Posted on 05/15/2019 5:10:35 AM PDT by w1n1
When you think of qualification as it applies to firearms it normally means that there is some sort of score involved, as well as time limits and conditions. The conditions, number of shots sequence etc are very defined and spelled out in detail.
For example, 25 years ago when I was qualifying for my job as a military police officer, we had to do such things as wait for the buzzer then draw and fire two shots in six seconds sort of thing. There were reloads thrown in and even a barricade to work around.
We still knew exactly what was expected, exactly how to do it and how many hits we needed to pass. For an entire week of my Academy we practiced nothing but how to pass the test to be qualified. At the end I received a passing score
yay, I passed the qualification, but I was still in no way or form ready to get into a gunfight.
This kind of "qualification" is not limited to just military police officers. Police, corrections, private security, it is all based on a passable standard
for the masses. How do you get EVERYONE through qualification?
you make it easy!
If a qualification standard is set too high then you limit the amount of people capable of doing the job. There is an age old mantra in the gun world when it comes to training vs qualification:
"Institutionalized inertia hampers progress (Wilson, 2018)" Institutionalized inertia refers to the fact that organizations are very slow to change how they do things. Logic being that if it worked yesterday, then why wont it work tomorrow?
Think of qualification as a pipeline where untrained recruits go into the pipe and a qualified gun carrier exits. Failures in the standard slow down the entire process with re-shoots and remedial training. Now think of the qualification standard for a Florida Concealed Weapons or Firearms License. It is simply demonstrate safety and proficiency. My own qualification years ago was a 22 lr round fired into a bucket of water without hurting myself or anyone else. Ask yourself the question, how comfortable do you actually feel standing next to someone on the range that the only proof of competency that qualified them to carry a firearm, was firing one round into a bucket of water? Read the rest of training vs qualifications.
No qualifications in the 2nd amendment. Shall not be infringed means just that.
BTW my marine/nypd dad trained me for safety and accuracy. I also became a range officer for Cowboy Action Shooting. Safety is paramount when we have a match. But shall not be infringed means just that.
“Ask yourself the question, how comfortable do you actually feel standing next to someone on the range that the only proof of competency that qualified them to carry a firearm, was firing one round into a bucket of water?”
I’m comfortable. And in my state (so far) you don’t need to take any test or training to carry a weapon. (What part of ‘shall not be infringed” isn’t clear?)
Of course at a range there is usually somebody watching to keep the idiots in line. Although I have no problem doing so as well with helpful hints.
I do wonder about some of the guys at the gravel pits though. I solve that by trying to get there early and set up at the farthest distance possible.
The last time, the other guys were pretty trusting. “We’re going to go down range, but way over to the right. Okay?”
I moved our gear around a bit to make sure we wouldn’t ever be pointing in their direction, but I still wasn’t real comfortable with it.
Due to the range hot/cold and unpacking/handling of firearms rules at the range I go to I always get a few minutes to sit back and watch/evaluate the basic skills and safety awareness of shooters on the line. The RSOs at the range are even better at it than me, and very attentive and vocal. ;-)
The person I'm really uncomfortable with is the person who did the bare minimum to get their concealed carry permit and who is standing behind me in the checkout line, or pumping gas at the next pump - basically the person carrying who hasn't fired/cleaned/trained-with their firearm in months. I would far rather be around someone working on improving/maintaining their skills, than someone who doesn't recognize their own limitations. (there's a Dirty Harry quote in there somewhere...)
If You knew what was going to happen in the next few seconds then most likely there would be no need to fire Your Weapon because You would have already stopped the Perp.
Training is more real World experience that comes from someone’s prior interactions or hypothetical situations in a training area.
Qualification is a Test of known information or scenarios already practiced under certain conditions.
?Anybody? Ping
Don’t qualify, go to training.
So I'm better trained than anyone, but I'm not necessarily more 'qualified' than anyone.
Good job Jon, you actually posted something almost worth reading.
In our area none of the ranges will allow you to practice drawing and firing unless you are taking a course.
Thank You for the input.
I think that qualified should be rated by Post Engagement results (real World) You Win, opponent Loses = 1 notch in the Qualifed side of the Record Sheet for You. No ooint in wasting ink on the other side.
Stay Safe and Take Care,
Mb1
You’re right, there is nothing to “train” you for a gunfight. There are things you can do to prepare yourself for the possibility of one. General proficiency in firearms, knowledge of your equipment, its strengths and weaknesses, maintenance of situational awareness, using judgement about the places you go, etc. I dont think anything can train you for something like that. Its oreparation and getting and maintaining the right mindset.
CC
There are 3 places to shoot ANY caliber of weapon you wish within 10 minutes of my house. No supervision, no fees ‘cept being a decent human to the owner, no rangemaster, always open.
Lets go shootin!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.