If you want to go that route, then true proficiency would include field stripping, cleaning, and maintenance. True proficiency would be held on shoot/no-shoot ranges with varied lighting, would require drawing from the concealed position, and require tactical and emergency reloads.cyphur wrote:We shot first thing, and frankly some of the folks at the range worried me. Its like they never touched the gun before in their life. One guy shot a 250(I shot a 246) but for the life of him could not remedy a FTF. The guy directly next to me couldn't reload in time between rounds, and he too could not remedy a mis-feed. Made me solidify the opinion you should present a proof of firearms proficiency(not the ability to hit the target, but how to handle them properly and such).
But that's not the point. The point of testing is to be reasonably sure that that the shooter will hit the intended target and common self defense distances. Failure to perform speedy reloads, and failure to clear malfunctions, will harm no one except the shooter.
It's in every CHL's best interest to reach true proficiency under combat conditions, including shoot/no-shoot decision making. Every CHL should be able to clear stoppages, and perform tactical and emergency reloads. But those things are for the CHL's benefit; inability to train to those standards doesn't endanger innocent bystanders.
I believe that 10 shots at 7 yards is sufficient to determine proficiency for the purposes of the CHL, so long as the student is also graded on safe gun handling.
Kevin