Illinois Concealed Carry Renewal

[Prof Young]

Talking to Katie the range lady today I learned that, in Illinois, when it comes time to renew a concealed carry permit, one must take a three hour refresher course that includes range time. At first I though this was a bit much, then she told me about the recent renewal class her boss had taught. Apparently most of the class had spent very little time with their guns in the five years that had passed since they first got a CC permit. Some did not know how to load their guns. One person was putting two fingers (one left and one right) on the trigger. Hmmmm . . . . Maybe the legislators who created and passed the laws about CC renewal were not so far off the mark.

 

[Don P]

In my opinion I would say piss poor training to start with or idiots that should not have guns

 

[K_Mac]

Passing the Illinois Concealed Carry proficiency test does not mean that one is skilled using a handgun. It simply means one has demonstrated they know which end of the gun to point at the target, how to load/reload, and how to put 30 total rounds more or less on a B27 target at 3, 7, and10 yards without hurting anyone. This doesn't disqualify anyone that I've ever heard of and it certainly doesn't mean one is trained to effectively carry a gun.

 

[Cheapshooter]

Just more ways for the People's Republic of Illinois to discourage the concealed carry that the politicians in Chicago never wanted to happen in the first place!

 

[Mike38]

If a person can not pass the live fire portion of the Illinois CCL, they should not own a gun. IMO, it's too easy. Only 21 of 30 rounds fired need to hit the black of the B27 target. That means 9 rounds could hit anything and everything except what you are supposed to hit. That's scary. The qualification target doesn't get scored by the printed points, but the shooter could score as low as a 147 out of a possible 300-30X and still pass. Again, scary. When I shot my live fire qualification I scored a 300-27X, and was disappointed in myself. The guy to my immediate left failed his first attempt. I was happy to get mine done and get out of the range before I got hurt. I think a person should have to put all 30 rounds on paper at the very minimum.

 

[HistoryJunky]

I took qualification with my M&P 40 that I had never shot until then and still got 30/30. I had a fair bit of previous handgun experience.

My instructor was very good and taught us much more than the minimum requirement .

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

 

[rodfac]

There are idiots out there for sure...for example, we've all seen them on the highways driving like they were immersed in a video game...and we all hope they'll show some individual responsibility and return to sanity. But where in the 2nd Amendment does it specify proficiency with any arm? Allowing politicians to mandate "improvements" in the name of "safety" or any other reason, is lunacy. YMMV, Rod

 

[grinner]

Talking to Katie the range lady today I learned that, in Illinois, when it comes time to renew a concealed carry permit, one must take a three hour refresher course that includes range time. At first I though this was a bit much, then she told me about the recent renewal class her boss had taught. Apparently most of the class had spent very little time with their guns in the five years that had passed since they first got a CC permit. Some did not know how to load their guns. One person was putting two fingers (one left and one right) on the trigger. Hmmmm . . . . Maybe the legislators who created and passed the laws about CC renewal were not so far off the mark.

What’s scarier are the people who haven’t even taken a minimal training class, have never even fired a gun, but own one and keep it loaded beside their bed.

There was a thread on another forum I read from time to time started by a very sincere man who wanted his elderly mother to carry a semi-auto and was trying to convince her to do so, even though she didn’t want to, didn’t want to train, and couldn’t remember how to even operate the pistol a few days after he showed her how. The thread quickly devolved into arguments over specific guns, semi-autos vs. revolvers, and whether she should be shooting .22 or 9 mm.

I don’t recall anyone questioning whether she should have a gun or not. And that scares me a little.

 

[unit 900]

I attended a LEOSA qual session and one police retiree loaded the rounds backwards in his Glock mags. Qualification is a liabilty hedge, no more than that.

 

[K_Mac]

I completely agree that governmental involvement in regulating the keeping and bearing of firearms is a slippery slope. I also believe that carrying a gun is an enterprise that brings with it serious responsibility. Fools and idiots have the same rights as the rest of us, until they don't. Preserving liberty while protecting individuals and society at large is the responsibility of we the people and our government. No thinking person has ever said that is easy.

 

[Cheapshooter]

There are idiots out there for sure...for example, we've all seen them on the highways driving like they were immersed in a video game...and we all hope they'll show some individual responsibility and return to sanity. But where in the 2nd Amendment does it specify proficiency with any arm? Allowing politicians to mandate "improvements" in the name of "safety" or any other reason, is lunacy. YMMV, Rod

Exactly! How well you think a proficiency in knowledge of the Constitution requirement to vote would go over. Probably make a much better government, but it is not written in the Constitution either.

 

[Laz]

I don’t recall anyone questioning whether she should have a gun or not. And that scares me a little

Liberty, by its nature, is messy. “Shall not be infringed” means some people are not going to be very skilled, or perhaps even very safe. The whole idea of personal self defense is for everyone to have the means to defend themselves. Just like 100 or 200 years ago. Not everyone will become or desire to become a skilled pistolero. The rub, as always, is who gets to “question whether she should have a gun”? Me? You? The Senate? The Sheriff? A judge? The opposition party?How much and what kind of “gun control” (which is what you are talking about) is acceptable? And the debate goes on. Illinois concealed carry has not resulted in a bloodbath or a rash of negligent shootings as far as I am aware

 

[rock185]

Slippery slope perhaps. But I've seen people in those required CCW classes who were just scary safety wise, and should not be carrying a weapon. Most passed the class. One woman, waving a hand gun around like a pointer, caused me to take cover behind a vehicle and alert the instructor. He called me a couple days later to tell me he did not pass her. I understand the concerns, but I suspect a lot of people who are not at all competent to be carrying a hand gun, may be deterred by having to attend a very minimal class. And that they, and the people with whom they interact, are safer due to their reluctance to go to the admitted hassle of even, the admittedly minimal, CCW class. Liberty is certainly messy, but so is getting shot by an incompetent who should not have a weapon.....ymmv

 

[Fishbed77]

Maybe the legislators who created and passed the laws about CC renewal were not so far off the mark.

Much like free speech, a firearm can be dangerous in the hands of an idiot.

But that is no excuse for additional layers of legislation.

 

[K_Mac]

rock185 It sounds like the woman unsafely handling her handgun was deterred by the very minimal class.

There are many who believe that no one can safely own or carry weapons. They may concede peace officers and military personnel are exceptions, but believe it is simply too dangerous for civilians to carry. Their goal is to make sure that you and I can't qualify for concealed carry and given the chance would make the requirements impossible to meet.

Illinois concealed carry has not resulted in a bloodbath or a rash of negligent shootings as far as I am aware

No, it has not in spite of many hysterical predictions that it would.

Yes, there are some folks who should have more firearm training before carrying, and as Cheapshooter mentioned there are some who should seek a better understanding of how our system of government works and our individual responsibilities before voting. Mandating these things brings us back to that slippery slope though. Giving up liberty for the purpose of safety does not make us safer.

 

[Laz]

Liberty is certainly messy, but so is getting shot by an incompetent

While it doesn’t alter my position, I certainly have to agree with you on this.

 

[rodfac]

KMac & Laz have stated the opposition to arbitrary qualification standards set by partisan politicians so succinctly, that I feel they're worth reiterating and will add that the 2nd Amendment's purpose was to give the people, all of us, the means to redress a tyrannical gov't's plans to subjugate our nation, as well as personal protection. It truly is, "a slippery slope" as so many have pointed out. Apologies to the OP for possible thread drift!
Regards, Rod

KMac: There are many who believe that no one can safely own or carry weapons. They may concede peace officers and military personnel are exceptions, but believe it is simply too dangerous for civilians to carry. Their goal is to make sure that you and I can't qualify for concealed carry and given the chance would make the requirements impossible to meet.

Laz: The rub, as always, is who gets to “question whether she should have a gun”? Me? You? The Senate? The Sheriff? A judge? The opposition party?

KMac: Giving up liberty for the purpose of safety does not make us safer.

 

[HistoryJunky]

What you guys are all ignoring is how much money it costs already in Illinois to get a carry permit.

Mandatory $150 to the state.

$100 and up for your class.
$10 or more for ammo JUST for the qualification

$30+ for a holster if you don't already have one.

More money for a gun if you don't already have an easily concealable gun.

Providing you already have gun and holster, minimum of $260.

Easily pricing many low income people out of the right to carry.

That's an objective of the Antis IMO.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

 

[shuvelrider]

Simply a money maker since Illinois is a broke d*ck state, the coffers are empty. So raise taxes at the gas pumps, real estate/property, stringent cost on conceal carry. Trying to raise your vehicle registration by 400%, figuring a way to charge residents for the mileage they drive. there has been an exodus of 30,000-45,000 residents per year for the past five. People are tired of the criminal mindset of Chicago politics running that state into the ground. I grew up Illinois, so glad I left in 2001.

 

[Onward Allusion]

What you guys are all ignoring is how much money it costs already in Illinois to get a carry permit.

I think the purpose of the high entrance fee is to keep the poor from walking around with guns to defend themselves. I know, tin-foil hat...but it sure seems that way.