This is a discussion on Mandate qualifing w/carry gun? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I think it falls into the category of "too much." It'd be like having to requalify for your driver's license if you bought a new ...
I think it falls into the category of "too much."
It'd be like having to requalify for your driver's license if you bought a new car, or are even just borrowing your brother's car just for a drive down to the grocery. The assumption is that after the initial qualification, that it is up to you to make sure you are safe and sufficiently proficient with whatever you carry.
"The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper
"Terrorists: They hated you yesterday, they hate you today, and they will hate you tomorrow.
End the cycle of hatred, don’t give them a tomorrow."
I want to know: Did 1911lover have a grin on his face and duck below the monitor when the "submit reply" button was pressed?
Just watched a documentary on Hitler earlier today. The similarities between the moves made by Germany under Hitler are so close to some of the directions this government of ours is headed. The talk of determining who will be afforded health care and who will not. The talk of registration of firearms and bans on others. WE NEED THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES, NOT MORE INVASIVELY INTO IT!
The second amendment gives every law abiding citizen the right to self defense. Neither Obama, nor anyone else should tell us how to qualify that statement.
With that said, Texas CHL holders had to qualify at the range and requalify every 5 years. The requirements are posted at: Texas Best CHL and Firearms Training - Course of fire for CHL range qualification . You must score at least 175 out of 250 possible points, and that is not that hard. You shoot a total of 20 shots from a distance of 9 feet with a total of 100 points available at that distance. You shoot a total of 20 shots from 21 feet with a total of 100 points possible. You shoot a total of 10 shots from 45 feet with a total of 50 points available. You should be able to easily make your qualifying score within 21 feet from the target.
Also, at least in Texas, it is considered a defensive shot if the BG is within 30 feet and presenting a danger that would make any normal person fear for their life. If you can't hit your target within 30 feet, you probably would not have qualified at the range.
NRA Endowment Member
Be a mentor to the youth of our communities.
Show them the way to shoot for the moon.
If they miss, push them to reach out for a star.
If any gang banger punks try to divert their attention...
show them the light as well.
Things have changed since I first shot a pistol in Arizona back in 62. No permit, no background check, nothing. It was a different world. In fact, you could leave your door unlocked. However now, with the number of deranged people (like the guy that shot up Virginia Tech) I'm all for permits and a training requirement. I think a background check is perfectly in order. If somebody had been paying attention, the V. Tech massacre would never have happened. They had all the information on that guy they needed but he fell through the bureaucratic cracks. I'm sad to say it's come to this.
Sig 226, 228. Glock 19, 23. Smith Model 60,and 1911. XD45 Tactical. Mossberg 930 SPX.
How we behave as gun owners is important. Posturing and threatening does not serve us well in the public eye.
I vote for ZERO qualification requirements. Every new rule puts us on a steeper slippery slope. If a gun buyer looks a little "slow" then the salesperson should steer them into a revolver. Other than that, "Get off of my lawn"!
Well i certainly didn't mean to open a can of worms on this issue,I was sharing some thoughts I had and was looking for feedback from others. With that said I'd like to state I'm all for gun right and carrying obviously,I just feel states should maybe at least restrict permit holders to the caliber they qualify with.
This is the case in my home state of Rhode Island as up there I had to qualify with a .45 caliber gun as that is what I wanted to carry BUT I could also carry any smaller caliber but nothing larger. They didn't need me to qualify on every gun I owned or wanted to carry,just the caliber of gun I wanted to carry and only the caliber of the weapon was listed on the permit,no make/model/serial number etc.
Again my intent with this thread was to get others views besides my own on this subject. I just feel like its a bit of flawed logic when some can shoot one round of of a .22 and conceal carry a .44,again just my opinion.
Snub nose revolvers,the original concealed carry guns.
I think mandatory training and qualification requirements just don't go far enough to address the real issue.
What's really needed are strong laws which prohibit shooting another person without legal justification, reckless discharge of firearms, and the real capstone, any use of a firearm in the commission of a criminal enterprise.
That's the kind laws I could strongly support. Man, if only we had some of those. Then we'd all be safe. Oh, wait . . .
"We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters
What's the difference? Why should I have to pay for proficiency testing? I already pay for my own training through defensive training schools and now I have to pay for everyone else too?
There are already shooting proficiency tests that take place for law enforcement officers. How difficult would it be to have a few civilians sit in on those same proficiency tests that are already in place and already paid for?
Another way to look at this is if SHTF, you will not in all likelihood be shooting at a bad guy at 5, 7, 15 or 25 yards. It's probably going to be 2 or 3 feet.
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
“I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”
- Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004
I don't know a answer that would make everyone happy, but i do remember that 8yrs. ago when i got my ccw permit from ky. That out of a class of about 30,there was 4 that had a right to bear arms, but they had no business ,ability wise to handle any weapon.
They did pass the B.S. shooting requirement.
FWIW, since I live in Texas the original question doesn't really apply here because we already must qualify with a gun at the range to get a CC permit, whether I agree or not. OTOH, I recently renewed my CC permit and actually enjoyed my time at the range since I consider ANY time spent at the gun range as time well spent! Anyway, agree or not, like it or not that's the way it is here in Texas and many other states. If any individual doesn't like it or feels it's against their 2A rights to be required to have a permit, they can always carry w/o a permit... but don't get caught and don't cry in your beer when you're forced to pay the consequences if you are.
"... Americans... we want a safe home, to keep the money we make and shoot bad guys." -- Denny Crane
And this thread is about to die if you guys don't keep it civil.
You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.