On training requirements

Myth #1:  Revolvers are not as accurate as semiautomatic pistols.

Myth #2:  Short-barreled revolvers are inaccurate and only good for close-range combat.

Reality:  You really need to practice more.

The above consists of 12 rounds fired from an unfamiliar S&W Model 15, freehand in double action.  I’d consider it OK shooting: there are guys who can do far better than that.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of people I meet who consider themselves “shooters” marvel at this.  Their assumptions of what constitutes accuracy are truly unsettling.

Being barely able to keep all your shots on a silhouette the size of Jackie Gleason at ten feet is not acceptable.  If you plan on carrying a weapon, you need to understand the responsibility involved.

Getting trained is part of that.  The following do not count as “training”:

• Shooting junk cars at the quarry with your friends while consuming beer,
• Watching a John Woo movie (or Sam Peckinpah for the Boomers),
• Any video game with the words “Call of Duty” in the title.

(Consequently, if you have the urge to imitate any such things in real life, consider stamp collecting as a hobby.  Shooting is not for you.)

You must learn your gun, and you must be able to shoot it well.  By “well,” I mean consistent bullseye hits at 15 feet (further with time) in slow fire.  You must put in time learning good habits at leisure.  Otherwise, you will choke if the unthinkable happens, and discharging a weapon in such circumstances can have truly unfortunate and life-ruining consequences.

Barrett Tillman wrote, “we do not rise to the occasion, we default to our level of training.”  He was absolutely correct.  The habits you build while practicing will be the ones that take control under pressure.  You must learn sight alignment, trigger discipline and breath control.

Blind rapid fire will not save your life.  In fact, it could lead to a truly horrible end if bystanders are present, or if you don’t have the presence of mind to identify backgrounds.  You must practice accuracy.  The rule of thumb is this:  expect your groups to triple in size under stress.  So, if you can shoot 2-inch groups with your carry gun, you can expect six inches when someone’s rushing you.  Even that’s risky, given that your target may be returning fire and will most likely be moving.

The cardinal rule of gunfighting is, you are responsible for every bullet that comes out of your gun. Sloppy shooting habits could get someone killed.

Word has it that Georgia may start requiring training and qualification for issuance of state Firearms Licenses.  There’s currently a committee investigating the idea of clarifying our state’s byzantine firearms laws, and the problematic “public gathering” clause may be stricken.

However, politics is about compromise, and something always has to give.  It appears that these changes will come with the price of a training requirement.  I’ve been told that the NRA supports this, and that they consider it a stepping-stone towards greater reciprocity between states (1).  I can understand that.

And, as much as I’ve opposed it in the past, I think I may support it.

I don’t like the idea that we should have to prove need or jump hurdles of any sort to exercise a Constitutional right.  In fact, I hate it.  This case is different, though.

I’ve seen a huge upsurge in the number of folks carrying in Georgia the last few years, but I’ve also seen an unsettling decline in general marksmanship and safety among them.  Many assume that by simple virtue of having a gun, they’re able to use it effectively.  I’ve come across more than a few who say they’re just itching for “their chance” to play the hero in some imagined crisis.

The plain fact is, I don’t want one of them causing a tragedy and screwing it all up for the rest of us.  That means training and qualification.

Done improperly, this could present a real burden.  Not everyone has weekends off to take a class, and the financial obligation can be significant for some (2).  The system would have to be fair and affordable.  Otherwise, the very act of applying for a permit to defend oneself becomes an obstacle.

Ideally, the training should be flexible and given by private instructors.  I’ve been in classes taught by government employees, and they’re not only opinionated, they’re often not very good (3).  I don’t want the government claiming a monopoly (or a punitive fee) on training.

The ultimate goal should be that the applicant can show up and qualify by shooting with some competence and knowledge of safety (4).  The qualification is important; how they get there is not.

Most folks with military or law enforcement experience can qualify without having to sit through a class, as do most folks who are regular shooters.  Those who need help have their choice in how they get it.  There are plenty of instructors and longtime shooters who are glad to give a bit of their time to newcomers (5), and the best way to learn is by doing.

I’m sure the “what part of ‘shall not be infringed’ do you not understand?” crowd will beat their chests over this and call me a turncoat.  They seem to be coming out of the woodwork these days, and frankly, I’d like to ask something:

Where were you in 1986?  1989?  1994?  What have you done besides bitch about things?  Have you given anything back to the community?  If you can’t give me an answer, please save me the trouble of deleting your email.

Our 2nd Amendment rights have been steadily eroded since 1934, and people who just got into the culture six months ago want to storm the gates like it all happened yesterday.  We’ve got 70 years of bad precedent to chip away at, and it won’t all go away tomorrow.

Until then, gaining back our rights means making concessions in some cases.  This is one that I’m willing to accept.

(1) The NRA is a national organization, and though they can fail local initiatives, they function with an eye on the larger picture.  Following the Heller decision, they took up the task of making sure it was applied to all states under the 14th Amendment.  That’s what they’re currently using to bitch-slap the District of Columbia into compliance.

Nationwide reciprocity between states is another priority.  According to Article IV, states are expected to honor “public acts, records, and judicial rulings” of other states.  This includes marriage licenses and driver’s licenses; it should also include carry permits.

The path of least resistance will be to ensure that most states have similar requirements.  A training requirement brings Georgia up to speed in this respect, and it could gain us reciprocity with states like Virginia and South Carolina, at the least.

Folks in Vermont and Alaska…I’m really sorry, but I don’t see an easier alternative.  Folks in California, Hawaii, Maryland and New York will thank us.

(2) Any fees charged must be fair and consistent.  In New York City, the cost to apply (you are not guaranteed one by paying) can be as high as $450.  That’s enough to discourage all but the most motivated and financially secure.  A person working a blue-collar job, paying >$1200/mo. for an apartment can’t budget that.

Additionally, the simple cost of owning a gun is considerable.  Expect to budget at least $300 for the weapon, plus another $200 in ammunition, plus range fees, and so on.

I’d propose that the cost of licensing should be limited to $25, regardless of county.  The paperwork and payroll simply don’t justify more than that.  Add an additional $10 charge for the qualification, and it’s still cheaper than most counties currently charge for the licensing.

(3) Remind me to tell you about a Duval County officer who came in to lecture a class about legal issues.  He insisted on unholstering an clearing his weapon for us, even though it was a cold room.  He then gave us this Chestnut of Wisdom from On High:

You don’t want to use hollow-tip [sic] bullets, because you’ll just get sued.  Plus, you want penetration in a fight.  Lots of guys on the street, they’re wearing Kevlar…

(4) The actual qualification should be just enough to make sure the applicant can handle a gun safely and hit the target with some reliability.  There should be nothing in the regimen that poses an impediment to disabled shooters, nor which requires qualification with a specific type of weapon.

The $10 charge should cover supervision and evaluation.  It only takes a guy with a clipboard and a pen.  The applicant should be able to make an appointment, show up, and be done within 30 minutes.

The course should require no more than 50 rounds of range ammunition, and should be similar to those required of security personnel.  In fact, something similar to the Texas course should be fine.  The applicant should demonstrate safely loading and unloading once, and the ability to holster and unholster the weapon once.

(5) You do know that was the original point of the NRA, right? The legislative action stuff came later, and is secondary to the mission of training shooters and instructors.