Reality Check

[Seeed]

Also I find it laughable anyone thinking being restricted or having to pay hundreds of dollars to carry a firearm makes you safer or more proficient than someone who doesn't in say Tennessee or Texas I challenge you to go to national competition and shoot against them and see.

who's saying that?

Comparing people that compete, that are trained by that very nature, to people that don't in a free state or not isn't a reasonable debate whatsoever.

And your point about "paying to carry a firearm" isn't exactly all that's happening here is it for CCW? You're not paying for that, you're also satisfying a TRAINING requirement so you become hopefully an informed and more responsible person as much as possible, within some level of reason.

If there's 100 guys that can just buy a firearm and carry vs 100 that had to pay a few hundred bucks and get some education/ training, and I'm in public? with my kid, or my family, or even us having a beer? Who would I want making the decisions to engage some nut next to me? Not the guy that thinks he's john wick.

 

[Mil-Dot]

who's saying that?

Comparing people that compete, that are trained by that very nature, to people that don't in a free state or not isn't a reasonable debate whatsoever.

And your point about "paying to carry a firearm" isn't exactly all that's happening here is it for CCW? You're not paying for that, you're also satisfying a TRAINING requirement so you become hopefully an informed and more responsible person as much as possible, within some level of reason.

If there's 100 guys that can just buy a firearm and carry vs 100 that had to pay a few hundred bucks and get some education/ training, and I'm in public? with my kid, or my family, or even us having a beer? Who would I want making the decisions to engage some nut next to me? Not the guy that thinks he's john wick.

I think you overestimate what you get for your $ vs what ppl in other counties and other states get for less or for free. You can get the same "Information" or knowledge that you pay for online for free and as for having to pay for it every 2 years that information/ knowledge doesn't change. Once you know that information you know it and it is waste of time and money to have to listen to the same over again in 2 years

As for the "training" well I get better training going to the range by myself or running my ccw rig in competition than I have in any ccw class.

Again you assume those 100 ppl you mention that dont have to pay hundreds of dollars dont do anything on their own.

That is my whole point, the speculation an assumptions are baseless that ppl in free states dont train on their own or do any reading on their state laws. As I have stated I know plenty of ppl who live in free states that carry and are very well Informed on their laws for safe conduct while armed and are competent shooters in their own right and dont have to pay hundreds every 2 years to be able to do.

I will take it 1 step further bc I see it during renewal. Why are their so many ppl who are taking qualification who cant shoot for here in CA? It is contradictory to everything you say. Same ppl paying hundreds to be able to carry and their target looks like F-ing Swiss cheese. I dont want those ppl near me even on the firing line let alone in public if hit the fan.

At the very end of the day like I said gun owners should be responsible and put their practice time in. I still do not think I should have to pay extra to do it. Nor do I think ppl in san Jose should have to pay 1k dollars for the same exact thing we pay 150 for here in OC.

 

[drinktothat421]

IN Re: the attempted analog of driving v. firearms competency.

DRIVING TRAINING/FAMILIARIZATION;
From birth, virtually everyone borne in the U.S. is subjected to automotive travel of some sort. They see cars; they are carried in cars; they view cars for sale on TV; their parents drive cars; as youngsters, they talk about cars; they build model cars; they buy Hot Wheels; they take Driver Training; they get Learner’s Permits; they get a restricted license; they get an unrestricted license. They are adults trained to accept; understand; and welcome the automobile into their lives.

FIREARMS TRAINING/FAMILIARIZATION:
Birth…..; Call of Duty; …….

Questions?

First i get its not a 1-1 comparison(just something skilled based the gov has some say in) You never had nerf or cap guns? So your saying that because you see cars in person and on tv and ride in cars you know how to operated and drive or even stick? Where has in cod or movies you literally see how the gun is reloaded and funtion? So thats the same learning curve. See it and i can repeat it.

 

[JDilla]

The absolute horror I experienced on Qual Day...

- One didn't know they had to rack the slide to chamber a round.

- One brought a full-size 92fs, another a DEagle, neither with a holster, both with only one magazine brought to the range, and neither with knowledge of their tool or any idea why the instructor was harping on them for their single choice of gun to roster.

- One brought the wrong ammo because he thought that "... all .357 rounds were the same, right?" (Needed .357 Mag, brought .357 Sig. I couldn't believe it either.)

- The guy standing next to me who had to be told by the RSO 3 SEPARATE TIMES to keep his GD finger off the trigger until he was down range and ready to fire. THREE TIMES until he was told that he would be failed if he did it again!

- Flagging. Every. Damn. Group.

- Utter inability to follow even the most simple of directions by 3/4 of the class at the range was absolutely staggering.

- One who admitted, openly, after a series of misfires and malfunctions, that he had only just purchased the gun when he applied for his License, and had just pulled it out of the box the night before Qualifying. No range time with it. Not a single round run through it. Had no idea how it worked, how to properly clear it, no tap rack bang, nothin. Yes. It was his first gun. No, he was not the only person firing their gun for the first time that day.


The worst part, all were given passes save for the last guy, who was told to come back for a redo the next week once he gets his gear figured out. The only ones that failed were the ones that couldn't hit the target, and there were more of those folks than there should have been.

At the end of the day, from my POV, I feel like a lot of this is a problem with (or rather, for) the Course Instructors. I get that it isn't their job to be judge and jury for the people who take their class. They are simply there to inform and provide a service for completion of a license requirement. I also totally understand wanting to maintain a reputation that they aren't hardasses and their classes are easy and straightforward; as well as their hesitation to be barriers for entry to people who are just trying to exercise their 2A Rights. I totally get it and that's a rough situation to be in. But their willingness to let go and overlook SERIOUS problems and obvious signs that a person has absolutely no business handling, let alone carrying a gun, and passing them all in the name of reputation or not willing or wanting to be a gatekeeper is going to get innocent people hurt or killed. The frustration I saw on my instructor's face at the end of the course and the speech he gave about how everybody in that class needed to do some serious reflection on whether or not they should be carrying a gun, and begged the class to take further training or at least watch a damned YouTube video and head to the range one in a while, yet his willingness to pass almost everyone worried me BIG TIME. Needless to say he was shaking his head and saying "Jesus Christ" more times than I can remember. These Instructors have the ability, and I would argue the responsibility, to say "No, I'm sorry, but I don't feel you have demonstrated that you can safely carry this in public because of these reasons..." and they choose not to.

At the end of the day I like to think that these folks will probably just leave their gun in the safe or lockbox (which they probably don't have) and won't really bother to carry it due to the hassle and burdens involved with carrying in this state, but that's likely not the case. Bruen was both one of the best and one of the worst decisions ever because it allows good, responsible gun owners the chance to protect themselves in public, but is also letting the idiots who aren't that do the same. I try not to gatekeep either, but there really needs to be some kind of basic requisite firearm-specific training or something. If you're willing and wanting to carry, you should absolutely be willing and wanting to learn about what you're carrying as well. You'd figure basic responsibility and common sense would be part of "Good Moral Character", but I guess not.

 

[ikeo1]

The absolute horror I experienced on Qual Day...

- One didn't know they had to rack the slide to chamber a round.

- One brought a full-size 92fs, another a DEagle, neither with a holster, both with only one magazine brought to the range, and neither with knowledge of their tool or any idea why the instructor was harping on them for their single choice of gun to roster.

- One brought the wrong ammo because he thought that "... all .357 rounds were the same, right?" (Needed .357 Mag, brought .357 Sig. I couldn't believe it either.)

- The guy standing next to me who had to be told by the RSO 3 SEPARATE TIMES to keep his GD finger off the trigger until he was down range and ready to fire. THREE TIMES until he was told that he would be failed if he did it again!

- Flagging. Every. Damn. Group.

- Utter inability to follow even the most simple of directions by 3/4 of the class at the range was absolutely staggering.

- One who admitted, openly, after a series of misfires and malfunctions, that he had only just purchased the gun when he applied for his License, and had just pulled it out of the box the night before Qualifying. No range time with it. Not a single round run through it. Had no idea how it worked, how to properly clear it, no rack tap bang, nothin. Yes. It was his first gun. No, he was not the only person firing their gun for the first time that day.


The worst part, all were given passes save for the last guy, who was told to come back for a redo the next week once he gets his gear figured out. The only ones that failed were the ones that couldn't hit the target, and there were more of those folks than there should have been.

At the end of the day, from my POV, I feel like a lot of this is a problem with (or rather, for) the Course Instructors. I get that it isn't their job to be judge and jury for the people who take their class. They are simply there to inform and provide a service for completion oof a license requirement. I also totally understand wanting to maintain a reputation that they aren't hardasses and their classes are easy and straightforward; as well as their hesitation to be barriers for entry to people who are just trying to exercise their 2A Rights. I totally get it and that's a rough situation to be in. But their willingness to let go and overlook SERIOUS problems and obvious signs that a person has absolutely no business handling, let alone carrying a gun, and passing them all in the name of reputation or not willing or wanting to be a gatekeeper is going to get innocent people hurt or killed. The frustration I saw on my instructor's face at the end of the course and the speech he gave about how everybody in that class needed to do some serious reflection on whether or not they should be carrying a gun, and begged the class to take further training or at least watch a damned YouTube video and head to the range one in a while, yet his willingness to pass almost everyone worried me BIG TIME. Needless to say he was shaking his head and saying "Jesus Christ" more times than I can remember. These Instructors have the ability, and I would argue the responsibility, to say "No, I'm sorry, but I don't feel you have demonstrated that you can safely carry this in public because of these reasons..." and they choose not to.

At the end of the day I like to think that these folks will probably just leave their gun in the safe or lockbox (which they probably don't have) and won't really bother to carry it due to the hassle and burdens involved with carrying in this state, but that's likely not the case. Bruen was both one of the best and one of the worst decisions ever because it allows good, responsible gun owners the chance to protect themselves in public, but is also letting the idiots who aren't that do the same. I try not to gatekeep either, but there really needs to be some kind of basic requisite firearm-specific training or something. If you're willing and wanting to carry, you should absolutely be willing and wanting to learn about what you're carrying as well. You'd figure basic responsibility and common sense would be part of "Good Moral Character", but I guess not.

This is actually the reality, I see all the time... Everyone wants a gun but doesn't want to get training because it is expensive at first to learn the basics. This is one of the reasons we started the site so that there was a resource where people could come and we could point them to classes and information.

I do feel for CCW instructors though, they see this kinda thing all the time from all kinds of people. For many people its the first time they've ever held or fired their firearm.

 

[Dvrjon]

First i get its not a 1-1 comparison(just something skilled based the gov has some say in) You never had nerf or cap guns? So your saying that because you see cars in person and on tv and ride in cars you know how to operated and drive or even stick? Where has in cod or movies you literally see how the gun is reloaded and funtion? So thats the same learning curve. See it and i can repeat it.

The point you missed is the open socialization, familiarization and acceptance of vehicles to the populace over a long period of time. There is nothing of that scale for firearms.

And if you're suggesting that having a nerf or cap gun constitutes a similar level of familiarization and acceptance of firearms within the community you're either confused or wrong.

 

[drinktothat421]

using nerf gun/bb gun is closer to gun training then being a passenger is “learning” how to drive.

 

[Dvrjon]

using nerf gun/bb gun is closer to gun training then being a passenger is “learning” how to drive.

I explained it to you. I can’t understand it for you.

Best.

 

[treelogger]

Everyone wants a gun but doesn't want to get training because it is expensive at first to learn the basics.

Absolutely. I've seen this so many times with friends and neighbors: A gun is cheap, about $300-$600, add about $100 in paperwork and fees, and one box of ammo, and people think they're set for life and safe from all threats. Fortunately, sometimes they come talk BEFORE buying the gun.

So instead I invite them to come to the range with me, I'll bring guns and ammo, and even lend them eyes and ears. Typically, their second shot goes into the ground, because after the first one they flinch so badly. Fortunately, after another 100 or 200 rounds, they "get it", and are on paper. And know more or less how to handle the gun safely. Many people think this is frustrating, because their idea (from watching movies?) is that guns are like a magic wand in Harry Potter: You wave it in the general direction of the attacker at 50 yards, and it makes a hole exactly where you want it to. The reality is: after 100 rounds, they are lucky to get into the A zone at 7 yards 5 times out of 6. And if you explain the Tueller drill to them, they get sad. At 50 yards, I need a lot of luck to get into the A zone myself, and a beginner has no chance.

But wait, it gets worse. Then they ask how much it would cost to go practice, and I add it up: Range rental fee $20 for an hour (welcome to the Bay Area), 50 round box of ammo $15 to $20, so a range trip is about $50 to $100. You should go practice once a month, so within half a year the cost of the gun has doubled.