The Cornered Cat
<— Older Posts Newer Posts —>
Practice time
March 11, 2015

While the rest of the country remains locked in the grip of the Winter That Never Ends, the weather here in the Pacific Northwest has been unseasonably mild — so much so, that the daffodils are blooming, the cherry trees are in full bloom, and my youngest son keeps wandering around the house in shorts and flipflops without so much as a glance at the calendar. It’s not normal for us to get even a few days of consecutive sunshine this time of year, and yet for the past few weeks our porch kitty has been drowsing in the sun every afternoon. Weird.

Dot Torture target with one dropped shot on Dot 8, the weak hand only drill.

Dot Torture target with one dropped shot on Dot 8, the weak hand only drill.

So of course yesterday afternoon found me at the range with a buddy. First we shot Dot Torture drills at 7 yards. Those are always humbling, and sometimes annoying. My inner perfectionist (who is a whiny little child) hates DT drills like the whiny little child she is. My grownup self enjoys the challenge, but I always have to stifle the urge to cry for a Mulligan with the first dropped shot.

And yes, there’s nearly always a dropped shot.

That’s because the goal is continuous improvement. You first shoot the entire DT course of fire from 3 yards, untimed, until you can do it perfectly. That might take months of regular practice. Because it requires your full concentration, it’s a surprisingly tough course of fire even at close ranges. Once you can do it perfectly at one distance, you either move farther away from the target or you add some time stress. Or both. It’s a deceptively simple series of exercises, and if you use it regularly you’ll always find yourself being stretched as a shooter.

For the skills covered and the trigger control required, I believe Dot Torture is one of the best practice time investments you can make in 50 rounds. The drill forces you to run through your basic gunhandling and requires excellent marksmanship out of the holster, after a reload, transitioning between targets, single handed with either hand… you get the idea. It’s not just marksmanship, but marksmanship skills performed in context. Some people can’t ever seem to hit the target after a reload, for example. Dot Torture helps prevent that problem or cure it. It’s also a very restful high-concentration routine that forces your mind into the here and now, like some types of yoga.

But my inner perfectionist still hates it.

When we finished our DT workout, we shifted over to the moving targets. The system we use runs the targets on a side-to-side track at varying speeds. We set it up to run a single IDPA target between two barrels set roughly ten feet apart, so that the target would take roughly two seconds to cover the distance between the barrels. We worked out of the holster at 7 yards, to get two shots into the center circle every time the target ran between the barrels.

Target shot on the moving target system from 7 yards.

Target shot on the moving target system from 7 yards.

My first run — which I shot from the holster but without a cover garment — exposed a nasty little flinch problem. You can see the tape over the dropped shot on the outer edge of the -1 zone in the lower left, though I’d rather you didn’t. Two or three runs later, I’d settled down and was getting nearly all my hits in the center circle, which felt nice.

It turns out that watching the front sight and pressing the trigger smoothly really help you hit your target even when it’s moving.

When my turn rolled around again, I put my cover shirt on and worked my draw from concealment. Still plenty of time for a good draw and two smooth presses of the trigger on that moving target, but no time for fumbles or bumbles during the process.

Toward the end, we changed the procedure so we could work on the “trapping” technique for moving targets. With this technique, you simply put your sights over the place where you know the target will appear, and remain unmoving until the target gets there. You must fire a single shot at the exact moment the sights are aligned in the center of the target, before the target moves out of your view.

The trapping drill on moving targets really exposes flinch and trigger mash problems, since it forces you to press the trigger Right Now when the target appears in front of your sights. But it’s very satisfying when you nail it.

Altogether, we each ran through around 100 rounds and walked off the range with smiles. It was a good day.

Leave a comment
Update on ATF’s proposed 5.56 ammo ban
March 10, 2015

ATF announced today that it will not move forward — at this time! — with its proposed ban of the popular M855 “green tip” ammunition used primarily in AR15 style guns. That decision was driven by the record number of comments it has already received about the issue. More than 80,000 comments came in, and the vast majority of those were against the proposed ban.

The ATF will continue to accept comments through March 16, and it’s still a good idea to contact your politicians about the big picture issues discussed here. You can find contact information for your Senators here and your Representative here.

1 Comment
It’s not what you think
March 9, 2015

The skills taught in professional defensive handgun classes sometimes surprise new students. There’s this tendency to think of it as a “shooting class,” and certainly marksmanship remains one of the building blocks to using a handgun for effective self defense.

Shooting well is a good thing. It isn't the only thing.

Shooting well is a good thing. It isn’t the only thing.

But plain marksmanship, as important as it may be, isn’t the only skill taught in good classes. Defensive classes teach students to shoot within the larger context of self defense, which creates the need to cover a much wider and deeper set of skills than simply pulling the trigger.

In addition to simple shooting and smooth gunhandling, serious defensive handgun classes usually offer other important lessons, such as how to build a legally-defensible survival mindset or how to deal with the physical sensations of sudden stress. They might discuss the interpersonal skills that go with avoidance, de-escalation and deterrence. They may teach pre-incident threat management and what to do in the immediate aftermath of a shooting, or how to spot (and thus avoid) a predator looking for a fresh victim. They often teach crisis management and how to solve problems with the gun in hand. They might teach related physical skills, such as how to retain the handgun if the criminal tries to take it away, or what to do if you’re trying to draw the gun in very close quarters. They sometimes throw students into role-playing scenarios to force the students to put their own shooting skills into a realistic defensivce context.

In short, it’s a big field with a lot of closely-related subspecialties.

Well-rounded schools

To quote longtime defensive firearms trainer John Farnam, “The best schools are well-rounded. Our Art embraces an extensive repertoire of psycho-motor skills, verbal skills, and disengagement skills, along with a sound philosophical overlay, all of which must to carefully integrated. Some of the material is dry, but it is still important and must be included.” Farnam also notes that in his own gun courses, “we do a lot of shooting, of course. But, aggressive verbal and postural disengagement are also critical skills and must be learned and exercised in scenario-based drills every time we’re [on] the Range practicing our shooting skills. In this life, you’re going to talk with a lot more people than you’re going to shoot… with any luck!”

Farnam’s outlook is shared by other professional defensive firearm trainers. Almost universally, the pros regard the non-shooting portions of their programs to be at least as important as, or even more important than, pure shooting skills.

Where do you find them?

These necessary danger management skills may be taught, to one degree or another, in nearly all professional defensive firearms classes. But you certainly won’t find them in “this is the end the bullet comes out” classes intended for beginners, nor in pure shooting classes intended for competitive shooters. They only really show up in defensive firearms classes intended for ordinary citizens. 1

Quite apart from any specific, individual skill they might learn, students walk out of this type of class with a firm understanding of what they don’t yet know and what they can’t yet do. That’s a tricky thing to teach (because confidence is a good thing), but it’s absolutely vital. The self-knowledge that says, “I’ve thought this through, and I’m willing to live with doing This but not That,” or that says, “I do not yet have the skills to do This, but I am able to do That” — that type of self knowledge can keep good people out of a world of hurt. It makes it less likely that you’ll jump into inappropriate situations, and more likely that you’ll survive when you fight back in appropriate ones.

But it all starts with understanding that defensive firearms skills are not the same thing as shooting cardboard targets at the range, not the same thing as playing fun and useful shooting sports games, not the same thing as imitating military and law enforcement tactics. Classes designed to teach defensive firearms skills might have some elements in common with any of those, but they also go far beyond that into life skills that aren’t offered in any of the other venues.

Notes:

  1. The best value in such classes comes from trainers who deliberately and consciously avoid teaching from either a law enforcement or a military mindset, and instead focus on the tactics and survival rules an ordinary person should follow to tip their odds toward the best possible outcome. Even though many good instructors have such a background on their resume, that background should not form the mindset taught in class to non-LEO, non-military students. See Context Matters for more about that. ↩
Leave a comment
Just keep swimming
March 8, 2015

The first day of swimming lessons always has at least one little kid holding onto his mom’s leg and sobbing, “But mommy… I can’t get in the water with the teacher. I don’t know how to swimmmm!”

first-day-1999

First day of swim lessons, 1999.

A lot of people approach firearms training just like that poor little guy approaches his swim lessons. They don’t want to come to class because they think they should already know the things the class is designed to teach. But the truth is, you come to class to learn something new, not to show off what you already know. If you don’t already know everything – okay, maybe not anything – that’s going to be covered in the class, that’s a good thing. It means you’re in the right place.

Many people are fine with this idea when it comes to taking their first and most basic class. It’s okay to take that first class without feeling a lot of confidence in their skills, they figure, because everyone else in the beginners’ class will be beginners, too. So they won’t feel out of place and they’ll do just fine. But … that’s where they stop. They’re afraid to sign up for the next class after that, because they still feel like beginners. They’re afraid to keep swimming.

Same problem, really. Only it’s slightly more complicated, because as you move through the training cycle you begin to realize that one needy student really can make a slow day for the other students who might prefer to move faster through the material. Good instructors are used to dealing with a variety of skill levels in their students, but there’s always the need to keep people moving at a good pace for everyone in the group. Having someone there who’s far behind the curve can be tough for all involved. So it’s not surprising that some folks feel awkward or fearful when they realize they don’t already know how to swim at the level the next class will be teaching.

You might be afraid of getting in over your head at first.

You might be afraid of getting in over your head at first.

It doesn’t have to be that way.

First of all, the thing we instinctively know about the beginners’ class – that you get in the water with the teacher to learn how to swim, and that you don’t come to class already knowing that skill – that’s still true in the next class up. And in the one after that. The truth is, learning something new often feels like you’re out of your depth at first. And that’s okay. It’s how we learn.

More to the point? If you really, truly feel like the next class up will be “too advanced” for you, like you won’t be able to keep up with the other students in it, that doesn’t mean you have to stop learning entirely. It simply means you’ll need to set some goals, practice diligently, and maybe you’ll need to take that first class again to reinforce what you’ve already learned before you move up. This is not a failure! It’s very much the expected and normal course of events for people who are serious about self defense. In fact, once you start looking for them, you’ll often find very advanced students and even instructors taking classes from other trainers at the basic level. We do it because we know that reinforcing the foundation makes the whole building stronger.

Just keep swimming.

Just keep swimming.

This isn’t theoretical. There’s a Defensive Handgun class intended for beginning to intermediate students at my local school (the Firearms Academy of Seattle) that I’ve taken more than a dozen times. Took it twice as a new shooter before I enrolled in the next class up, and took it again many times after that as I was becoming an instructor. Every time, I learned something new or reinforced good habits I wanted to build.

So if you’ve taken one class, felt it was beneficial but don’t feel ready to advance yet, don’t despair. Keep practicing the things you learned in that first class, and set a deadline by which you will take another class. If you feel ready by that date, take the next class up. If you don’t, take the basic one over again as a refresher.

Just keep swimming.

1 Comment
Guest post: What’s the Story Behind ATF “Banning” 5.56mm Ammo?
March 7, 2015

If you’ve been following this blog very long, you know that I have literally never featured a guest post before. However, when Glenn Bellamy sent this to my email box the other day, I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to shed a little light on an important issue that’s been confusing for a lot of people.

For those who wonder why Cornered Cat would ever talk about political issues related to guns, please [click here.] That should explain things (the short version is, I’m all about teaching women how to protect themselves using guns, and sometimes that means that we need to learn something about how to protect the guns we use to protect ourselves). And if, after reading this excellent article from Glenn Bellamy, you feel motivated to write to your representatives — please do!

What’s the Story Behind ATF “Banning” 5.56mm Ammo?

(. . . and what can you do about it?)

 By Glenn D. Bellamy, Armorer-at-Law®

March 5, 2015

There’s been no shortage of misinformation and hyperbole about an ATF memo released on February 13th reported to “ban AR15 ammo.”  The memo describes a “framework” by which ATF proposes it would consider requests for “sporting purpose” exemptions under the federal statute banning the manufacture, importation or sale (but not possession) of “armor piercing” projectiles.  I’ve searched and research the law and the facts behind it with passion over the last two weeks. I’m tempted to write a legal brief in opposition, or at least to give it a thorough fisking.  But that would bore you and be wasted on the ATF at this point.

Instead, I’ll give you the skinny on what’s going on and the most effective thing(s) you can do about it.

 The Skinny

 Back in 1986, Congress debated — and passed — a law purported to protect law enforcement officers from evil “cop killer” bullets (the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act).  Since virtually every rifle round will penetrate the soft body armor worn by police, the law became focused on ammunition designed for handguns.  Rather than define what would be prohibited by performance (whether it could penetrate body armor), they compromised on a definition based on the projectile or projectile core being “constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.”  Certain ammunition was expressly excluded from the ban, including lead-free shot pellets and any projectile “which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.” Later, the law was amended to add a second category: full jacketed projectiles larger than .22 caliber “designed and intended for use in a handgun” and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight.

ammo-diagram M855 “ball” ammo (and its NATO counterpart, designated SS109), sometimes called “green tip,” uses a copper-jacketed projectile with a core made in part from steel and part from lead.  Since its core is not made “entirely” from steel and its jacket is less than 25% of the total weight, it does not fall within the scope of either definition of “armor piercing” ammo in the law.  Nevertheless, as soon as the law was passed in 1986, ATF “granted” an unnecessary “sporting purposes” exemption for M855 ammo.  In the “Framework” memo, ATF (erroneously) says “AR-type handguns were not commercially available when the armor piercing ammunition exemption was granted in 1986.” If that were true, then no exemption would have been necessary. The statute only applies to handgun ammo. Now, citing the proliferation of AR-platform handguns and glossing over the fact that its projectile core is not made “entirely” of steel, ATF singled out M855 as a specific example of ammo that would fail the criteria of its new “framework” and is withdrawing its prior “exemption.”

ATF is blatantly misreading the language of the federal law.  The statute says:

. . . a projectile or projectile core being which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.  (Emphasis added)

Although not explained in the memo, ATF issued a “Special Advisory” dated February 27, 2015, revealing their distortion of the law:

It is important to note that the limitation on “armor piercing ammunition” in the GCA does not apply to projectiles manufactured exclusively from non-restricted materials such as copper and lead; it only applies to projectiles that include the specifically restricted materials, and can be used in a handgun.

See the difference? This is a perversion of the clear language of the law and cannot be tolerated.

 What To Do?

 This “framework” has been a couple of years in the making, but both the political left and right recognize it as an implementation of the President’s promise to the anti-gun lobby to use every administrative means possible to make up for their legislative failures. For a very insightful article (with only a few factual errors), see this Huffington Post blog. So, while the action taken by ATF isn’t a “ban of all AR15 ammo,” it does require a response.  The question is: How do we respond effectively?

Two ways: 1) Send your comments to ATF and 2) write to your Senators and Representatives asking them to sign on to Congressional letters to ATF and to support proposed legislation that would curb ATF’s abuses in this area.

When ATF published its proposed “framework,” it invited public comments for 30 days (ending March 16, 2015). As a starting point, ATF skirted the official procedure for creating regulations that implement federal laws. (See instructions for submitting comments on page 17 of the ATF memo.)

Substantive rules of this kind are supposed to have a 90-day comment period and other steps before going into effect.  Here, ATF characterized their rule change as a “framework” by which they will consider requests for exemptions for ammo that otherwise would be prohibited under the “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” exception and published it simply as a “notice” to the industry.

Make no mistake, ATF doesn’t care how you “feel” about their latest action, and rants about how everything they do is unconstitutional and evil will be ignored and discarded as off-topic. The only comments with any potential to influence ATF are those explaining why the proposed action exceeds or violates the agency’s statutory authority, internal conflicts or inconsistencies in what is being proposed, and unintended consequences they have overlooked. Feel free to borrow liberally from my example letter. This option is worth your time, but is unlikely to be effective alone.

Your elected officials should care how you feel — after all, they want your vote to be re-elected. But, more importantly, tell them what you think and what know about this subject (ATF’s misrepresentations in the Proposed Framework and skirting proper rulemaking procedure).  Then ask them to do something specific.

Congress can apply pressure in various ways to curtail rogue agencies.  The topic has picked up some inertia in Washington and even been noticed by the main-stream media outlets. A group of more than 250 (so far) Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have signed this letter to ATF Director B. Todd Jones.  A similar letter is being circulated in the Senate by Chuck Grassley. Specifically ask your Senators and Representative to sign these letters. If the House or Senate Judiciary Committees schedule hearing on this topic, it may be enough to put the brakes on ATF’s plans.

Congress also has the power to change the law so it won’t be misinterpreted, although it’s hard to think of clearer language than “a projectile or projectile core . . . constructed entirely” from a specific list of materials. Articles about proposed bills being drafted can be found here and here. Specifically ask your Senators and Representative to support these efforts.  When a bill is officially introduced, write again asking for support of the bill by name or number.

You can find contact information for your Senators here and your Representative here. Below is a template you can use if you wish.  Please write!

 Dear ______,

 I am writing to you about concerns I have with the recently proposed ATF Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are “Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes” Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(17).  The Proposed Framework relies on several erroneous assumptions of fact and law, which render the entire underlying proposed framework untenable.

 First, it is in direct conflict with the express language of the law. The ammunition known as M855 does not have a core “constructed entirely of . . . steel.” ATF is misinterpreting the law to allow only bullets “manufactured exclusively from non-restricted materials.”  This turns the statute on its head and this kind of regulatory abuse cannot be allowed to continue.  ATF’s “Framework” needlessly removes from commerce one of the most common types of ammunition used in the most common type of rifle in America today.  There is no evidence whatsoever that M855 ammunition has posed a particular threat to the lives of law enforcement personnel in the last 20 years.

 Second, it is an attempt by ATF to skirt the proper rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 533). ATF is proposing a significant and substantive regulatory change whose flaws would be exposed when subjected to the public scrutiny of a 90-day comment period.

 I ask that you sign the letter to ATF Director B. Todd Jones being circulated among members of the [Senate/House] opposing the agency’s action.  I understand that bills are being drafted and will be introduced soon to curtail ATF’s authority in interpreting the law banning armor piercing handgun ammunition.  Please cosponsor or support such a bill when it is introduced.

                                                                         Thank you,

 ************

That was the end of Glenn’s article and this is me again. There’s an important update!

First: ATF is definitely not playing fair, and is breaking its own rules. Yesterday, Katie Pavlich reported that ATF’s new regulation booklet that came out in January — which comes out every ten years and takes months to alter — had already banned the ammunition in question. In other words, the 30-day comment period which began in mid-February and ends March 16 was just for show, all along.

Then, this morning, the ATF issued a “Notice of Publishing Error.” Translation: oops, we got caught. Pay no attention to the man behind that curtain.

Contact your politicians. They need to hear from us.

Leave a comment
Bad habits bite
March 6, 2015

People who’ve taken one of my classes know that we spend a lot of time working on a safe, smooth drawstroke — and just as much time learning how to put the gun safely back into the holster. This is particularly important when it comes to putting the gun away when you’re wearing a cover garment.

Over on YouTube, there’s a short news segment, roughly five minutes long, that first aired about a year ago. It’s making the rounds again, and it made an excellent point, so you should probably go watch it. Sadly and annoyingly, the copyright owners chose to disallow embedding, so you’ll have to go over to YouTube to view the complete video. You can find it at [this link].

There are actually two important lessons in the video, even though the people who made it thought there was only one.

Lesson One (the point the producers intended to make): if you have a jacket with a drawstring toggle, you should either cut the toggle off or pin it out of the way whenever you carry your gun. Otherwise, the toggle can get caught in the trigger guard as you holster and it could fire the gun when you adjust your jacket. 1

 

Toggles can cause trouble.

Toggles can cause trouble.

 

Whether or not you have a drawstring toggle on your jacket, pay attention whenever you holster your gun. Don’t be thinking about other things while you handle a loaded weapon. Don’t be casual. Do consciously and carefully move your cover garment out of the way, and do stop — instantly! — if you feel anything unusual while you’re holstering. (As you watch the video, notice the man’s casually distracted body language as he holsters the gun. What do you think — was that a contributing factor to this equipment problem?)

 

If the toggle slips into the trigger guard, it can fire the gun when the shooter adjusts her jacket.

If the toggle slips into the trigger guard, it can fire the gun when the shooter adjusts her jacket.

 

Now for Lesson Two, the one the producers didn’t realize they were teaching. At 4:47, you hear one of the talking heads explain that the officer involved in this situation also had another unintentional shooting a few years back when he shot himself in the hand “with a gun he thought was unloaded.”

Gosh… I wonder what kind of ongoing bad gunhandling habit this man had, that could have prompted that previous injury? Anyone?

 

What bad gunhandling habit do you see in this still from a surveillance video?

What bad gunhandling habit do you see in this still captured on a surveillance video?

Stay safe.

Notes:

  1. Although it’s tempting, don’t fall for the bit of misdirection about the brand of gun involved here. This type of unintentional shooting happens with all types of guns, including revolvers and those with external, manual safeties as well. It’s not a brand problem. It’s a behavior problem. ↩
4 Comments
“Finger!”
March 5, 2015

By now, even parts of Hollywood seem to have gotten the message about keeping your finger off the trigger until you’re in the very act of firing the gun. That’s good. But that’s not all there is to the story.

From Sandusky, Ohio comes the report of a law enforcement officer who slipped on ice and fell as he prepared to enter a home on search warrant. As he fell, his gun fired unintentionally and the bullet struck him in the leg.

Let me repeat here what I’ve often said before: Like Will Rogers, all I know is what I read in the papers. I don’t have inside information about this event and I wasn’t there. For all I know, everything could have happened 180 degrees different from what the news accounts reported.

However, the story does give us a nice little springboard to talk about where, exactly, we put the finger when we take it off the trigger — and why. I’ve often had experienced shooters in class who let go of the trigger and place it alongside the trigger guard, something like this:

A common way self-taught shooters take their fingers off the trigger.

One common way self-taught shooters take their fingers off the trigger.

This way of holding the gun, with the trigger finger alongside the trigger guard and slightly relaxed, does get your finger off the trigger. That’s good. It’s much safer than standing there with your finger resting directly on the trigger, and certainly safer than moving around with your finger on the trigger.

But it’s not best, and here’s why: when someone loses their balance or trips, their hands will naturally clench. That same clenched-hand reflex can also be triggered by other causes, such as a simple sneeze or even just hearing a loud noise when you’re tensed up.

With the finger alongside the trigger guard, it’s very likely that any startle response will force that finger right back onto the trigger — with noisy and embarrassing results. That’s why it’s so unsurprising to see a news article about someone who fired a round as he slipped on the ice while he was holding a gun.

Here’s a much better and safer way to get your finger off the trigger:

Placing the finger high on the gun's frame, at the natural limit of movement, ensures that it won't slip onto the trigger if the shooter slips and falls.

Place the finger high on the gun’s frame, at the natural limit of movement. This makes it less likely for the finger to slip onto the trigger if the shooter slips and falls.

This change in technique, which places the trigger finger high on the gun’s frame, improves your ability to handle the human startle reflex when you have a gun in your hand. Because the finger is already at its natural limit of movement, it reduces the chances that a sudden slip of the foot will put unexpected holes in things that don’t need to be shot.

With this change in behavior, the shooter can also feel the ejection port underneath his finger. That “felt index” of a specific point on the frame provides the shooter with good feedback about where his finger actually is, which helps reduce the risk of oopsies caused by casual unawareness.

One more thing. Putting the finger high on the frame is a habit, which means it’s something you should do every time you handle the gun — not just when you feel you might slip and fall. Practice this finger placement at the range every time you shoot, and at home every time you pick up the gun. When you build an ongoing, solid habit of holding the gun in the safest and most secure way you can, that makes it much more likely that you’ll do it that way when you’re under stress and moving rapidly.

Stay safe.

1 Comment
Training requirement
February 23, 2015

From Georgia comes a political news story that many in the gun world find ironic: a state representative who voted against a widened concealed carry bill last year, but then applied for a carry permit this year. When his permit came in the mail, he suddenly realized that he hadn’t had any training. That’s a common process (more about that in a minute), but because this man is a political creature, it didn’t occur to him to just go learn more for himself. Instead…

ATLANTA – Rep. Dexter Sharper didn’t vote to allow guns to be carried in more places in Georgia last year. But when the so-called “guns everywhere” law took effect last summer and permitted firearms in bars, schools, churches and government offices, the legislator from Valdosta found himself applying for a license.

… he said he now realizes that his pistol is of little use without guidance as to what to do with it. He suspects other inexperienced, gun-toting Georgians know too little about the state’s gun laws, or how to safely use and store firearms, as well.

Sharper is proposing that those who get a license to carry firearms be required to take a gun safety class.

[Read the whole thing]

That’s the way it often works in states without a training requirement: people apply for the license, receive it, and then get to thinking… “Oh my gosh, they gave this thing to me and I haven’t learned a thing about carrying a gun! I’d better go get some training.” And many of them do. 1 This self-driven training process produces eager, motivated learners who often continue training to the advanced levels (where every person who carries a gun should eventually end up). Whether or not they end up at the advanced level, each student in such states does end up with a level of training that meets their own needs within their unique set of personal circumstances.

In states where training is required by law, it works differently. The person applies for a license and learns they have to take a class in order to get that license. So being human, they go looking for the cheapest, fastest way to get the paperwork completed. Online? Sure! Shortcut class that barely meets state law? Good! Whatever, just get me that paper. All too many of the applicants don’t much care what will be taught in the class; 2 they’re just looking for a signature on a certificate. They get it and they’re done. Good instructors soon become frustrated and burned out by running diploma mills for unmotivated students, 3 and as for the students? Well, the state said they have learned enough as soon as that piece of paper is in hand, so why would they ever look for more? They’re done.

I’m always impressed with instructors in training-required states who can take a constant stream of reluctant students who are just looking for a rubber stamp and turn any of them into serious learners. That’s not an easy job.

And that brings us to my bottom line here.

This sometimes surprises people who know what a big fan I am of training, but I am very much against any law that requires people to take a class before they’re allowed to carry a firearm for self defense. There are three reasons for this.

  • Self defense is the most basic of all human rights. As a matter of principle, I oppose any government action that impinges on that right.
  • Laws that make it harder for ordinary people to carry necessary tools for self defense have a disproportionate impact on the poor. As a matter of ethics, I oppose any government act that makes staying alive harder for people who already face an uphill struggle doing that.
  • Laws that require training often function paradoxically: they force people to take minimal training while making it less likely that they will pursue good training. As a practical matter, I oppose training-required laws because I’m a fan of ongoing, personally-motivated training that encourages each individual to reach the highest level they are able to achieve given their own unique set of needs and circumstances.

h/t SayUncle

[edited to fix a typo]

Notes:

  1. Not all, of course. But many. The most common category of non-trained people with carry permits in these states seems to be, people who don’t carry and never intended to. That’s because in many states, there are advantages to having the permit that have nothing at all to do with carrying the gun, such as a shortened or non-existent wait time for gun purchases or an easier set of rules for transporting your guns to the range. ↩
  2. Some do and good for them! Yay for personal motivation wherever it strikes. ↩
  3. With an occasional, refreshing gem of an eager student who makes the grind worthwhile. Again, hooray for that person! ↩
9 Comments