Courses to prove proficiency????

This is a discussion on Courses to prove proficiency???? within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I just googled Colorado CCW training and found several links to instructors who offer post-permit classes in specific firearms proficiency. You get a certificate (suitable ...

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Courses to prove proficiency????

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631

    Courses to prove proficiency????

    I just googled Colorado CCW training and found several links to instructors who offer post-permit classes in specific firearms proficiency. You get a certificate (suitable for framing) that you are proficient with a given firearm. In this suit-happy society (Castle Doctrine notwithstanding), does anyone see any merit in this type of training?
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Not because of any lawsuit related activity no, I don't see any benefit for this type of certificate.

    That being said, you should be proficient with any weapon your using, whether for self defense or target shooting. I don't think that any certificate is in order, but, if your not familiar with firearms, nothing wrong with gettting training from someone who is.

    Now here is the real kicker. How do you know that that instructor is proficient or familiar with your choice in arms. The common ones they probably are, but what if you got some off the wall thing he has never seen. Are they going to spend the class learning about the gun themselves?
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    Bingo! Thanks. I've been around enough to know some stuff, but now and then I get a curve ball and this was it.
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    The only way I've seen it play out in court, is in a negative way for those who were "proficient with a specific weapon".

    A friend is an armed guard, he shot a robber, and a stray nicked a passerby. His company lost a lawsuit, during which the plaintiffs attorney made several arguments but only one that really seemed to resonate: "Someone who is certified as proficient with their specific weapon would not miss and hit an innocent bystander short of negligence... he knew he would miss when he pulled the trigger. He knew his weapon, he knew his abilities, yet he pulled the trigger anyways."

    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  6. #5
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,781
    Any training above the requirement will have some benefit. I would think that a weapon specific training would not be a bad idea, and most knowledgable instructors would be able to do such a thing as long as you dont carry an oddball type of gun.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by matiki View Post
    The only way I've seen it play out in court, is in a negative way for those who were "proficient with a specific weapon".

    A friend is an armed guard, he shot a robber, and a stray nicked a passerby. His company lost a lawsuit, during which the plaintiffs attorney made several arguments but only one that really seemed to resonate: "Someone who is certified as proficient with their specific weapon would not miss and hit an innocent bystander short of negligence... he knew he would miss when he pulled the trigger. He knew his weapon, he knew his abilities, yet he pulled the trigger anyways."

    I've heard similar arguments from the other officers in my dept. They have stated "why get a 100% when we qualify just on the chance we might miss when involved in a true gunfight?" They probably believe that due to attorneys like the one listed above. OMO

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array AZ Husker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    4,244
    Quote Originally Posted by mulle46 View Post
    I've heard similar arguments from the other officers in my dept. They have stated "why get a 100% when we qualify just on the chance we might miss when involved in a true gunfight?" They probably believe that due to attorneys like the one listed above. OMO
    Sadly, that's the common view of LEO's today. Why do more than the minimum required, I may be accountable some day. How sad!

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    I agree that its sad that some officers will only do the minimum. My post was geared more towards those officers who purposely throw shots on qual day to avoid 100's on the off chance that they might be involved in a shootout sometime and want IMO a plausible reason if they do miss and hit a bystander. I think it is also sad that LEO's and depts will usually get sued by BG(if he survives) or BG's family(if BG doesn't survive) for their actions. Too many lawsuits in today's society...OMO.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array KenpoTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    SW Missouri
    Posts
    2,193
    Quote Originally Posted by mulle46 View Post
    I've heard similar arguments from the other officers in my dept. They have stated "why get a 100% when we qualify just on the chance we might miss when involved in a true gunfight?" They probably believe that due to attorneys like the one listed above. OMO
    it's for this reason that the company I work for uses a pass/fail system for handgun quals. We'll score the targets to determine if you got the passing score of 80% (and for the bragging rights) but nothing gets written down in the record except that you passed.
    "Being a predator isn't always comfortable but the only other option is to be prey. That is not an acceptable option." ~Phil Messina

    If you carry in Condition 3, you have two empty chambers. One in the weapon...the other between your ears.

    Matt K.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by KenpoTex View Post
    it's for this reason that the company I work for uses a pass/fail system for handgun quals. We'll score the targets to determine if you got the passing score of 80% (and for the bragging rights) but nothing gets written down in the record except that you passed.
    Same here. In our case we don't get bragging rights. You don't have to buy the beer.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    Matiki, not having to buy the beer is a bragging right. My dept. does record your score as part of your personnel file so it would be available to attorneys in the event of a lawsuit. There is a PPC national champion in my dept who doesn't always get 100's on his quals. He might throw shots just to avoid 100's on qual. OMO.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Supertac45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Michigan's U.P.
    Posts
    3,657
    Where did their credentials come from making them an expert in that firearm and giving them the status of an instructor?
    Les Baer 45
    Sig Man
    N.R.A. Patron Life Member
    M.C.R.G.O.

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. i wanted to prove...
    By sfl1972 in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: June 5th, 2010, 10:17 PM
  2. Failure of proficiency testing, training, etc?
    By DaveH in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 8th, 2010, 03:58 PM
  3. Should a shooting proficiency test be required for a CWP?
    By TechGuy in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: February 12th, 2007, 12:31 PM
  4. proficiency on more than one gun (HK)
    By Hobbes in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 6th, 2006, 10:30 AM
  5. This goes to prove you are never too old or young for guns
    By fitznig in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2006, 08:44 AM