HB11 - Would eliminate renewal training for CHPs

[Tulse Luper]

I'll support this if a bill is introduced to eliminate the requirement that police officers have to re-qualify with their handguns every year.

.

A citizen carries a gun for self-defense. We don't sweep houses, we don't hold perps at gun point, we don't get calls to respond to armed robberies and home invasions, we don't use guns in coordination with others, we don't use them as part of a job, we don't get paid to carry, we are not directly in harms way, etc. ,etc., etc.......

 

[LACamper]

How about a test administered by LSP at any state police station (or DMV office?) to avoid taking a refresher? If you know the material how is sitting through several hours of similar lecture going to benefit anyone?
I wouldn't mind taking a more advanced class and getting credit for it though. But a rehash of what I already know is a waste of both my time and the instructors.

 

[Bayoupiper]

Because LEO gun handling skills are so good? "This is a Glock fotay. I am the only one in this room qualified to handle this gun. BANG! I'm alright."

And the CC permit holder's gun handling skills are....................





.

 

[Bayoupiper]

A citizen carries a gun for self-defense. We don't sweep houses, we don't hold perps at gun point, we don't get calls to respond to armed robberies and home invasions, we don't use guns in coordination with others, we don't use them as part of a job, we don't get paid to carry, we are not directly in harms way, etc. ,etc., etc.......

They don't?

You aren't?




.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

How about a test administered by LSP at any state police station (or DMV office?) to avoid taking a refresher? If you know the material how is sitting through several hours of similar lecture going to benefit anyone?
I wouldn't mind taking a more advanced class and getting credit for it though. But a rehash of what I already know is a waste of both my time and the instructors.

Who will certify all the troopers?
Who will cover their shifts while off the road?
That is not a part of their chartered mission statement.
How much will it cost?
Do you really want to sit at the DMV for a day to take a test rahter than discuss firearm laws and issues with other students and an instructor?
Who will pay for their salary and associated expenses?
Who is going to pay to track the scores?
Who is going to pay to create the test?

That is a good idea, but all of that costs money. The reality is that you should not be going over all the same things that you did 5 years ago. There will always be legal changes. There will always be new case law to discuss. There will be new carry techniques and gear. there is always new topics.
the problem is that many instructors just do an hour or two and call it a day for renewals....yeah, that is a waste of everyone's time. Most people have had very poor experiences with CHP instructors and becaue of that have a jaded and negative view of the training experience. Going to a quality instructor will open your eyes to what you do not know, or it will at least get you thinking about things outside just the trigger and the sights.

 

[Ben Segrest]

#1. While you think you may have a right to shoot them back, besides being wrong, it does not change the fact that your child has been shot.

#2. In the situation given, it is clearly an accident and you DO NOT have a right to shoot them back, as the person never was and still is not a criminal threat to you. WHat you are talking about is revenge and last time I checked, that is not mentioned anywhere in any statute as a justification for homicide.

#3. EIther you are letting your emotions speak for you, or you have a fundamental misconception about the law as it pertains to self-defense and could benefit from a refresher class.

If you are in that situation, how do you know it was an accident? YOU are assuming that the shooter does not appear to be a threat. I am assuming that the shooter does appear to be a threat. You have your imaginary version of what's going on in that situation and I have mine. In mine, all I know for sure is that shots have been fired in my direction, I may or may not know that my child is hit, and I have identified a person with a gun pointed at me. I am in fear for my life and the life of my child/children. How are you going to prove that I was/am not justified in shooting the gunman?

 

[Ben Segrest]

How is making sure that someone is capable and qualified a punishment?

Because it costs money. It's basically charging a fine in order to exercise a right.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

If you are in that situation, how do you know it was an accident? YOU are assuming that the shooter does not appear to be a threat. I am assuming that the shooter does appear to be a threat. You have your imaginary version of what's going on in that situation and I have mine. In mine, all I know for sure is that shots have been fired in my direction, I may or may not know that my child is hit, and I have identified a person with a gun pointed at me. I am in fear for my life and the life of my child/children. How are you going to prove that I was/am not justified in shooting the gunman?

OK, if you say so.

 

[Ben Segrest]

OK, if you say so.

I do

 

[sraacke]

Things have already been watered down so that you don't even have to fire a real gun when qualifying. You can use airsoft guns type simulations. That's crazy. You have people getting CHPs to carry who have never fired thier gun. I've seen it at every renewal I've sat through. I hate being one who supports mandatory training but I think the classes are a good idea.

 

[Bayoupiper]

Things have already been watered down so that you don't even have to fire a real gun when qualifying. You can use airsoft guns type simulations. That's crazy. You have people getting CHPs to carry who have never fired thier gun. I've seen it at every renewal I've sat through. I hate being one who supports mandatory training but I think the classes are a good idea.

Well said!





.

 

[DuckYou]

Additionally wouldn't this ultimately jeopardize our reciprocity among other states? Could it be viewed as a reduction in overall training?

Based on that, since we are travelers, Spec and I have been on the fence over this bill.

No, Many states do not require Re-Training.

 

[DuckYou]

I am amazed at the number of gun owners that so willing give up their rights and fall victim to the ideas of those who hate guns and want to ban them.

 

[Leadfoot]

I am amazed at the number of gun owners that so willing give up their rights and fall victim to the ideas of those who hate guns and want to ban them.

I do not see how wanting MORE people to be EDUCATED in firearm safety, the law, and common sense is falling victim to anyone's anti 2nd amendment agenda.

Ben:

Ok, I get your point about it being basically a fine. If the cost of the class and or permit were more along the lines of a driver's license, would you still feel the same?

 

[honestlou]

If you are in that situation, how do you know it was an accident? YOU are assuming that the shooter does not appear to be a threat. I am assuming that the shooter does appear to be a threat. You have your imaginary version of what's going on in that situation and I have mine. In mine, all I know for sure is that shots have been fired in my direction, I may or may not know that my child is hit, and I have identified a person with a gun pointed at me. I am in fear for my life and the life of my child/children. How are you going to prove that I was/am not justified in shooting the gunman?

Well, the original statement was this: Imagine if every retard did Carry. You know the type that would whip it out at the mall to show his friends, then pulls the trigger on accident shooting your 4 year old in the face.

So it is quite clear that the shooting was accidental, and your attempt to change the hypothetical to cover your extremely ignorant statement is quite obvious. In addition, although you are arguing against having to take a renewal class, by your statements you
are doing a great job of making the case in favor of more required instruction.

(Brannon, you must be taking your chill pills)

Moving on, I have seen a few references to a 4 hour renewal, but I don't think that there is a time mandated for renewal training; at least I know in the past it wasn't, and if it's changed I can't find it tonight. So, I think instructors have much more discretion in the time required for renewals. The legislation does mandate the basics be covered, but I don't think it would be too difficult to structure an 'advanced' class for renewals, where you could cover any legal changes, and move on to some additional material.

I had already considered teaching a 'scenario' based class, which I can promise would be beneficial.

And the most compelling reason to require renewal training: it is always better to be educated than ignorant!

 

[flamatrix99]

I just hate wasting a day sitting through a class.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Well, the original statement was this: Imagine if every retard did Carry. You know the type that would whip it out at the mall to show his friends, then pulls the trigger on accident shooting your 4 year old in the face.

So it is quite clear that the shooting was accidental, and your attempt to change the hypothetical to cover your extremely ignorant statement is quite obvious. In addition, although you are arguing against having to take a renewal class, by your statements you
are doing a great job of making the case in favor of more required instruction.

(Brannon, you must be taking your chill pills)

Moving on, I have seen a few references to a 4 hour renewal, but I don't think that there is a time mandated for renewal training; at least I know in the past it wasn't, and if it's changed I can't find it tonight. So, I think instructors have much more discretion in the time required for renewals. The legislation does mandate the basics be covered, but I don't think it would be too difficult to structure an 'advanced' class for renewals, where you could cover any legal changes, and move on to some additional material.

I had already considered teaching a 'scenario' based class, which I can promise would be beneficial.

And the most compelling reason to require renewal training: it is always better to be educated than ignorant!

Thanks for noticing Lou.

In the face of such an ignorant post and obvious crawfishing, i decided to let the post speak for itself. Enjoy it...you know it doesn't happen often.


Your correct, there is no time assigned to the renewal class, but there is a set of topics. The topics are pretty much identical to those of the initial class without the state mandated allotments of time for each subject.

IMO, having someone come in for an hour just so you can say your class is short and then take their money for a certificate is not only a waste of their time, but is also not good business and more importantly is a failed opportunity to do the intended thing and actually teach them something.

I say four hours, because that gives me time to have them sit through my legal portion if they are joining an initial class in process while also being able to cover the other required topics as a refresher. i am not going to go over "this is the trigger..." with anyone renewing, but we will cover very quickly the state required topics no matter how mundane.

I see that the person is paying me for a service, so it is my model to provide more service than they expect to get. it has not let me down yet. I have had guys who have been through 3-5 renewals, who i made sit through my whole class for my renewal, and they have left saying they learned more than all their other classes combined.

I think that is not as much because Iam so knowledgeable about the subject, but moreso because I take the responsibility seriously and exceed the standards set forth by the state. I make it very clear tat my class is not some "Hi, watch these videos and in a few hours, you can head home." kind of class. That would be illegal and unethical in my opinion.

I also realize that with every day that passes, the real probability that one of my students will be involved in an incident increases. i am concerned with two things primarily...

1. I have given them the foundation to avoid or win, whichever is most appropriate.

2. I have provided myself with the peace of mind to stand in court and testify that they were taught above the state mandated course and that knowledge was founded on solid industry recognized principles and techniques.

 

[robbynola]

I'm mixed on this one. In a perfect world, I'm all for permit free CC, i.e. Arizona. At the same time, I know this is not a perfect world and there are a lot of herp derps who could benefit, at the very least, from an instructor teaching them some basic safety lessons before they start carrying. These same herp derps failed the fourth grade a few times, so a refresher is in order to prevent them from hurting themselves and others. Sure, most folks on this board gain little to nothing from the mandatory refresher course, let alone the initial course, but I'm happy thinking that the course may have prevented a few folks from negligently shooting themselves or others.

My Libertatian side thinks that the folks who would have benefited from the training, yet weren't required to go through it, and were still too dumb to google the firearms safety rules will be doing us all a favor by accidentaly shooting themselves. The problem is that they could just as easily accidentaly shoot you an yours.

This bill is great and terrible all at the same time.

 

[Bearco]

Things have already been watered down so that you don't even have to fire a real gun when qualifying. You can use airsoft guns type simulations. That's crazy. You have people getting CHPs to carry who have never fired thier gun. I've seen it at every renewal I've sat through. I hate being one who supports mandatory training but I think the classes are a good idea.

Airsoft guns are not allowed, but marking projectile (Simunition) guns are. But, I see what you are saying.

 

[swamper]

Something has been reverberating in my noggin since reading the posts. That something is "well-regulated." Training is a responsibility. Sadly, we've (those of us who have no military/law enforcement background) been far removed from this training as regular citizens. As for the law mentioned in the OP, I'm with many of the others. Part of me likes the bill, but the other part sees the need for the training.

"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year."

Holy chit them guys was smart!