Was Your CCW Class Full of Inaccurate Shooters?

[RS14]

I once rode my motorcycle at (clock speed) of 210 mph on a German autobahn, which is as fast as Formula 1 cars go, and passed 2 police cars while doing it too. They weren't too concerned. It was a good road though, I imagine nothing like Afghanistan, but then I also doubt that the cars are capable of that speed.

You're right on the ball about the road being different. It is a windy, two-lane highway (undivided) with a deep gorge off to one side. Many of the accidents seem to be caused by people trying to pass slow-moving trucks.

That's not what I said (since I made the original comment), I said driving has mandatory training, and yet road traffic accidents are the largest single cause of accidental death in the US. Showing if nothing else that mandatory training for driving has not necessarily been a glowing success, we don't know (we can all have an opinion, but it will be purely anecdotal) how bad or better accident rates would be if there was no mandatory training, so it's moot. If it were then I'd expect that newly licensed drivers would have the lowest insurance rates, since they have yet to learn any bad habits, this is not the case in my experience.

It is plausible, however, that the accident rate would be much higher if no training was required. In this case, mandatory training is a success, in that it has reduced the accident rate. It hasn't necessarily been a success, no, but it hasn't necessarily been a failure either. Without data on the accident rate if training were not required, we can't say. And in the absence of any conclusion here, we can't really use it to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of CCW training.

I also disagree with your conclusions based on insurance rates. Would you believe that an experienced shooter is less accurate than an inexperienced shooter straight out of a class? As with driving, the experienced shooter has had more time to pick up bad habits.

One other point while driving may be an unenumerated right under the 9th, owning firearms is enumerated, and not open to interpretation. Thus requiring mandatory training is an infringement of that right. Responsible people understand that the drawbacks of rights, are the responsibilities that come along with those rights. Those responsibilities with firearms are if you use your firearm in self defense do not hit any non-targets. There are laws that enforce penalties if you fail to live up to these responsibilities.

Yes, I don't disagree with you here. That's because this is a much better argument.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yes. Me.

We all have to start somewhere.

 

[jfrey]

Four of my close relatives, my wife included, wanted to get their CHL so this is the way I handled it. I took all of them to a private range three times before they went to the class. My wife and father-in-law had shot before. My brother-in-law I didn't know too much about when it came to shooting a pistol. My sister-in-law had never shot one and was the most energetic student. She listened and learned a lot. I had them all burn 150 or so rounds in the three sessions. I burn more than that myself in a single weekend shoot.

They all then took the class and passed with flying colors. My wife almost aced the shooting part with her Hi-Power. The rest did well. The problem I have now is getting them to practice after they passed the test. I have seen a lot of people shoot enough to pass the course and then quit until they have to take it again 5 years later. I practice almost every weekend and I personally think the Texas qualification score is way too easy, but no one asked me when they made up the test.

The times I have taken the requalification test, most everyone was a descent shot but I have heard of folks failing the test mainly because of bad gun handling. The idea of the range test is to see if you can shoot, not teach you how.

 

[lechiffre]

Was Your CCW Class Full of Inaccurate Shooters?

nope, just me baby.

 

[M2 Carbine]

I personally think the Texas qualification score is way too easy, but no one asked me when they made up the test.

I agree.

For the heck of it I tried it with my eyes closed. I did it "by the numbers" except I had my eyes closed and didn't shoot 15 yards, so I forfeited 50 points. I still passed and that was with the old target. If I had used the new target the score would have been higher.

IMO, if you can pass with your eyes closed the qualification is too easy.

 

[jpwilly]

Most could shoot just fine but they did take some extra time for one little old lady who hadn't ever shot a handgun. She finally was able to hit the man size target 7yards away. You could have spit on the stupid target hitting it with a point and shoot weapon isn't rocket science.

I think the test should have been arranged so that if you missed you couldn't get your license...not the other way around.

 

[mrnkc130]

Was Your CCW Class Full of Inaccurate Shooters?

Yes, it was actually quite comical...or scary...im not sure which...

There was one lady there who was missing the target at 3 yards with a full size pistol! She would have done better with a pointy stick.

 

[mcdonl]

To the OP's original question....

Not really. But, this club provides a 2 Day CCW class, with one full day at the range. And this is after going through sight picture, a lot of handling drills, etc...

Then, club members mentor the students so their is a one to one ratio of student and instructors. Everyone did fine. Good enough for SD shooting.... *IF* they maintain after the class was over.

Now, a funny story... a couple of years ago at an IDPA 101 class, a lady freaked... couldn't do it... lol... sold her gun right there to another member...

 

[Double Naught Spy]

My instructor was a retired Army E7 CoE vet. The only thing that threw me was that he had a loaded Jennings .22 in his back pocket that he took out and showed us. he told the class that anyone that had bought a shiny expensive new gun just for CC was wasting thier time and money and should leave.

"If it goes bang it doesn't matter how cheap it is"

Yeah, not all of the instructors really should be instructors.

I personally think the Texas qualification score is way too easy, but no one asked me when they made up the test.

Undoubtedly, there were a couple of goals in the forumulation of the Texas CHL shooting test. First, there had to be a test to satisfy anti-gun and fence-sitter legislators to show that there is a minimal level of competence required. Note that the written test isn't that hard either. Second, they did not want the test to actually exclude folks unless they were just crazy bad shooters, incompetent - hence being able to pass without even shooting the 15 yard portion of the test (as M2 Carbine noted). So in this regard, the test is necessary, but the reasoning for the test isn't so much for shooter competence as it was to placate those who would have otherwise voted down the bill for CHL in Texas.

 

[Jonah71]

Only inaccurate shooter in class was me with my Taurus .22mag 2" UL. I'm much better now after about 10,000 rounds. A whole lot of years and one eye had passed since I last took shooting seriously.

 

[Ronsch]

No. Everyone passed the shooting portion. Some did not pass the written test.

 

[GRIZ22]

The idea of mandatory training was then discussed, but wasn't really fleshed out. I do not think it would make people better shooters, as it doesn't seem to make police better.

Yes there are LEOs that are bad shooters but not the vast majority as you seem to convey. This would also be dependent on what agency you are talking about.
Yes there are non LE shooters who shoot better than some LEOs.

my class of 25 consisted of about 21 out of the group that were "pie plate accurate" within 10 yards.

"Pie Plate Accuracy" with a handgun at 10 yards would not get you qualified on many police qualification courses.

There is a big difference between training with Bubba down at the gravel pit and taking all the courses at Gunsite or LFI. Everything else lies somewhere in between. To dismiss all types of training "it doesn't seem to make police any better" doesn't seem to be clear thinking.

I'm not a fan of mandatory training but hope people would be more responsible.

 

[JellyJar]

Well.......

.....I was there

 

[CoRoMo]

Mandatory shooting/qualifying isn't beset upon us in Colorado, so many classes don't do it. Mine was this way.
Therefore, I'd say, no; it was not full of inaccurate shooters.

 

[Baba Louie]

During my 1st CCW class back in '95 we were told that the state minimums were just that, minimums. Should we ever actually need to, you know, shoot someone in a SD situation, during the civil "Wrongful Death" legal action that is sure to follow, the fact would probably be brought up again and again (minimum scores = inadequate training), so it might behoove us (in class) to consider taking at least one more course or two and to keep current, just in case our attorney needed to show, in court, that we were not "inadequate", but were in fact, well trained w/ certs to show, etc.

While not "Mandatory" it certainly seems like a wise course of action a prudent student would take, what with all that responsibility riding on ones hip in todays litigious society.

Full of inaccurate shooters? A couple. Worse than that, were the gung ho "shoot 'em all and let god sort em out" crowd.

 

[Jonah71]

The basic course helped me to see that my shooting skills had greatly deteriorated and I needed lots of practice before I started carrying. I hadn't realized how much the loss of an eye and lack of range time had taken their toll. It took a lot of rounds to regain the accuracy and confidence needed to carry.

 

[bababooey32]

My CCW class WAS full of poor shots. It is a little scary that someone would consider taking oin such responsibility without even rudimentary skills. I do NOT believe shooting skills should be a requirement, but I would hope that people who want to carry would want to be proficient.

The shooting test in TX is pretty simple. I and an LEO in my class shot perfect 250 scores. I had been shooting for about 6 months prior to taking the course, with no real fireamrs experience prior. In that time I had taken an intro class and went to the range regularly so as not to embarass myself at the CHL class.

One person could barely operate their firearm. The others got most/all shots on paper. Everyone passed.

The scariest was the poor level of shooting from 3 yards!!