Shooting Qualification: Any funny stories?

[NcongruNt]

The place I took my CHL had specific instructions to bring a hat to wear to deflect brass.

I found out when we went to qualify why...

Our instructor had us stand shoulder-to-shoulder with about 3 inches of clearance. I was shooting my PA-63, which like pretty much all Makarov-chambered pistols has very positive ejection. My cases usually end up at 4:30 about 15-20 feet away.

Well, the fellow next to me failed to bring a hat as instructed and was taking my brass directly to his forehead. All places were taken, so he couldn't move... our instructor wasn't going to stop the test anyway. By the time we were finished, he had at least half a dozen crescent-shaped cuts to his forehead along with a bunch of tiny bruises. I believe he will remember his hat when renewal time comes around.

[HooG19]

The CHL class is NOT the place to fire a handgun for the first time in your life.

I agree 100% and have argued it here before by suggesting pre-requisites. At the end of it, I was convinced that it does not need to be made any more difficult to obtain a CHL. I still hope that people can see how large their spread is and devote time at the range to improve their accuracy.

As for a range story to keep from getting off track too much...

I don't really have one, but it is similar to Houston1944's. Just amazed how some people could pass the range qual while hitting anywhere and everywhere on (and off) the paper. But then again, that could be part of the reasoning this range uses to not give the shooter their target.

[HEMIzygote]

We did our shooting at Bass Pro Grapevine. I was in the 2nd to last bay.

Our instructor had the even lanes shoot, then the odd.

The instructor and I were standing in my bay looking at my target which was 7 yards out I believe.

As we were looking at it.....we saw it was getting hits on paper. We were like what the heck....and realized that the kid to the right of me was all over the place.

I dunno if he was just trying to be funny or seriously shooting to the best of his ability. But the instructor kept a firm eye on him the rest of the day. I left before he did so I wasn't sure if he passed or not.

[boomerang]

The CHL class is NOT the place to fire a handgun for the first time in your life.

My instructor said DPS told them they couldn't help anymore. If the handgun malfunctions it's up to the student to fix it. That sounded fair to me and I hope that's the new policy. Getting help from the instructor sounds too much like cheating for my taste.

[mr surveyor]

The CHL class is NOT the place to fire a handgun for the first time in your life.

My instructor said DPS told them they couldn't help anymore. If the handgun malfunctions it's up to the student to fix it. That sounded fair to me and I hope that's the new policy. Getting help from the instructor sounds too much like cheating for my taste.

I agree! I remember my group having to wait between every set for a range officer to help one of the total novices (not all ladies) clear malfunctions, or help them load and rack the slide

The CHL range qualification course is NOT the place for a first time shooter. It seems the CHL range test is supposed to represent one's proficiency with a handgun. I personally believe that every range qualification given should actually represent the true proficiency of each individual licensee, regardless of how many would actually fail the first time..or two.

I am all for 2A rights, but also believe that before the CHL laws were passed that the majority of folks that carried (mainly vehicle) were proficient in the handling and use of their weapons. Even with the new legislation allowing vehicle carry, I would guess that the majority of folks applying those laws are not first time shooters. It would appear, at least from many of the "war stories" I have heard from friends, and from participants on this forum and others, that there is a good number of CHL applicants that have only shot a handgun once or twice, if at all, before their class experience. These people think because they "pass" their qualification test that they are "good to go". What gives them the idea that that's all there is to it? What makes them think that they would almost have to shoot someone on the range to keep from passing the test?

I can't believe that I am expressing an opinion that would even suggest any type of limitation to the Second Amendment. I think I need to go to bed.

[longtooth]

I too have a little problem w/ folks coming to a class w/ no forethought or skills.
I once watched an instructor stand behind a shooter & close finish closing his slide after almost every shot. The instructor asked when it had been cleaned.
"Well not since the last time I was here. I only shoot this one to qualify. I carry a revolver."
My guess is that one does not see much #9 either.

Legislation that restricts others is not the answer though. If that particular issue of foolish complacency is legislated away there will be another that shows its head pretty shortly.

On the other hand I have a problem w/ the "No help" rule.
There are folks that are proficient enough to pass the test but health keeps them from from being time efficient on the line.
Folks w/ autheritis so severe that it takes them 10 minutes to load a mag need some help. They cannot load 5 & rack a slide 10 times in a 20 minute proficience test.
They can set at home & in an evening get 2 high cap mags loaded & the arm charged. Someone in that physical condition is a much more evident victim than you or I. They will probably never need to reload in a fire fight & will certainly neve need to reload a 3rd mag.
They need the right to defend themselves too.

There are some problems that legislation is not the answer too no matter what the LIBS say.

[longtooth]

Concerning ladies on the firing line:
I have found far fewer ladies w/ non-functional guns on the line than men.

[seamusTX]

Legislation that restricts others is not the answer though.

Amen. We don't have tests to buy electric saws or gasoline.

If someone can't load a weapon or keep it in working condition, it won't be much use, but it won't be a hazard, either.

- Jim

[Photoman]

the CHL range test is supposed to represent one's proficiency with a handgun.

Yes. If we're going to have the laws, we should enforce them. If the person can't even load their own gun, they should fail the test.

[Crossfire]

My instructor said DPS told them they couldn't help anymore. If the handgun malfunctions it's up to the student to fix it. That sounded fair to me and I hope that's the new policy. Getting help from the instructor sounds too much like cheating for my taste.

Your instructor is full of something that isn't exactly the truth. I have never heard DPS say anything of the sort. I have even seen DPS troopers help INSTRUCTORS qualify who had malfunctioning guns or physical problems.

[longtooth]

Good deal.

[GrannyGlock]

I am still new at this but tell my students before they sign up that this is a proficiency test. If they do not quailify with at least a 225 (what instructors are required to shoot), I recommend they practice extensively before they carry.

If they qualify with less than a 200 then I recommend they take lessons before they carry.

I have only had one that qualified with a score of 190, an 88 yr old lady who did not plan to carry, but wanted the license. She does not own a gun (does not plan to get one) and had not shot except for 2 practice sessions a few weeks before the class since WWII when she was in the Marine Corps. She put all 40 shots at 3 and 7 yds somewhere on the paper. She did require help racking the slide, but we were told at the DPS training that this was permissable as the only qualification was the student had to pull the trigger. She was pleased to be learning something new and was very attentive in the class and at the range. Proud to call her "Mom"

I also tell my students that I will fail them if they do not follow my instructions or display unsafe behavior. They can take the test again at a latter date.

[txinvestigator]

My instructor said DPS told them they couldn't help anymore. If the handgun malfunctions it's up to the student to fix it. That sounded fair to me and I hope that's the new policy. Getting help from the instructor sounds too much like cheating for my taste.

Your instructor is full of something that isn't exactly the truth. I have never heard DPS say anything of the sort. I have even seen DPS troopers help INSTRUCTORS qualify who had malfunctioning guns or physical problems.

That is my experience too Linda.

I am disappointed in the apparent prevalent attitude of snobbishness and superiority in this thread and the "idiots in your class" thread. As an instructor I help everyone I can. Unless the person is unsafe and refuses to correct his problem, I believe that everyone deserves to get positive instruction.

Nowhere in the law, and generally in advertising is it announced that the class is only for experienced people. Many people who have never handled a handgun before assume that the class will TEACH them how to shoot. Heck, the curriculum even has "handgun proficiency and marksmanship, handgun storage and safety.

We all had to start somewhere.

[crbowers]

I recently did my first qualification and was told by my instructor that if I had a malfunction it was my responsibility to clear it and if I could and still get those shots off they would count. If I could not clear it and get the shots off it would be just as if I missed them.

I had no malfunctions, but I felt I could have handled them if I did.

I agree with the way he handled the testing; if I cannot clear a malfunction in the weapon I carry then I should not carry it and that should hurt me on any proficiency test I take with that weapon.

That being said; on the first shots of the test he had us load five rounds into the magazines and said "Fire ONE round at the whistle" he blew the whistle and one guy emptied this magazine into the target.

The guy was pretty embarassed but he needed to LISTEN and PAY ATTENTION! He had been pretty "excited" through the whole class...

[txinvestigator]

I recently did my first qualification and was told by my instructor that if I had a malfunction it was my responsibility to clear it and if I could and still get those shots off they would count. If I could not clear it and get the shots off it would be just as if I missed them.

I had no malfunctions, but I felt I could have handled them if I did.

I agree with the way he handled the testing; if I cannot clear a malfunction in the weapon I carry then I should not carry it and that should hurt me on any proficiency test I take with that weapon.

I do that too. I tell them that I won't be with them on the street to fix their gun. BUT, after that string of fire, I show them what to do next time.

That being said; on the first shots of the test he had us load five rounds into the magazines and said "Fire ONE round at the whistle" he blew the whistle and one guy emptied this magazine into the target.

The guy was pretty embarassed but he needed to LISTEN and PAY ATTENTION! He had been pretty "excited" through the whole class...

I have had people do that too, Sometimes it is excitement, not listening/comprehending, and sometimes it is a language issue. One person thought a "round" = magazine.