Yes indeed.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Weymouth PD REQUIRES live fire for LTC.
- Thread starter Precision Point Firearms
- Start date
Yes indeed.
71montess
NES Member
If your not a PP, you should be handed a license without delay. .
I don't think you should be permitted to take live fire with a .22 semi-auto until you have proven yourself capable with a .22 single shot bolt action, followed by a .22 lever action or pump action. Only when you have mastered the lever or pump will you be permitted to test on the semi-auto.
After you complete your .22 training, you can move up to .223, any range in the .30 caliber, into the .40s and .50 caliber.
Oh yeah, you can't fire a handgun until you have gone through the same ranking. Start with .22 single shot, move to a revolver, then a semi-auto.
And none of that metric shit till you've finished all the 'merican stuff
People should not be allowed to do things for themselves. That way lies madness.[/QUOTE]
^ This!!!
Well, did you complete the education requirements to get your free speech license from your local authority? I thought not. You'll probably need to repeat the logic classes, at a bare minimum.
- - - Updated - - -
The level of stupid on this thread hurts. So much fail, I'm astounded.
Last edited:
dcmdon
NES Member
Based on the Weymouth application, they also require 3 letters of recommendation. Which is also not required by law. I guess we'll slide that into the catchall suitability bucket for now.
dcmdon
NES Member
Even that is iffy. There are plenty of non-violent felons out there who are PPs.
I don't think you should be a PP if you didn't lock up a gun, but that is the law here in MA. I don't think you should be a PP if you have a single OUI conviction, but that is the law here in MA.
- Joined
- May 23, 2013
- Messages
- 4,785
- Likes
- 4,913
Personally I can't understand why an instructor wouldn't want to do a live fire portion in their class, why would anyone intentionally sign off on someone so ill prepared? I know if I were an instructor it wouldn't feel right for me to give someone the responsibility of a LTC without giving them some trigger time with various calibers, I'd feel I'd be doing them a disservice. Aside from that it would help them to decide which type of pistol and which caliber would suit them best and it might just encourage them to become more active once they get passed beginners jitters.
I know more than a few s-heads who have had their CCW permits for quite some time who have never even loaded their pistols let alone ever fired off a few rounds, and others that carry everyday and have never visited a range. Are these the types of folks you would want around your families popping off shots if something ever happened?
Now whether or not a town should require it is another matter. I just wouldn't give the town the option to refuse a student for it, strip away as many reasons and make it as difficult as possible for them to deny anyone.
JMO.
I know more than a few s-heads who have had their CCW permits for quite some time who have never even loaded their pistols let alone ever fired off a few rounds, and others that carry everyday and have never visited a range. Are these the types of folks you would want around your families popping off shots if something ever happened?
Now whether or not a town should require it is another matter. I just wouldn't give the town the option to refuse a student for it, strip away as many reasons and make it as difficult as possible for them to deny anyone.
JMO.
dcmdon
NES Member
Because there is a difference between what you may feel is right and what the government has a right to require.
I've been a pistol instructor for 13 years. The minimum class I will give is NRA Basic Pistol. In my class, this involves a substantial amount of live fire. If I'm going to sign off on someone, I want to see them shoot.
But with all that said, I would never advocate that those people should have to take a class from me before they can exercise their natural right to self defense with a firearm.
The other thing is that you have all these cut rate training places who will do the absolute minimum for $50, you have to do the minimum if you want get much business. I choose not to compete with that. I charge substantially more, but my classes are generally 2 to 3 people and the students get to shoot as much .22 as they want. (Yes I had a big stash before the panic) In certain cases I've even let students shoot my machine gun as a bonus. (they buy the ammo)
Because of this, I do 1/3rd the number of classes I used to do in CT where NRA Basic Pistol is the minimum requirement. But that fine. I've got absolutely no interest in teaching a $50 class to a room with 15 people in it.
Don
Let me shock you . . . From the first landing of Pilgrims on this continent until 1998, there was NO requirement for any training in order to buy/own/shoot any guns in MA. The streets weren't red with blood.
In 1998 the state MANDATED training but grandfathered everyone that had a permit in effect on June 1, 1998. They created a bureaucracy to pass judgment on what courses were acceptable. The FIRST acceptable course was created by MCOPA and did NOT include shooting, the statute calls out Hunter Ed as acceptable (no shooting there either), and NRA Home Firearm Safety (no shooting) plus some others with and without shooting were approved. The specific reason why MCOPA's course doesn't require shooting is a recognition that many police officers do NOT have access to gun ranges where they could do this. And in the 17 years of that law, more and more gun clubs are restricting the use of their facilities for training purposes. Braintree R&P has just instituted a number of new (or restated) rules for instructors and restrictions that is likely to reduce the number using the facility which will end up either reducing the number of trained people, number trained with shooting included or send them off to the mega-mill school (which only allots 10 rds of 22 per student).
BASIC courses are not designed to train people to CCW or to make them good shooters, the courses strictly instill some safety awareness no matter how "comprehensive" the instructor tries to make them. You are NOT "giving them the responsibility" to do anything as an instructor. If you want them to work with various calibers (and all the NRA basic courses say .22LR ONLY) it drives up the cost significantly and someone has to pay that. People are looking for groupons thus looking for cheap, you oftentimes get what you pay for and nobody can afford to teach a class for $20-35 (groupon takes a huge chunk of that money) and give you $20-45 in ammo for the privilege. A buddy of mine was offering one of the courses with extensive shooting various calibers, he calculated that he used average $47.00 worth of ammo (and these were Qmmo ammo prices not retail) per student and charging $50 for the shooting portion added to a course that doesn't require shooting . . . and he had to pay another $10/person to the gun club to use their facilities. That isn't a good business model and unless you have a fortune you are trying to spend down, it's not good for longevity.
People should SEEK training and go way beyond the Basic courses, but most don't. Gov't should NOT mandate training in order to have a "right to self-defense", but those that screw up should be held "personally responsible" for their bad behavior when an innocent is harmed by virtue of their lack of skill or common sense.
If Jerry Miculek were to lose his mind and move to MA, he would have to take a firearm safety course in order to get an LTC. Now there is nothing I could teach Jerry about shooting or safety. But you would advocate that I try.
I have had more than a few students who, while not being such an extreme example, only needed the course because they needed the piece of paper. For them, the shorter and cheaper the course the better.
While I am all in favor of training, I am absolutely not in favor of mandatory training before you can exercise a right guaranteed in the Constitution.
dcmdon
NES Member
When I moved to MA, I needed to get my LTC pretty quick because I refused to leave any of my guns home in CT except those that were waiting on 5320s. I found myself in a catch 22. I am certified to teach NRA Basic Pistol, which is an acceptable course for a LTC. I initially thought I'd just make up a certificate for myself but soon realized that wouldn't work. Per MA law, you must receive the approved course from someone who himself holds a MA LTC. So i was stuck.
I was in the process of calling instructors offering to co-teach a class for free if they would give me a certificate when the Universe shifted and sanity prevailed. My licensing officer allowed me to submit my teaching credentials as proof of training.
So to get back to your original point. If JM moved to a decent town, he'd be fine. If he moved to the wrong town, he might get a restricted LTC with an offer to upgrade to unrestricted if he shows good judgement for 5 years.
- - - Updated - - -
I look at initial training this way. I need to give you enough knowledge so that you can continue to learn on your own, safely. Period. I cover marksmanship fundamentals and STRONGLY urge people to continue learning. But my main goal is to get them to a point where they can load, unload, shoot, deal with malfunctions, and clean a firearm safely.
In the aviation world, I learned that the first license a pilot gets (typically private, single engine, land)is referred to as a "license to learn". So I appropriated this philosophy from our friends with wings.
In my class, I tell students that they will NOT know enough to carry a firearm safely. I briefly review what they WON'T be taught in that class.
1) carry gun selection and compromises between caliber, weight, shootability, and accuracy.
2) Holster draw (its not like in the movies)
3) legal aspects of armed self defense.
4) legal aspects as far as your requirment to conceal
5) choosing a method of carry. iwb, owb, retention, pocket
6) holster selection to support that method,
7) use of cover/concealment
8) the difference between cover and concealment
8) reloading under pressure
9) shooting on the move
10 one handed shooting
11) weak hand shooting
12) understanding and practicing the tradeoff between speed and accuracy.
What I do tell them that they will have the skills to do is possibly defend their home from a safe room. I'm not talking about clearing rooms. I'm talking about gathering the family into a defensible location and pointing a gun at the door while you wait for the cavalry to arrive.
Don
p.s. to encourage continued instruction I offer what I call 2/2/25. Two guys, for two hours, 25/hr each. So I make $100 in 2 hrs. These guys get a private lesson for 2 hrs for $50 each. I have a good time, they learn something. Society gets 2 more better trained shooters. (not just gun owners). Everybody wins.
Last edited:
BTW, MGL does not legally allow a PD to accept teaching credentials in lieu of a MSP certificate. It's a dumb law and each other state which requires training, when I called them directly their laws allow acceptance of proof that you are an instructor. MA makes no exceptions other than active duty MIL (new law) or those that go thru the police academy and get a cert from there (plus statutory acceptance of Hunter Ed cert, just to be complete). If the objective in MA is to make the student aware of MA obtuse gun laws, all these exceptions FAIL in a big way. I haven't met a cop yet (other than a "gun person") who really has a clue about MA gun law.
NRA Personal Protection in the Home and Outside the Home cover most of the above points well as a STARTING POINT for the student. Only thing not in the courses are shooting on the move (NRA is against that sort of thing), one/weak handed shooting and reloading under pressure (although I modify the course a bit to let them do tactical reloads) . However, I can tell you that very, very few people in MA are willing to invest the time and money to take these courses. I offer them 4-5x/year each and get very poor turn-outs, and I throw a lot more into it than is required by NRA.
kimmie1911
NES Member
Revisiting this thread. Who's responsibility is it to find out if the town where the LTC will be applied for, requires live fire? Should this be wholly on the student to do the research on what the requirements are? Or should the instructor research this, if they don't offer live fire? Or at least mention it to a potential student when they call to register for the class that they don't offer live fire and that some towns require it. If you go to Mass.gov it doesn't mention needing live fire but it does tell you to contact your local PD for specific information on the application process. My thought is that the student should do the research prior to taking the class, but, we recently had a student come to us for live fire after taking a course with an instructor, without live fire, in a town that required it and I would think the instructor was aware of this. Thoughts?
So let me ask this. If I take a student who has completed the firearms safety class to the range. Go through a few drills and have them shoot etc. does that then qualify as live fire? I generally do it for people who don’t own a firearm and want to try a few etc. just wondering if it’s not worth it to just do it on a regular basis.
pastera
NES Member
My kids took the Hunter's Ed class to get their certificate - they had been shooting for a while at that point so they just needed to comply with a ridiculous rule.
Most of the US doesn't have any requirement at all to own and you don't see any real difference in accidents and issues.
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,414
- Likes
- 17,602
It's the student's responsibility. Period.
When I participate in running a course, either NRA or Hunter Ed, I have no idea where a student will be applying.
Some towns do not accept HE as valid for FID/LTC, despite it being OK per MGL. Should I make sure that each and every person in the class will not be stymied when they go to John Law's house?
You asked for thoughts; those are mine.
I agree with Mr. Happy. Responsibility is on the student to know the requirements for his/her town.
Wouldn't it would be up to the LO if they would accept you certifying that the student satisfied their requirement?
When I teach, I try to make the legal nonsense as easy as possible. e.g. : if a student is from Boston I make sure to have a Moon Island target and let them practice on it.
It’s not much extra work, and it makes their lives easier.
You’re absolutely right that it’s their responsibility, but I do what I can because I want there to be more LTC holders.
No sure but that sounds reasonable. I guess the best thing would be to have the parameters under which the live fire needs to occur. For example so many rounds t so many yards and some max grouping?
Ask that and they will start making up range rules for all instructors to follow.
My simple method is teaching Home Firearm Safety AND including live fire after the class is done, noting it on the MSP Cert. I haven't had a problem with that, at least nobody has brought it to my knowledge. My only exception would be if teaching a pregnant or breast-feeding lady and only if she insisted on shooting after being warned about the risks. Another potential exception is if someone asked me to teach elsewhere where I have no connections to a local range.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
PD's should be allowed to make up the law or rules as they see fit or when they feel like it. We all know the state will do nothing to stop it, just like the useless 40 day BS
Last edited:
kimmie1911
NES Member
Thanks for the replies thus far. As I said, I personally believe that the student should do the research prior to taking the class. I guess that I was a little taken aback that a student from X town, took a course from an instructor in that same town, live fire wasn't a part of the course, and, the instructor never mentioned that it would be needed for that town. In the end, it was on the student for not researching prior to handing over his money but I felt that the instructor could have mentioned it. We have live fire in our classes so that's not an issue however we also inform our students that they need to contact their individual police departments to find out what other requirements there are such as letters of reference, etc.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,545
- Likes
- 33,590
No, but you could explain enough about MA gun laws to convince him to turn around and go back.
