CPL Too Easy?

[Brian Pfleuger]

That being said, I think you have a moral responsibility to try to be competent with a firearm, understand legalities and moral principles related to taking a life if you intend to use it in circumstances that might injure an innocent or overract to an incident.

I agree with Glenn.

I'll also point out that, no matter how uneasy someone might feel about all these untrained folks wandering the streets with guns, it has never been and is not a major problem.... or even a minor one.

In spite of a near total lack of training on the part of millions of folks, accidents related to lawfully carrying a gun are vanishingly rare.

We don't need the government involved trying to solve problems that don't even exist.

Big Government! If you think the problems we create are bad, wait 'til you see the solutions!

 

[osbornk]

In Virginia it can be done without spending a second with a real instructor or on the range. I qualified in 5 minutes over the internet. It took longer to enter the credit card info than to do the class and pass the test. The info given on the class was basic gun terminology and basic safety. Not helpful to anyone that doesn't already know it.

Yes it worries me that it's so easy.

I had the same experience here in Virginia. Printed out the form, took it to the Clerk of the Court's office, filled out a form and gave them $50. 2 weeks later it was in my mailbox. No questions as to whether you own or have ever even shot a gun. The lady at the clerk's office said she had a permit "just in case" but she had never had or even shot a gun.

 

[kraigwy]

Mandatory training?????

Who sets the standard? Joe Biden? Anti gunners who would make it so hard no one could pass.

Mandatory training is just wrong. Besides, what is the cost of the training. I just found out tonight that someone is putting on Women's Gun safety and Firearm classes for $250 per session. I ruined their party, I'm adding a second night to accommodate more women.

The same class I (through our club) puts on FREE.

We don't want self defense to be a rich man's game.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

So, since the OP indicated this was a CPL course, we don't know if the instructors were negligent, or simply following state requirements.

While I agree that there should be no legal training requirement for the exercise of a fundamental right, if the instructor was offering the NRA Basic Pistol class it doesn't matter what the state's requirements are -- he is required by the NRA to teach the course the way the NRA prescribes it. If he doesn't -- he isn't offering the NRA Basic Pistol Course.

As an example, I happen to think that the way Cooper summed up firearms safety into four major rules is better than the NRA's three major rules and however many minor rules. But, as an NRA certified instructor, when I teach Basic Pistol I teach it their way, and I then suggest to students that they may find Cooper's rules to be easier to remember if they wish to look them up.

Here's the current NRA Basic Pistol live fire requirement (if I can get it to format):

6. Shoot at targets using live ammunition.
Ensure that everyone on the range has eye and hearing protection.

Have students shoot live ammunition at the blank targets using single-shot and then multiple-shot exercises. Emphasize the importance of applying the shooting fundamentals every time they fire a shot.

Note: Students with double-action revolvers should cock
the hammer before each shot, if possible.

a. single-shot exercise
Have the students load and fire only one cartridge at a time. Have them fire five times at a blank target, and have coaches evaluate the shooters. Perform this exercise at least twice, for a total of 10 shots.

b. five-shot exercise
Have students load five cartridges and fire at a blank target, at their own pace, to achieve a shot group. All shots should be on the target. Be sure that the students rest between each shot.

Repeat the exercise until your student is able to shoot "groups" anywhere on the target. Observe and offer feedback as appropriate.

7. Adjust the rear sight to center a group on the target
Once the students are able to group their shots, instruct them how to make sight adjustments. Remind them to move the rear sight in the same direction that they want the hits on the target to move. Emphasize that the guns
must be unloaded before any attempt is made to adjust the sights.

Point out that some pistols do not have adjustable sights.

8. Continue firing five-shot groups from the bench
Continue to have the students load and fire five shots from the bench. The students may now fire on a bullseye target, using a six-o-clock hold so that they can see the front sight clearly in the white area of the target.

Remind the students that their eyes can focus on only one object at a time, and that the front sight should be in sharp focus, with the rear sight and target being less clear.

The students should rest after each shot. Continue to make sight adjustments as necessary.

Repeat the five shot exercise until your student is able to shoot at least three, five-shot groups within a 9-inch diameter circle in the middle of the target. If you are using the coach/pupil method, have participants reverse
the roles and repeat the eight steps.

D. Two-Handed Standing Shooting Position
Demonstrate the two-handed standing shooting position. Explain that both hands are used to grip and support the pistol.

Have the students learn this position using the proper sequence of steps.

1. Study position
Demonstrate and describe the key points of the position, referring students to the pictures of the position in the handbook.

Describe and demonstrate the two-handed grip presented in the text.

2. Practice position without a pistol
Assist students in achieving the proper foot, arm and body position without a pistol.

3. Practice position with a pistol
Assist students in achieving the position with a pistol.
Check for:

• Proper grip
• Feet shoulder width apart and body weight
distributed evenly
• Legs straight
• Back straight or bent slightly forward
• Head erect
• Arms fully extended
• Pistol brought to eye level
• Shooter should be relaxed and comfortable

4. Align position with target
Make sure that each student’s position is such that the pistol is naturally aligned with the target.

5. Dry-fire pistol at target
Have students dry-fire their pistols at a target. Emphasize:

• Sight alignment—aiming
• Trigger squeeze—trigger control

Point out that nobody can hold a pistol perfectly still. The students must try to keep the sights aligned while maintaining a minimum arc of movement.

Emphasize that the trigger should be squeezed straight to the rear, and that the hammer fall should be a surprise.

Note: Students with double-action revolvers should cock the hammer before each shot, if possible.

6. Single-shot exercise
Have the students load and fire one cartridge at a time. Have the students fire five shots at a bullseye target. Be sure that the students rest between each shot.

If the two-handed position is maintained for eight seconds or more without firing a shot, the shooter should remove the trigger finger from the trigger, keep the gun pointed it in a safe direction, and lower it or rest it on the
bench before attempting another shot.

Using the coach/pupil method, have coaches evaluate the shooters. Repeat the exercise, for a total of ten shots.

7. Five-shot exercise
Have students load five cartridges and fire at a blank target, at their own pace, to achieve a shot group. All shots should be on the target. Be sure that the students rest between each shot.

Repeat the five shot exercise until your student is able to shoot at least three, five-shot groups within a 9-inch diameter circle in the middle of the target. If you are using the coach/pupil method, have participants reverse
the roles and repeat the eight steps.

E. Evaluation of Shooting Practice
Lead students in a discussion of the shooting exercises. With each student, focus on the positive aspects (what the student did right).

F. Summarize Presentation

Note that the 5-shot exercises do NOT stipulate a number of rounds. Each student is supposed to continue to shoot 5-shot groups until they demonstrate the ability to hit a 9" plate consistently, or to shoot something approximating "groups" on a blank sheet of paper. Shooting two different targets, two-handed, as described by the OP is nowhere near what the NRA prescribes. It may satisfy state requirements in his state, but the instructor should not be calling it or advertising it as the NRA Basic Pistol course, because it isn't.

 

[Fishing_Cabin]

We don't want self defense to be a rich man's game.

QFT...

I know some instructors who charge way to much for way to little of a class. Put females into the spectrum and it goes down hill.

Thank you kraigwy.

 

[kraigwy]

Here's the current NRA Basic Pistol live fire requirement (if I can get it to format):

Guess the NRA wouldn't like my classes, I teach Self Defense classes, not shooting classes.

I didn't want to repost the whole quote, lets just say I'm "unconventional" when it comes to SD. I try to base my classes on reality, not target shooting.

Just for example, I don't like the idea loading one or two rounds in a revolver. The less you have to remember the better you'll preform. I've seen too many people click on empty chambers because they didn't get the cylinder lined up right. Then they worry about it the round is under the hammer instead of an empty spot.

90% or better is done with one hand, (both left and right). Seldom does one have both hand free.

One scenario: I have a large rag doll, about 2 1/2 ft tall. The lady holds the hand of the doll, them pulls it behind her (for protection) and engages the target.

Another is attached the shoulder strap to the target frame and the shooter pulls on the purse while she engages the target.

I set up a chair to represent the seat of a car, and she engages the target though what would be a car window (car jacking),

Setting in a chair and engaging the target as in a home invasion.

I could go on forever but you get the idea. Most of the shooting is done at 3 yards and under.

Regardless the student never knows the scenario until just before they shoot.

Of course several times during the night we go over the 4 basic firearms safety rules.

They are short classes, two hours per session but they are weekly sessions.

As I said, I'm a bit unconventional, it is a SD class after all, life is unconventional.

 

[Frank Ettin]

I agree that we don't (shouldn't) need government setting training standards. On the other hand, I'm generally appalled at the atrocious gun handling and abysmal marksmanship I routinely see at the range.

The responsible gun owner will on his own initiative seek out training and make a real effort to achieve some reasonable level of proficiency. If someone chooses not to, I for one am not going to congratulate him on that choice.

 

[Crazy88Fingers]

I know the feeling. I took a CWP class with a fellow who didn't have a very good grasp of English (bienvenido a Miami). A lot of time was spent repeating everything to him in Spanish. When it was over he was given a booklet that explains all of the state laws pertaining to possession of a firearm and use of force. All of which was written in a language he does not understand.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Guess the NRA wouldn't like my classes, I teach Self Defense classes, not shooting classes.

I didn't want to repost the whole quote, lets just say I'm "unconventional" when it comes to SD. I try to base my classes on reality, not target shooting.

I have no issue with that, but I think you're missing the point. You are offering "Kraigwy's Self-Defense Method" classes, not the NRA Basic Pistol class. The NRA publishes the course book for each of its classes, and as certified instructors we agree that when we advertise a class as "the" NRA Basic Pistol (or "the" NRA ___ class) we will teach the class according to the NRA course handbook. If a state will accept something less than that or something other than that, fine -- for the state, but the instructor is not allowed to advertise something other than the NRA course as the NRA course, and he/she should not be awarding an NRA certificate of completion at the end of something that is not the NRA course.

My state requires, per state statute, the NRA Basic Pistol class as a prerequisite to getting a carry permit. I know there are instructors out there who don't teach the required class, and who don't follow the new protocol for live fire. That's wrong, and the bottom line is they are simultaneously breaking the law and cheating their students. The basic course for my state and for most states is not about self-defense, it's about handling a firearm with a bare modicum of safety. Anything beyond that is on the licensee.

 

[Pilot]

The CCW course I had to take in Colorado after moving there was mostly on Colorado law, and exercising proper judgment on when to use deadly force for self defense. It also explained the basics of gun handling which I was already familiar with, but I still learned something after several decades of all types of shooting.

However, I do agree that government should NOT mandate these types of requirements for RKBA. What happened to personal responsibility, judgment and getting training on your own? I rarely go to public ranges anymore, but the number of incidents is very, very minute, so why legislate for perception rather than reality.

 

[MLeake]

AB, I am not sure what the OP is talking about, to be honest with you.

I don't know of an NRA basic pistol cpl class.

I know that some states will accept completion of the NRA basic pistol class as proof of required handgun training for the permit; I know that some states will only give concealed carry instructor's licenses to people who have certificates from either the NRA, the military, or some Law Enforcement training organization.

But I can't tell, from what the OP has said in his three posts, if this was an NRA basic pistol course being taken for a certificate, in order to get his permit; or if this was a concealed carry class, being taught by a guy who also happened to be an NRA certified instructor.

Without that clarification, again, I don't know that the instructors were in the wrong.

If it was the NRA basic pistol course, being used in lieu, then you are correct.

 

[zukiphile]

I agree that we don't (shouldn't) need government setting training standards. On the other hand, I'm generally appalled at the atrocious gun handling and abysmal marksmanship I routinely see at the range.

Indeed. Some ranges are great to avoid.

One might be appalled at the way some people dress, speak, write or eat, but having government mandate these matters doesn't seem likely to be effective. Similarly, the habits of care and safety are not the likely result of a state training course, but are more likely the result of individual care and healthy social pressure, just as they are in habits of dress, speech, writing and diet. Happily, we aren't compelled to associate with any specific range involuntarily or eat at restaurants with awful people and terrible food. That sphere of choice has the effect of demonstrating our approval and disapproval.

Law has its limits, and we can wish for people to be better without making law carry the entire burden.

 

[dajowi]

In my state people are taking the CCW classes without firing a shot. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

However, people have the right to defend themselves and if they wish to do so using a firearm which they've had little or no practice with, that will be a huge problem for both the public and the shooter.

 

[TailGator]

I agree that mandatory training makes a right into a privilege, and introduces at least some degree of exclusivity.

I also try to remember that those classes are the beginning of training. A responsible person will need to practice the skills to which they are introduced in the classes. Are there irresponsible people with firearms? Sure, and with cars, and knives, and toxic chemicals, and flammable materials, and . . . .

 

[Tom Servo]

In my state people are taking the CCW classes without firing a shot. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Most mandated CCW classes came about as compromises to speed up legislative approval for concealed carry. Like many political wrinkles, they weren't very well thought out, and the people who instituted them didn't know the criteria very well.

That's why we have mandated classes that are expensive, time-consuming, and useless. I've sat through a couple.

I've never seen data showing that states requiring such classes have fewer acts of negligence than those that don't.

 

[zukiphile]

I am skeptical about the value of a state mandated CCW class as a training tool. We spend a lot more time trying to teach new drivers to drive safely and proficiently, but it takes a lot of us years not to take stupid risks in cars.

On the other hand, I believe such a class can explain to people their obligation to disclose during a traffic stop, their obligation to keep the item concealed, and when they are entitled to employ the item.

I would think that every such class has a majority who do not know the answers to these questions and who are looking for instruction on those points.

 

[SPEMack618]

In GA, a snippet of laws related to CCW are printed on the back of the physical permit.

I wouldn't mind seeing a full sized, readable document listing all pertainent laws concerning CCW issued with each permit.

Doesn't necessarily constitute training, but it does provide needed information.

 

[buck460XVR]

Originally posted by Glenn E. Meyer
That being said, I think you have a moral responsibility to try to be competent with a firearm, understand legalities and moral principles related to taking a life if you intend to use it in circumstances that might injure an innocent or overract to an incident.

While many of us that have owned and shot firearms for a long period of time would like to believe that all gun owners are like us, i.e. responsible, with high moral values, that ain't quite the way it is. While I'm not gonna argue whether or not training should be a requirement of a CWC license or that a license for CWC is necessary at all, I, like the OP, see a lot of new gun owners with a high number of their CWC license that scare me. I have for over twenty years helped teach Hunter Safety to new hunters. It is a mandatory requirement before one can buy a license to hunt......anything. Same as it is in many other states. Funny, for those twenty years and in the last several years of being active on internet gun forums, have I ever heard or read, one person complaining about this being required by "big Brother". In fact, many of the same folks that whine about a license for CWC are the same one that applaud Hunter Safety programs and many times snibble Hunter Safety courses are too easy. Sorry, but IMHO, the dangers to innocent folks is the same. Since Wisconsin legalized CWC a year and a half ago, the average student in our classes has changed. Since a state funded Hunter Safety class is useable for the required training requirement and it's about 5 times cheaper than the average CWC specific classes, we went from 10,11 and 12 year old kids and an occasional mom or dad to a classroom with more adults than young hunters. The young hunters were motivated to learn and wanted to be there because they were excited to be able to hunt. The adults there for the cheap way to their CWC permit just want it to be done. They show up for the first class and the last and then are angry cause you won't pass them. They generally do worse on the final exam and on field day than their adolescent counterparts. They figure none of the info we are trying to teach them is pertinent to them.........even tho 90% of what we teach is firearm safety and use. I have yet to graduate a young first time hunter that I was afraid to hunt next to in the field. I certainly can't say that for those adults seeking their CWC. Just sayin'.

 

[Frank Ettin]

While many of us that have owned and shot firearms for a long period of time would like to believe that all gun owners are like us, i.e. responsible, with high moral values, that ain't quite the way it is. While I'm not gonna argue whether or not training should be a requirement of a CWC license or that a license for CWC is necessary at all, I, like the OP, see a lot of new gun owners with a high number of their CWC license that scare me....

I believe it was John Adams who said:

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

 

[K_Mac]

Frank, like John Milton before him, Adams knew that freedom without a moral compass was a dangerous thing. Milton said this: None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but licence.

There are many things in our society that scare me. Idiots with concealed weapons is one of them. What frightens me more though is a government that will deny my right to live as a free man to protect me from idiots. We cannot legislate personal responsibility when it comes to firearms, automobiles, cell phones, cheeseburgers, or anything else. Government can define the legal consequences for irresponsible/unlawful use of a weapon within the confines of the 2A, and enforce those laws. Maybe it can even help provide opportunities for training. Beyond that I'm not sure it has much of a role...