Should a shooting proficiency test be required for a CWP? - Page 2

Should a shooting proficiency test be required for a CWP?

This is a discussion on Should a shooting proficiency test be required for a CWP? within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I'm an instructor too. I strongly agree with everything said by HaveGunJoe. 100%...

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 89

Thread: Should a shooting proficiency test be required for a CWP?

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,802
    I'm an instructor too. I strongly agree with everything said by HaveGunJoe. 100%
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.


  2. #17
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,968
    I do not believe a shooting test should be necessary. It merely indicates the individual was proficient enough one time. Nothing more, nothing less.

    The individual should take personal responsibility to train and develop the skills necessary to be a responsible firearm owner and licensee, however they may define that term to their satisfaction. It has to pass their own personal "Sleep test".


    The tyrant dies and his rule is over, the martyr dies and his rule begins. ― The Journals of Kierkegaard

  3. #18
    Distinguished Member Array BIG E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    1,443
    Short answer.... YES!
    Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft!

    -- Theodore Roosevelt --

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,851
    Safety knowledge and practical proficiency; plus shooting competency. Absolutely. But I'd much prefer it to be off the radar when it comes to the government. They've got the meat hooks into it too far, as it stands. But without the requirement and checking up on shops for compliance, I'm pretty sure it would be ignored by many. I'd like to think instructors would do it out of sheer fear of sending someone out there without a clue, but that often won't happen.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  5. #20
    Distinguished Member Array LenS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Commiechusetts
    Posts
    1,646
    MA does NOT mandate a test at all. There are 9 or 10 different courses one can take to get the LTC, some do have a shooting component and others do not. NOTHING in MGLs requires any particular score or particular course of fire. Some towns/cities do require a shooting test for EACH renewal (now 6 years), but again it is a local requirement, not MGL.

    In MA you need a LTC in order to own a handgun (even at home) or handgun ammo/mags/components. Most LTC holders in MA Never carry a gun at all.

    I'm all for training and have also been in law enforcement for 24+ years, but even the police qualification here is shooting at a stationary target from a fixed position. NONE of this will train anyone how to react in a self-defense shooting, only good for bullseye training.

    Newbies who've never had a gun aren't likely to do too well on these type tests. In fact it is usually implemented in states/cities/towns as a method to discourage people from getting permits.

    I'd much rather see a gun safety course and test required. I'm tired of seeing people point muzzles at others, etc.
    NRA Instructor

  6. #21
    Member Array nicneufeld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by kansas_plainsman View Post
    Kansas requires a basic competency level - both one- and two-handed, any handgun. Some in my class qualified with target .22s.
    Hehe, I would have been tempted to bring my 6" Ruger MkII! That thing will thread a needle...

  7. #22
    Moderator
    Array buckeye .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    7,731
    Even though it was not required in Idaho, our CCW instructor required us to pass the Ohio shooting test. 15 out of 20 shots within a pie plate target at 21’ in 2 1/2 minutes. VERY EASY.
    I have an Ohio CHL, and that shooting test was no part of the cirriculum of the class. The only requirement is 2 hours of time on the range, and the person must prove proficiency with a weapon. Ohio CHL class is only NRA basic pistol class.

    http://www.ag.state.oh.us/le/prevent...y_training.pdf

    There is a link to the Attorney General's CHL training fact sheet, just says 2 horus live fire time.

    Do I think there should be some sort of training, yes I was appalled at the lack of skills presented by most members of my "training" class. It doesn't exactly make me feel safe that they are allowed to carry a weapon around, when they miss most of the 21 foot shoots. My instructor's rule was "most of the bullets should be on the paper", not in the black, not in the rings, on the paper.
    Last edited by buckeye .45; February 7th, 2007 at 12:13 AM.
    Fortes Fortuna Juvat

    Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
    NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor

  8. #23
    Member Array ber950's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    38
    GA doesn't have a test. Many states don't. It doesn't seem to be a problem in those states. What part of shall not be infringed do you not understand?
    I know your intentions are good, but that kind of logic is what got us where we are today.

  9. #24
    Distinguished Member Array ArmyCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Chickasaw, AL
    Posts
    1,804
    Ditto this for me! Also would add cost in fees I'm sure. I believe the right to carry shouldn't cost a dime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnutty View Post
    Guys this could turn into a can of worms. Not the thread the testing. Should we know what we are doing, yes most definitely!!!!!! But remember the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is not based on profiency but the constitution. Who gets to determine what is proficient the liberal Senators? They could lay out a test that the most of us could not pass. If we did pass it then as has been mentioned why did we not just wound the BG. I don't think we will ever get into trouble unless we underestimate the stupidity of many politicians. testing would give them one more thing to use against us. Just my opinion.
    For God, Family and Country!

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry View Post
    ...I guess I worry about the person who has never even owned a gun, who while exercizing his right - goes on a whim to pick up a gun, not even knowing what will suit best. Then perhaps stuffing said gun into his pants to make it his carry. Lack of familiarity and perhaps poor judgement too - could lead to accidents...
    This exact scenario occurred a week or two ago with the story of the cab driver in MA shooting in the back a fare who prior had robbed him and run away.
    The cabbie was a freshly minted CCW and said that he'd never shot his gun before. He commented that he meant to just scare the guy by shooting around him but wound up putting one round into the back of guy as he ran away at a distance.

    As well there was the story last summer/dfall of the community CCW advocate (I forget what state he was from) that was out walking his dog and carrying in Condition 3/Israeli Carry when he was accosted and beaten by a younger & stronger male with some sort of pole or board. The man and his dog both were beaten to the ground and while trying to defend himself he deployed his sidearm only to point it at the attacker as his off hand and arm were badly damaged and disabled by the attacker. He had nothing going but a prayer that the beating would stop. The attacker saw his gun and choose to run rather than continue the attack and remove it from him, which the victim at that point would have had little to do about it by that point. This too was featured here.

    I agree 100% with you and others, basic and minimum proficiency is a necessary testing point for the safety of the user as well as the public at large.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  11. #26
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    LenS,

    MA does currently require a test for an LTC A or B.
    I recently went through as much with an issuance date of 1/06 (LTC-A) upon moving back to MA with a VA CHP and having had 12 yrs. ago an LTC that though it had expired I was written up by my local issuing authority as a 'renewal', even as I had indicated on my paperwork that I was a 'new' type applicant.

    For more info see chapter 140 section 131 P parts a & b of the Mass General Laws...

    Quote Originally Posted by M.G.L.
    Section 131P.
    (a) Any person making application for the issuance of a firearms identification card under section 129B, a Class A or Class B license to carry firearms under section 131 or 131F, or a permit to purchase under section 131A, who was not licensed under the provisions of this chapter on June 1, 1998, shall, in addition to the requirements set forth in said sections 129B, 131, 131A or 131F submit to the licensing authority a basic firearms safety certificate; provided, however, that a certificate issued by the division of fisheries and wildlife pursuant to the provisions of section 14 of chapter 131, evidencing satisfactory completion of a hunting safety course, shall serve as a valid substitute for a basic firearms safety certificate required under this section; and provided further, that any applicant for a firearm identification card for the sole purpose of purchasing or possessing chemical mace, pepper spray or other similarly propelled liquid, gas or powder designed to temporarily incapacitate shall not be required to complete any basic firearms safety course as a prerequisite for receiving such card. Persons lawfully possessing a firearm identification card or license to carry firearms on June 1, 1998 shall be exempt from the provisions of this section upon expiration of such card or license and when applying for licensure as required under this chapter. No application for the issuance of a firearm identification card or license to carry shall be accepted or processed by the licensing authority without such certificate attached thereto; provided, however, that the provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) any officer, agent or employee of the commonwealth or any state of the United States; (ii) any member of the military or other service of any state or of the United States; (iii) any duly authorized law enforcement officer, agent or employee of any municipality of the commonwealth; provided, however, that any such person described in clauses (i) to (iii), inclusive, is authorized by a competent authority to carry or possess the weapon so carried or possessed and is acting within the scope of his duties.

    (b) The colonel of state police shall promulgate rules and regulations governing the issuance and form of basic firearms safety certificates required by this section. Said colonel shall certify certain persons as firearms safety instructors and shall certify safety course curriculum. Such certification shall be for a period of ten years, unless sooner revoked by reason of unsuitability, in the discretion of said colonel.

    Source - http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/140-131p.htm
    As well basic firearm handling and competency is currently required to be demonstrated as per the requirement of the MA state police as referenced in the MGL above.
    Below is copied directly from the documentation toward training of MA firearm instructors as applicable to LTC licensing via the MA Chiefs of Police Association (http://www.masschiefs.org/hottopics/hot_fire_train.html)...
    Quote Originally Posted by MCOPA Basic Handgun Safety Course
    Documentation of Student Competency
    Both a safe handgun handling practical, and written examination are required for course completion.

    Course Requirements
    To successfully complete this course, the student must:
    attend all portions of the classroom presentation;
    demonstrate basic competency in safe handling of a firearm; and.
    complete a written exam consisting of twenty-five multiple choice questions, with a minimum
    score of 80%.

    Source - http://www.masschiefs.org/hottopics/hotpdf's/firearms_pdfs/MCOPA%20Handgun%20Safety%20Updated.pdf
    I took my course at the S&W training center with instructor Ken Frisbee, who is a former/retired issuing authority.
    I spoke with him privately and even as I was a long time shooter & CCWr and had come in with a valid & newly renewed VA CHP _and_ I had recently taken the VA state required course of same via the NRA, he stated that as per MA law I was required to take a MA specific and recognized course of same, or have a Basic Hunting Education cert (which I am due to start on the 19th. of this month) or provide a statement of miltiary sourced weapons training...neither of which at that time I'd possesed. So I took the class, paid my $125, passed the written 100% and aced the shooting requirement as well.
    Not difficult for a person with background to do, albeit spendy, but amongst my classmates the shooting portion was relatively trying for many though not difficult as they all learned & adapted enough to hit the target in the end.

    - Janq
    Last edited by Janq; February 7th, 2007 at 11:59 AM.
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  12. #27
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,827
    The RIGHT to own and carry is a RIGHT, not a privilege like driving. IMO, the whole CCW permit thing is unConstitutional, it makes a right a privilege governed and regulated by the state and that 'right' can be revoked by the state.

    However, I don't see anything unconstitutional about requiring a person to have safety and shooting instruction before they purchase a gun. They shouldn't have to repeat the instruction for every gun purchase.

    That would not prevent them from owning or carrying a gun, nor would they have to be licensed by the state as we are now. The thing is, any resident of Vermont, that's not a felon, can carry a concealed weapon. When was the last time you heard of a gun accident in Vermont?

    Now Alaska has adopted a Vermont status with a CCW permit available for reciprocity with other states that license gun owners.

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,054
    My state requires 30 shots.

    I don't think we should require training, pay or need to obtain a permit or license, nor prove to anyone why we need to exercise a right. I don't need training to protest. Why should I need one to carry a gun?
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  14. #29
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,827
    Just think about how far this has already come. We have a terrorist attack or what ever the reason, and your state declares all CCWs suspended until further notice.

  15. #30
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,054
    Molon Labe.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Makes me wish an IQ test was required
    By TennesseeTen in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2010, 10:51 PM
  2. Winchester SXZ water jug shooting test.
    By andersmg in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 21st, 2008, 10:12 AM
  3. test shooting a cast iron bathtub
    By ppkheat in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: February 15th, 2008, 08:30 PM
  4. Courses to prove proficiency????
    By sniper58 in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: January 25th, 2008, 05:42 PM
  5. proficiency on more than one gun (HK)
    By Hobbes in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 6th, 2006, 11:30 AM

Search tags for this page

arkansas concealed carry shooting test

,
cwp test
,

minnesota conceal and carry proficiency test

,

minnesota conceal and carry shooting test

,

minnesota concealed carry proficiency test

,

minnesota shooting proficiency test

,
mn carry proficiency test
,

mn conceal and carry proficiency test

,

mn concealed carry proficiency test

,
ohio concealed carry shooting test
,
shooting proficiency test
,

why restaurant proficiency practice is required

Click on a term to search for related topics.