IL Residents: CCW not likely....

[SShooterZ]

Spoke to my Dad tonight and he said that there was so much confusion surrounding the law (state vs. federal) that many of the retirees weren't bothering to get certified/licensed and therefore are unable to obtain legal permission to CCW.

He said he will ask his buddy the next time he sees him to see what the hold-up was.

 

[No_Brakes23]

even with all of the training police undergo

lol

This again. That sort of logic makes it sound as though the author would be copasetic with giving carry permits to folks who willing to get IL POST training in use of force and firearms handling. I bet that's not the case, though.

 

[Edmond]

In reality, I think the person who CCW might even have more specific training than an average LEO in the use of firearms and firearm related subjects.

 

[No_Brakes23]

In reality, I think the person who CCW might even have more specific training than an average LEO in the use of firearms and firearm related subjects.

I'd like that to be true, but not all states require training for a carry permit.

 

[Jeff White]

Edmund said;

In reality, I think the person who CCW might even have more specific training than an average LEO in the use of firearms and firearm related subjects.

Are you basing your theory on the fact that a lot of police officers aren't into guns as a hobby? There are couple problems with that theory.

1st: There is a big difference between being a hobby shooter and knowing how to stand there and shoot a target and being a defensive shooter. Knowing the twist rate of the barrel in your handgun does not make you a gunfighter.

2d: POST firearms training is averaging 40 hours and 600+ rounds nationwide. I don't know of any state that requires that much to get a CCW permit. POST training is far from being ideal but it's head and shoulders above any requirement for CCW I know of. Officers come out of the academy with a fairly decent skill set. The problem is sustainment training is severely deficient or in many cases non existant. Those skills deteriorate quickly. I've heard of studies that say marksmanship and weapons handling need to be trained as frequently as every 8 days to keep them sharp. Few people police, military or civilian train that often. I'm not talking about going to the range and plinking, I'm talking about training.

Jeff

 

[Deanimator]

Are you basing your theory on the fact that a lot of police officers aren't into guns as a hobby? There are couple problems with that theory.

1st: There is a big difference between being a hobby shooter and knowing how to stand there and shoot a target and being a defensive shooter. Knowing the twist rate of the barrel in your handgun does not make you a gunfighter.

2d: POST firearms training is averaging 40 hours and 600+ rounds nationwide. I don't know of any state that requires that much to get a CCW permit. POST training is far from being ideal but it's head and shoulders above any requirement for CCW I know of. Officers come out of the academy with a fairly decent skill set. The problem is sustainment training is severely deficient or in many cases non existant. Those skills deteriorate quickly. I've heard of studies that say marksmanship and weapons handling need to be trained as frequently as every 8 days to keep them sharp. Few people police, military or civilian train that often. I'm not talking about going to the range and plinking, I'm talking about training.

Every CCW holder I know here in Ohio, save one, is a competitive pistol shooter. Some compete in rifle and trap as well.

I've known some cops who were both knowledgeable and safe around firearms. One of them was a regional sniper with whom I shot service rifle matches. They were in the minority.

Many times when I hear a cop talk about guns, he's at best misinformed. 99.9% of the time when I hear a cop talk about guns or self-defense in the newspapers, or on TV or radio, they're either misinformed or attempting TO misinform. My favorite is when they talk about "unregistered" guns found in a jurisdiction which does NOT require registration. I once called one of those departments to ask if registration was required after such a story hit the TV. They didn't apparently care for me asking questions like, "If registration isn't required in your town, with whom do you register?"

 

[isp2605]

Spoke to my Dad tonight and he said that there was so much confusion surrounding the law (state vs. federal) that many of the retirees weren't bothering to get certified/licensed and therefore are unable to obtain legal permission to CCW.

Ask him where this "confusion" is. There is no state v federal. IL was one of the first states to get the statewide program fully implemented. There have been a few other states that have patterned their program after IL's. There are thousands of retired cops in IL who have been certified to CCW. It's a very simple process. If they haven't it's mostly likely because they don't want to. Have them go to www.rpocc.com. The process is explained and all the forms can be downloaded.

 

[Edmond]

To many cops, the gun is just a tool of the job. They don't look at it in any special way and they sure don't train with it much beyond what is required. I have many cop friends and most of them say that they shoot only when it's time for re-qualification.

But when you talk about people who CCW, they seem to have more training. You have guys who participate in competitive shooting, guys who take classes from the big gun schools, guys who view their guns as something to protect themselves and their loved ones and not only as a tool.

Are there LEO's that have extensive training? Of course there are but it seems like they are the exception rather than the rule. And I'll bet there are departments where they don't even want their guys to train beyond what the department gives them.

 

[Jeff White]

Edmund,
I have no way to back this up, because as far as I know, there are no statistics kept. I'm basing my opinion on how much the average CCW holder trains based on the ones I know personally, talks with CCW instructors from other states and the questions that are posted in the Strategies and Tactics Forum here and in the trraining forums of other gun boards.

A person with a CCW is most likely to take the minimum training required to get their permit and never train again. You can't confuse any competition with training to fight. When you compete and train, you are training to compete. There are plenty of people walking around with loaded weapons and CCW permits right now who haven't ever fired the weapon they are carrying today. There are plenty of people who aren't gun culture people who CCW.

Police training is woefully inadequate. But it is head and shoulders above what is required to get a CCW anywhere in the US. Unfortunately most gun culture people suffer from American Male Disease an infection of the brain where they believe they were born knowing everything there is to know about guns, gunfighting, hand to hand combat, driving and making love.

The gun schools do a nice business, but you know who they deal with? The same group of true students of the art. And a lot of those students happen to be soldiers and cops. If you're average CCW holder was as interested in training as you say, given the number of CCW holders out there, there would be a 300 year waiting list to get into Gunsite or Thunder Ranch. Clearly that's not the case.

In my experience cops don't train enough and most CCW holders don't train at all.

Jeff

 

[isp2605]

To tag onto Jeff's comments:
Too many believe when they go to the range, fire a few boxes of ammo, that is somehow training. It's not training in any way, shape, or form. All that does is make empty brass. But they come away from the range thinking they're a 21st century Wild Bill Hickok.

 

[Autolycus]

Ah but who cares what LEOs think about training requirments? Who cares what journalists think? Who cares what gun people think? Who cares what non-gun people think? I dont....

I care about what the Founding Fathers think. Do you really think that they required some sort of training? Most of it was commonsense and learning as you go. I am sure many of them learned to shoot at the hands of their family and not some authorized instructor.

 

[razorburn]

Where do you live? Have you ever lived in Chicago for an extended period of time? Chicago is like no other place I've ever been, both in terms of its endemic racism and its sheer ENTHUSIASM for corruption.

I've lived in rural areas in central Missouri and in the South at Ft. Benning and Ft. Knox. NEVER in all my time in those areas have I EVER seen racism that could hold a candle to what I saw growing up in Chicago. It's quite literally a "black and white" difference. It crosses all political boundaries. White Democrats hate Black Democrats who hate Jewish Democrats.

The perfect example is the relationship between Blacks and the Irish in Chicago. In the 19th century they were both despised and discriminated against. Instead of the obvious solution of banding together, they allowed divide and conquer tactics to be used against them, and they ended up in what was basically a razor fight over a dung heap. Chicago rules say you don't fight the guy who's oppressing you. Instead, you find somebody else whom YOU can oppress. It's very much like the Japanese, Korean POW camp guards and American POWs during WWII. WHATEVER you do, you don't want to be at the bottom, no matter WHAT you have to do to keep yourself from being there.

Want to understand Chicago? Look at Iraq. In both places it's not as important to make your own life better as it is to make somebody else's you don't like, worse.

I live in Seattle, and now out to Pullman for school. I've also been to San Francisco, Boston, and a few other major cities. I'm studying in a rural area now, and also been through rural Idaho and Montana and Wyoming. I've lived in 3 countries and speak 4 languages. I'm a citizen of 2. I'm also a minority, being asian. Born in Washington. Spent half my childhood reading field and stream. I fished a lot, but never knew how to get around hunting and nobody in my family had done it. I always wanted to. Went to check out books from the library on deer hunting although I knew I'd wouldn't be able to get out doing it, living in Seattle.
I had strangely conservative interests for a kid. I guess from the highly conservative influence of the hunting and fishing magazines. I wanted blued steel and walnut guns, traditional values, and I thought I wanted to live in that vaunted small town atmosphere where everybody knows everybody and neighbors were friends and all that. Then I actually came out to a small town when I was 18. It was like a slap in the face. So much for all that small town warmth. I guess that's only true if you're white. I never thought about my race before, but I realized I stuck out like a sore thumb here. People weren't friendly, most of them assuming I didn't speak english. Even after I spoke perfect english to them, I'd get treated with a stiltedness. From visibly making an effort trying not to notice our racial differences, a sort of unnatural awkwardness is inevitable. There were no natural, casual conversations. Occasionally, when I try to initiate conversation, some would ask me where I'm from. I'd answer "Seattle", and they'd have that half surprised look on their face, expecting me to answer some foreign country. "I'm of Chinese descent though" I'd offer. I felt like a spectacle out here. A couple even asked me if I ate dog. An older woman stood with her kid while I was out buying furniture. The kid started walking up to me and the woman grabbed him quickly. "Stay away from those Mexicans" she whispered to him. So ended those small town dreams.
Returning to Seattle for break was like a breath of fresh air. The first time I returned, I walked down a street on the way to get a haircut. "How's it going?". I turned around it was just some guy passing down the street. Wow. Someone speaking to me casually. This was something I hadn't experienced for a while. I was used to only speaking to other college students in Pullman, so a local speaking to me to casually was a surprise. When it turned out I couldn't get a haircut at that particular place and had to drive down a couple blocks, I went back to the parking garage. The Ethiopian guy selling parking tickets had already progressed past a few tickets, but if we could get another guy to come in we could give him my ticket and I could get my money back. We hung out for a while, just talking casually about the local clubs, girls, whatever, and trying to flag in another customer. Got one, and he gave me my money back, and he invited me to come hang out at the club event on the weekend. It was nice. I'd forgotten what it was like being able to make friends easily too.
I don't know if all cities are like this, or if all small towns are like that. But it's been my general experience after living in or visiting a number of cities and small towns, that there will be far more racism in a small town than a metropolis. I'd never even noticed racism before going into rural america, thinking the stuff on the news was just sensationalistic hype.

 

[ilbob]

Why such cognitive dissonence? One reason is the fact that except for the brief term of Mayor Harold Washington, the law, and particularly the Chicago PD have NEVER even PRETENDED to work in the interests of the average working Black person.

I think it is safe to say that the government of the city of Chicago including its corrupt police force have never even pretended to work in the interests of the average working person of any persuasion.

 

[ilbob]

Ah but who cares what LEOs think about training requirments? Who cares what journalists think? Who cares what gun people think? Who cares what non-gun people think? I dont....

I care about what the Founding Fathers think. Do you really think that they required some sort of training? Most of it was commonsense and learning as you go. I am sure many of them learned to shoot at the hands of their family and not some authorized instructor.

Amen.

I think it would be instructive to consider the "right" to carry in the same vein as the right to vote. The arguments against civilian carry are not far off from the Jim Crow laws prohibiting black people from voting. Can't have those illiterates voting. Can't have those untrained civilians carrying.

Remember one thing and you will understand a lot. Gun control is not about guns, it is about control. And those with power rarely give it up without a fight. Fortunately, in this country we can elect people to office who understand that and work to reduce the level of control government has over our every day lives. Or we can keep electing people who understand it, and use it against us.

 

[Deanimator]

I think it is safe to say that the government of the city of Chicago including its highly corrupt police force have NEVER even PRETENDED to work in the interests of the average working person of any persuasion.

That's not quite right.

Chicago society has always been highly stratified along racial lines. Non-"ethnic" Whites were at the top. In the 19th century, Blacks and the Irish were in a vicious fight for next up from the bottom. The Irish won that fight. Over time, the Irish rose from 2nd from the bottom up through the strata. It was ALWAYS the intent that Blacks should stay at the bottom. My grandmother was in Chicago for the race riot of 1919. A Black child washed up on a Whites only beach and was killed. Thereafter Whites attacked the Black community. Interestingly, the Chicago riots were just about the only ones in which Black and White casualities approached parity. One reason was that Black ex-doughboys raided the National Guard armories and fought back with '03 Springfields and machineguns. For recent examples, witness:

The '88(?) Democratic primary in Cook County. The regular Democratic organization ran a slate of candidates, some virulently hated in the Black community, Aurelia Pucinsky for example. They also did not provide voter "education" materials in the Black community as had been the custom. Blacks refused to vote for the machine candidates. Instead they picked random alternate Democrat candidates. The next morning, it was discovered that the Lyndon LaRouche faction had [with majority Black support in Cook County] won the Democrat nominations for Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General. Failing in its attempts to expel the LaRouche candidates, the Illinois Democratic Party temporarily dissolved itself.

The blizzard of '78(?) which cost Mayor Michael Bilandic his office. Not only were Black neighborhoods not plowed, and elevated trains instructed to bypass stops in Black neighborhoods (I saw it with my own eyes), but Bilandic refused to even concede that these things were even problems. Washington just somewhat reversed the polarity of the bias. Some Black people saw that as an improvement... but then "Chicago" magazine ran an article in the early '90s in which Black city council members were willing to entertain seriously the idea that Jewish doctors intentionally infect Black children with AIDS. As I've said, mindless prejudice is an equal opportunity pastime in Chicago.

White mayor, White people count. Black mayor, Black people count. At no point does EVERYBODY count.

 

[ilbob]

You must have been replying while I was editing.

I don't deny there is considerable racial animosity in Chicago.

However, I don't think those running Chicago's governmental bodies cares one whit about any average citizen - black, white, or brown.

Government and its armed minions are in place to protect the power of the politicians. They bestow a certain amount of largess on those who help them maintain that power. There is some spillover to others. It is enough to keep control.

It is interesting to note that white politicians use black and Hispanic fears of each other to maintain control over both blacks and Hispanics in Chicago.

<added>

The blizzard of '78(?) which cost Mayor Michael Bilandic his office. Not only were Black neighborhoods not plowed, and elevated trains instructed to bypass stops in Black neighborhoods (I saw it with my own eyes), but Blanc refused to even concede that these things were even problems.

I lived in Chicago then. It was not as simple as not plowing black neighborhoods or bypassing stops in black neighborhoods. Those things did happen, but they also happened in other areas of the city. The city was completely unprepared for such an event, and did not know how to respond. The better local political organizations did respond and generally they responded by getting their wards taken care of first. Once they got resources diverted to certain areas, it was not practical to try to move them elsewhere. It would have served no purpose to start in one area, and then run off elsewhere. Keep in mind back then, the aldermen had their own little fiefdoms going on. Most of them had dedicated city resources they had direct (if unofficial) control over.

There was also an enormous amount of city resources directed toward downtown to try to move enough snow to get the business sector back open. It was weeks before they could dump enough snow in the river to fully open down town. It was a deliberate decision on the part of city leaders to do that, even though they had to know it would cause them grief elsewhere. The people with the big money wanted downtown reopened ASAP and they got their wish.

 

[Deanimator]

However, I don't think those running Chicago's governmental bodies cares one whit about any average citizen - black, white, or brown.

Daley cares about those who write the biggest campaign donation checks, and who can be shaken down for the most money. In general, that's White people. He has to keep them happy or the money spigot gets shut off.

As far as the blizzard goes, look at who got services versus those who didn't. Those who did were those with money and influence. Those who didn't were those without. In Chicago, that's ALWAYS Black people, except when you have a Black mayor who's going to shaft White people, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, or whomever isn't immediately useful to him. I was one of those people standing on the 79th Street El platform watching trains go by. I almost got frostbite that day. I don't even remember if I ever even made it downtown. I don't think I did.

Ironically, it was an alliance of Blacks, Mexicans, and liberal Whites, especially Jews, who put Harold Washington into office. After Washington's death, the coalition fell apart, due in part to the despicable association of the Black acting mayor, with the "Jews inject Black children with AIDS" crowd. In fact, one of his aids was discovered to be selling audio cassettes proclaiming such swill. He also double crossed the Mexicans of Pilsen (where the Mexican food is probably better than in Mexico City) who turned on him.

I went to Quigley South Preparatory Seminary at 79th and Western. My class was a very diverse one and to a large extent, people got along racially. There was however a hardcore of Irish and Lithuanian kids who had a positively INCANDESCENT hatred of Black people, of the sort you tend to think of in connection with Slobodan Milosevic and Bosnia. They weren't just racists. They were AGGRESSIVE racists of the sort who join the neo-Nazi National Alliance. I'm sure a couple of them would have killed somebody if they thought they could get away with it. My two best friends were Irish and Lithuanian respectively, so I don't make any claim that ALL Whites in Chicago are racist, anymore than all Blacks are anti-Semites. However, both inclinations are more than strong enough to keep a stench in the air of Chicago. As a perversely funny aside, the places in Chicago where it was the most dangerous for a Black person to go when I was a kid, such as Marquette Park, appear to be all Black or Mexican now.

Chicago is what Chicago is, and it disgusts me. I want no part of it and don't take the perverse pride in it that others do. I go there once or twice a year to see my mother. When she dies, that'll be the end of my trips there, forever.