then you and I work on some things I see as a problem." then finish the others, clear the range and return with just the one student.

Pretty much everything else is extraneous.

_________________
molan labe


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 11:01 am 
On time out
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:36 am
Posts: 228
Maybe, just maybe .22LR for qualifying some isn't such a bad idea after-all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ROfEeJP ... re=related

_________________
On probation; can't post until at least 5/31/2009


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 11:15 am 
On time out
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:18 pm
Posts: 1689
Location: 35 W and Hiway 10
regarding fears of what CSM will say of a DGU where a .22 is used.

1) its used in the olympics as a true test of shooting skills.

2) if the shoot is a good one, legally, it will not be prosecuted.

_________________
molan labe


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 11:27 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
1911fan wrote:

2) if the shoot is a good one, legally, it will not be prosecuted.


I hope you're right...(cough cough Treptow cough cough)


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 11:50 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:16 am
Posts: 364
Location: Minneapolis, MN
I allow students to qualify with a .22, and in fact I have a .22 available for rental for my students who do not have their own gun. I would say without reservation I certainly don't fit into the Cocconut Charlie category.

I used to rent them a 9mm, but my 3914 was a little too challenging for someone who had never used one (even experienced shooters can have trouble with compact autos).

I chose the Walther P22 as a replacement because it's similar in function to a full-size defensive sidearm. The low cost of .22 ammo also allows me to provide ammo for the shooter, reducing their (and my) costs.

As stated above, the qualification is a test of safe gun handling. This can be demonstrated with any firearm - including a .22.

Now, for my tactical carry classes, I require something practical. But those are classes on self-defense gunfighting.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 12:00 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:59 am
Posts: 434
Location: Twin Cities
Erik_Pakieser wrote:
I allow students to qualify with a .22, and in fact I have a .22 available for rental for my students who do not have their own gun. I would say without reservation I certainly don't fit into the Cocconut Charlie category.

I used to rent them a 9mm, but my 3914 was a little too challenging for someone who had never used one (even experienced shooters can have trouble with compact autos).

I chose the Walther P22 as a replacement because it's similar in function to a full-size defensive sidearm. The low cost of .22 ammo also allows me to provide ammo for the shooter, reducing their (and my) costs.

As stated above, the qualification is a test of safe gun handling. This can be demonstrated with any firearm - including a .22.

Now, for my tactical carry classes, I require something practical. But those are classes on self-defense gunfighting.


For the record, I am not going to chastise you for allowing your students to use a .22 for your shooting qualification. There is no verbage in the law stating that you can't, so I won't try and take that away from you. I also know nothing about you as an instructor, good or bad, so of course this is nothing against your teaching style either.

I do what I feel is right for myself and for my students. Yes, I require a larger caliber handgun for my qualifications (unless special circumstances apply). Yes, my course of fire is a little more difficult than some. I will fully admit to being more strict than required by law.

Now, that being said, really the ONLY way that I will flat-out fail someone is if they shoot myself, or someone else. If I notice unsafe gun handling, I will offer to work with them further to improve it. If their shots are missing the target, I offer to let them re-shoot. Now both of these situations would require them to spend some time practicing, and then come back to shoot again at a later date (at no extra cost to them). Once they have demonstrated to my satisfaction that they can safely handle and accurately shoot, then I sign off on their certificate.

Right or wrong from an idealist or purist sense, I am stricter than the law requires. I feel ok with that. In fact, I've been told that my shooting qual is stricter than the vast majority of instructors out there. That being said, I have never had a student complain about the qualification. Besides, my conscience likes knowing that I personally am only certifying individuals that I personally feel understand the safety issues involved in handling, carrying, and discharging a firearm.

As time goes by, and I continue to certify more individuals, I'm sure I'll modify my qual from time to time, but for now I'm happy with where it is at.

_________________
“...whoever rescues a single life earns as much merit as though he had rescued the entire world”
-The Talmud

Protect yourself and the ones you love.

NRA Certified Instructor
MADFI Certified Instructor


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 12:19 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:16 am
Posts: 364
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Nmat, I also hold my students to a similar standard...I think that's the right way to do it. The only difference for me is caliber.

As my students shoots the qualification, I watch closely for safety violations and shooter errors.

After they finish the first phase, if the student is willing, I make some on-the-spot corrections to their technique before they continue shooting. After they are done, when scoring their target I also analyze their shot pattern and give them advice if they need it.

The dealbreaker on my qualification is safety violations, and I address them in a manner similar to yours. Here is the formula I follow:

1st Safety Violation:
I explain what they did wrong, and show them how to do it right. I may also suggest they try another gun (if the gun they are shooting is not a good fit). Then I give them a 2nd attempt.

2nd Safety Violation:
I pull them off the line and give them a review of the gun safety rules I covered in class. Takes about 20 minutes. After they have had this refresher, they go back on line for a 3rd attempt.

3rd Safety Violation:
I pull them off the line and offer them the option to either repeat the entire class at no charge or schedule one-on-one training at their cost. Most students actually choose the latter. Once I get them some one-on-one doing pistol basics, they can qualify with ease.

I've been applying this plan to all of my training for over 20 years, and it's worked very well.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 12:22 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:59 am
Posts: 434
Location: Twin Cities
just out of curiosity, what level of safety violations are we talking about? Are we talking finger in the trigger guard, or pointing the barrel at you? I really like your approach, but I just think that three warnings may be a bit much for certain types of safety violations.

_________________
“...whoever rescues a single life earns as much merit as though he had rescued the entire world”
-The Talmud

Protect yourself and the ones you love.

NRA Certified Instructor
MADFI Certified Instructor


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 1:51 pm 
On time out
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:18 pm
Posts: 1689
Location: 35 W and Hiway 10
I allow no safety violations in teaching. That is, every violation of the four rules is immediately corrected. But then I am always teaching never running Quals.

I am still bothered by the attitude that you have to exceed the legal standards because you feel that is what it should be.

this smacks to me of what was started to be discussed before, individuals raising the bar above and beyond the law.

_________________
molan labe


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 2:03 pm 
The Man
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
1911fan wrote:
I allow no safety violations in teaching. That is, every violation of the four rules is immediately corrected. But then I am always teaching never running Quals.

I am still bothered by the attitude that you have to exceed the legal standards because you feel that is what it should be.

this smacks to me of what was started to be discussed before, individuals raising the bar above and beyond the law.
Yeah, but you're wrong. Those of us who have standards above the minimums prescribed by law aren't preventing people from getting their certificates from other instructors who have standards that barely meet the minimums prescribed by law. We're just like the mechanics who insist that before a car leaves their shop after it's brought in for service for a leaky hose that it will work well, and not just fail to pump enough CO into the passenger compartment to kill people.

Now, if I was to try to change the law to require that carry classes teach everything that I think is necessary -- or, worse, to require that the classes be taught only by me -- that'd be different. But I'm not, and I won't. If I could get 624.714 changed, it'd be to go Alaska-style, not in the direction of requiring more and better instruction.

_________________
Just a guy.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group