Are you "qualified" with every gun you carry?

[ExSoldier]

Another issue for the masses: Are you qualified on every gun you carry? That is, do you have some documentation that proves that you have passed some sort of shooting qualification for each model that you carry? Do you feel uncomfortable carrying a gun without some proof of competence, even though you have practiced and are comfortable shooting it? Does anyone think this is important for legal reasons?

Thanks.

SSKC

Okay, I qualified "EXPERT" in every weapons platform in the inventory of the Infantry, so can I carry a LAW or a 90mm RR? How about an M249 SAW or an M60? I LIKE that reasoning! Similarly, I also qualified expert on the M1A1 tanks weapons systems including the main gun. Can I have my order taken over at AM General?

A loooong time ago in a far away galaxy, I was an OIC of a post pistol team we used the 45 in interservice competitions. Now, I'm also an NRA certified Firearms Instructor. I can clear any police qualification test with any and all firearms that I own, except my NAA mini .22 and I could do THAT if I could touch my target! LOL

I'm marginally better with my semiautos but I can still "get the job done" with any revolver.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Euclidean]

I didn't think you meant it like that P95, I was just picking on you.

We forget sometimes there are elderly people in this country who are marked for crime and who are in such a physical shape they can't handle the recoil of a 9mm cartridge. There's an awful lot of people who carry .22 LR for self defense because it's simply the best they can hope to do.

My underlying philosophy is that CCW permits are a stepping stone to get this country back on track. If I can live in a nation where everyone and their dog can carry and use a cell phone competently and everyone can drive more or less competently, I can live in one where everyone can rattle off the Four Rules and hit a man sized target at 7 yards.

On a related note, I wonder if it would change my choice of firing platform if I had to qualify with the exact gun I carried. I dare say I'd purchase two exact copies of my carry guns or else I'd have to move to something that could easily be repaired/worked on locally.

[Tom357]

Virginia CCW requires completion of an approved handgun safety course, and most in the area include a practical, but there is no official requirement to qualify with each handgun you intend to carry, and the license to carry doesn't mention your weapon(s).

Official documentation of qualification isn't about safety; it is about barriers to entry, establishing a de facto legal standard that further limits who can carry what. It's about building an industry around the qualification process, the troll under the bridge taking money from travellers so they might pass. It's about gun control.

Should I be competent with everything I carry? Absolutely. That is my responsibility, though, not the State's. It seems to me that in court, we should try to maintain the assumption of the right to carry, that the question is not whether one is qualified with a particular firearm, but whether lethal force is justified in a particular circumstance; otherwise, I can see a possibility where the question of whether or not a lethal response was justified becomes secondary to one's qualification score.

Of course, I am speaking from the perspective of a private citizen. Certification and qualification serves a different and necessary purpose in the professional arena.

[rstickle]

PA here - so no pieces of paper per gun!

Back before "shall issue" PA required that your carry gun be listed on the permit.

[SSKC]

I think we (members of this forum) hold ourselves to a standard that is higher than any mandated by whatever state we may live in. We are not satisfied with merely filling the squares, rather, we practice regularly, read, and seek training when we are able.

I didn't state my original question as clearly as I should have. What I meant to ask was: do you feel any need to have something "on paper" that you could use to show competence to Mr. and Ms. Juror, should you be so unfortunate as to have to defend yourself and subsequently end up in court? Said documentation could be government issued, or could be from a well-known school or your local NRA instructor or range operator. If you feel it is good to have some sort of certification, do you do so for each individual type of gun you elect to carry?

Thanks for all the input so far!

SSKC

[Moondoggie]

Our CCW program is progressing through the legislature here in NE....the Gov says he'll sign it. Hopefully the bill can get past the filibuster of the most famous PITA in our state...Sen Ernie Chambers. I think we're gonna make it this time...I've contacted my Senator (Nebraska is the only state that only has one legislative body, "The Unicameral"). Keep your fingers crossed.

The bill doesn't include any language that requires a specific pistol, only proof of completion of an "approved firearms safety course" in the past 3 yrs.

If anybody has any doubt as to your competency with a specific pistol, how about a "post incident" trip to the range for score??? Wouldn't faze me. I can shoot anything in my safe very well...otherwise it wouldn't be in my safe.

[Euclidean]

I think we (members of this forum) hold ourselves to a standard that is higher than any mandated by whatever state we may live in. We are not satisfied with merely filling the squares, rather, we practice regularly, read, and seek training when we are able.

I didn't state my original question as clearly as I should have. What I meant to ask was: do you feel any need to have something "on paper" that you could use to show competence to Mr. and Ms. Juror, should you be so unfortunate as to have to defend yourself and subsequently end up in court? Said documentation could be government issued, or could be from a well-known school or your local NRA instructor or range operator. If you feel it is good to have some sort of certification, do you do so for each individual type of gun you elect to carry?

Thanks for all the input so far!

SSKC

I do have a couple of certificates for some stuff I've done here locally, but I keep them only because they're certificates of completion and they are both related to proficiency and safety. There's no mention of any kind of score.

That's the way I'd want anything else to be as well. For instance suppose there was a "Basic Combat Revolver for Idiots" clinic and I went, and I come home with a report card that says I shot an average of 120/150. I'd burn it.

My qualifying target from when I took the state test? I burned it too.

I'd also be careful not to make myself look like I was too qualified. See you can't win against anti gun non-logic.

If you have anything that reports some kind of score that is anything short of perfect I'd burn it. As a matter of fact I think I'd keep my list of credentials pretty basic because otherwise they're going to point out that I was practicing; it was premeditated and I was just looking for an excuse.

It depends on where you are, and who you are. If you're former military for instance no one will question why you went to Gunsite. OTOH I'm a civilian, and if I were prosecuted in one certain county around here they'd use that to imply I was a murderer waiting to happen. "Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury the state will prove the accused is a trained killer."

Now I'd still like to go some day anyway but for my own benefit not for some kind of recognition or credential gathering.

Imagine some prosecuting attorney making you out to be a Rambo wanna be who was just itching to pull the trigger. I say leave your Level 3 Super Advanced Anti Infantry Carbine Tactics certificate behind.

OTOH if you can pull out something official looking that says "So and So is a certified Firearms Safety Expert" that would probably help.

[rocky]

No regs for qualification of each gun. However like most here, I only carry the guns I practice with .

[ExSoldier]

I didn't state my original question as clearly as I should have. What I meant to ask was: do you feel any need to have something "on paper" that you could use to show competence to Mr. and Ms. Juror, should you be so unfortunate as to have to defend yourself and subsequently end up in court? Said documentation could be government issued, or could be from a well-known school or your local NRA instructor or range operator. If you feel it is good to have some sort of certification, do you do so for each individual type of gun you elect to carry?

Thanks for all the input so far!

SSKC

Most states except for those who allow carry without a permit like Vermont or Alaska, mandate some form of training or certificate. Here in Florida it could be a training certificate from an NRA certified Firearms Instructor (like me) or a DD214 (Military Honorable Discharge) or even a valid Hunter/Safety certificate.

Euclidean makes the point that the "more qualified" one is, the weaker his case will be in an antigun jurisdiction. Well, here in Florida, those kinds of prosecutors have just been rendered ineffective due to new legislation. This is again a model for the nation. However, IMHO, no matter what, a "good shoot" is a "good shoot." The reasonable man standard is tough to meet for a criminal case. Still, I try to be careful. Where this would become easier is in the civil arena where a "preponderance of the evidence" is sufficient. However, again the new Florida legislation negates a lawsuit by the bad guy or his ummmm estate if it's a "good shoot."

I try to keep things as prosecutor friendly as I can: I carry a Sig Sauer where the DA pull is 10.5 pounds and the SA pull is 4.5 pounds for every succeeding shot after the first. There is NO way any lawyer is going to give MY gun to an ignorant juror and make the case that I didn't know the gun was going to go BOOM and therefore this was an accidental shooting a cause for negligent homicide at least. That is the main reason I stopped carrying my 1911! Not for criminal prosecutions, but rather for the inevitable lawsuit.

As far as the other stuff, I use MagSafe or Glasers (neither of which has ever been the subject of a successful lawsuit) and NOT Black Talon. Or I use what the local cops use in my sp mags. I'm an NRA Instructor, an NRA Life Member, USPSA Life Member, subscribe to a number of gun mags like "Combat Handguns," etc. Yup, I have the standard "I LOVE ME WALL" in my home, where I hang diplomas and "I was there" certificates, etc. Had this since I was on active duty. Most all army officers have it.

Heck, at one time in my life I even subscribed to Soldier of Fortune magazine. Does that make me a merc? I have been a member of the John Birch Society. A proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy? You betcha! If my life is going to be used as a weapon against me then by all means bring it on. Heck, even our posts on this and other forums will hang in cyberspace forever. By your reasoning we must all cease posting here (and everywhere else) and crawl into a hole. Not me. Safety is nice but it's not first. LIFE is first....and Life is NOT Safe! Simple. They want an explanation of my behavior in the light of any intervention I took against a criminal or terrorist? Look to my SHEEPDOG heritage:

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2004/1..._hang_wit.html And I rest my case.

[APachon]

aside from NV what other states require a witnessed test signed off on and each weapon listed on your CFP, CHP, CCW...???

[Puppage]

No qualification requirements here in Connecticut,either. However, it stands to reason that if you've taken on the huge responsibility of carrying concealed, you DAMN WELL better know how to handle the gun you're carrying.

[Betty]

Luckily, TN does not have you carry just the gun you qualified with. I qualified with an Interarms Walther PPK/S, which broke the day after I received my permit in the mail. My brother kindly loaned me his G23 until I was able to purchase a K40. I've been through a half dozen carry guns since, finding what worked better for me. I'd hate to have to be stuck with only what I "qualified" with, or have to list specific handguns on my permit.

Euclidean makes the point that the "more qualified" one is, the weaker his case will be in an antigun jurisdiction. Well, here in Florida, those kinds of prosecutors have just been rendered ineffective due to new legislation. This is again a model for the nation. However, IMHO, no matter what, a "good shoot" is a "good shoot." The reasonable man standard is tough to meet for a criminal case. Still, I try to be careful. Where this would become easier is in the civil arena where a "preponderance of the evidence" is sufficient. However, again the new Florida legislation negates a lawsuit by the bad guy or his ummmm estate if it's a "good shoot."

The lose-lose situation we're in is very interesting. Antis claim only cops and military should have guns because only they have the proper training. However, if we take classes at Thunder Ranch, consistently pop the bullseye, and invest our money in a well-made handgun, we were "planning to murder, must be vigilantes, and cannot be trusted wth firearms." We're either not good enough or too good. There is no just right with antis, because they do not think logically and just don't care.

[SSKC]

Heck, even our posts on this and other forums will hang in cyberspace forever. By your reasoning we must all cease posting here (and everywhere else) and crawl into a hole.

I'm not advocating that anyone change their lifestyle in order to be completely, perfectly, politically correct. If that's the way we had to live, we wouldn't be in America.

My point is: how do any of us, as responsible citizens who have unfortunately been involved in a "good shoot," prove to the jury that we are competent and minimize the chance of having the opposition try to paint it as a bad shoot?

Euclidian's point that you could be "over-qualified" is an interesting one as well. How sad it is that a record of regular training could be construed as being a Rambo wannabee. In my opinion, the better trained and more proficient you are, the longer you can wait before defending yourself, thus the greater chance you give a bad guy to cease aggression and mend his ways.

Keep those posts coming. Your well-reasoned responses are educational and thought-provoking.

SSKC

[revlar]

Under Missouri law, the "Certificate of Endorsement" (which is required for the "License to Carry") must, among other things, include an affirmation from the trainer that the training session included; "a physical demonstration performed by the applicant that demonstrated his or her ability to safely load and unload a revolver and a semiautomatic pistol and demonstrated his or her marksmanship with both". Does this "physical demonstration" equate to "qualification"? Judging by what I observed on the firing line - no - far from it. But it does meet the requirement of the law - and the license does not limit the type of handgun the licensee may carry. I like that.

[Tom357]

...The lose-lose situation we're in is very interesting. Antis claim only cops and military should have guns because only they have the proper training. However, if we take classes at Thunder Ranch, consistently pop the bullseye, and invest our money in a well-made handgun, we were "planning to murder, must be vigilantes, and cannot be trusted wth firearms." We're either not good enough or too good. There is no just right with antis, because they do not think logically and just don't care.

I think this is the crux of the problem. I, personally, want to be well-trained and well-qualified with whatever I carry, because it is important to me. I do not want to feel like I have to present a piece of paper for a jury, because I think a prosecutor would do everything possible to use it against me. I would rather keep the focus on the fact that it was a good shoot, because in the end, a piece of paper saying I'm qualified with my 226 isn't going to prove that I used proper judgement in a self-defense situation.