Jump to content

Variant

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    50

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Posts posted by Variant

  1. Posted

    13 minutes ago, 124gr9mm said:

    I never implied that.

    I was pointing out that there are proficient shooters in both the civilian and police worlds, so it's not fair to say that the average civilian shoots better than the average cop.

    I think quality trumps quantity, so if there's a qualification course in place twice a year that adequately tests someones proficiency, I think that's better than just some kind of 'range time' requirement.

    But it doesn’t adequately test someone’s proficiency, that’s the entire point. The cops who only shoot once or twice a year to pass that qualification are terrible shots. But apparently I’ve been told that it’s OK for someone not to be able to shoot Minute-of-Man at 7 yards because he has other skills…

    And I agree with you, a range time requirement is silly. Why would you want people to practice and train more with a deadly weapon that they are allowed to use at a much higher level and with significantly more authority than the civilians they put in danger. 

    I never imagined I would ever read something like I’m reading here. Police should be the best trained and most experienced at shooting a handgun in the population. I just can’t fathom citizens defending police shooting once or twice a year instead of being heavily trained and practiced. 

    This is the clown world we live in. Cue the video of the LEO telling the classroom how he’s the only one professional enough to carry a Glock 40. 

  3. Posted

    5 minutes ago, RichP said:

    You are certainly entitled to lobby the state reps and governor for added training and qualification requirements. I'm sure that they will do their best to accommodate your request, as well as extending those requirements to any potential ccw holders.

    No way, no reason to do that. As I already said, expecting Police to know how to use their handgun and fire it more than once or twice a year is completely unreasonable. Thank you for showing me the error in my original thinking. 

  4. Posted

    You guys are right, you changed my mind. Expecting police officers to shoot more than once or twice a year is completely out of line. Expecting police officers to be able to shoot a reasonable sized group with the handgun that they carry is definitely an unreasonable idea. There’s no need for training and practice. 

    Police have the ability to shoot dozens of rounds in public, miss their assailant with every one of them, hit innocent bystanders, then be cleared of all wrongdoing. No need to practice and be proficient at shooting, amirite?

  5. Posted

    2 hours ago, RichP said:

    Your average butcher is better with a knife than most surgeons, just sayin...

    What exactly is a "better shot"? I personally know hunters that can stack rounds on targets at ludicrous distances, but will miss vitals on deer at 100 yards. Is a bullseye shooter a better shot than an USPSA GM? Or a SEAL?

    I also think that you're giving waaay too much credit to the  "average citizen". Having shot at many ranges, I can definitely say there have been many times when I've felt endangered by the "average citizen".

    Your average butcher is not better with a scalpel then your average surgeon. 

    I am talking about close range with handgun. I’m sure you could define what a good shot is yourself. I don’t think it’s asking much for a police officer who has far more power and authority to use his handgun to be able to shoot as well or better than most of the other people at the range. But many of us know for a fact that officers often shoot incredibly poorly, terrible groups and sometimes missing paper completely.

    It’s a well-known fact that many police officers only shoot when necessary to qualify. I honestly can’t believe why anyone would defend this practice. 
     
    Griz defended this by insinuating that all police are highly trained operators and war heroes who have other skills that could help more. I don’t believe that to be true and neither do you, but even if it was, why can’t we still expect them to practice enough to shoot better than average?

  6. Posted

    “You need to understand the belief that cops should be a very good shot is false.”

    No, I’m not going to believe that. I’m going to continue to believe that police officers should be a very good shot. I’m going to believe that police officers, who carry a firearm professionally and have far more authority and privilege to use it, should put the work in to be a better shot than the average citizen. I believe that the liberals who only want police officers to carry guns should stop believing that police officers are all more qualified to carry a gun than the average citizen, which is simply not true.

    I don’t question your credentials, I just don’t see how your stories change what is a very simple and easy to accept fact.

    Your stories make it out like cops are highly trained war heroes they could make up for being bad shots with grit and experience. Even if that was true, which it’s not, I still don’t see why they should forgo the most important part of it.

    I remember over 20 years ago shooting at the Bullethole next to Belleville and Newark police. It was embarrassing that a couple of 21-year-old with no training shot significantly better than the police who are most likely to use their firearm. And here’s the thing, I was a terrible shot back then and I’m still not that great today. But I don’t carry a firearm professionally and there is no theory that I’m more qualified to carry a firearm than everyone else.

    The same thing continued for years at Fort Dix and Cherry Ridge, my friend and I would meet many cops and they were almost always the poorest shots on the range. Why would they be good shots, many only shoot a couple times per year. 

     

  8. Posted

    3 hours ago, GRIZ said:

    Shooting is just a part of fighting.

     

    I’m not sure what that means or how it applies.

    You laugh at people who say they shoot better than cops. That’s a very serious problem when cops are the ones who everyone expects to be a very good shot. And it’s even worse when considering that such a huge amount of people think only cop should be the ones carrying guns.

  9. Posted

     I laugh at those who say "I shoot better than the cops".

    I’m not sure why. The average firearms enthusiast and casual shooter is a far better shot than the average cop. It’s unfortunate, and also ironic since half of the country thinks only cops should have guns. 

  11. Posted

    49 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

    I think it's just a rushed last minute/low effort action to have *something* in place.

    I'd love to see the faces of the legislators who wrote this new requirement when they learn of how it's implemented:

    "Are you kidding me!?  The extent of the training requirement is that they have to click a button 26 times!?"

    I have a feeling that all these legislators will be patting themselves on the back for “effecting change” and “making the world a better place” and whatever other garbage they tell themselves.

    They will probably vote to give themselves raises and longer vacations as a present to themselves for all the hard work they did making us safer.

  12. Posted

    18 minutes ago, Bushmaster1313 said:

    Judges are far from saints. 
    But in general they are overworked and a good one is not paid as much as if they were in the private sector. 
    Without respect for the judiciary civilization falls apart. 
     

     

    Prosecutors as well as the people working in their offices don’t make nearly as much as they could the private sector either. Nor do politicians. Or soldiers. 

    It’s service, they make a choice to forgo money in order to serve.

    As far as respecting them, that should be on an individual basis. Judges who knowingly break the law and infringe on our rights should be taken off of the bench and shamed in the streets.

    • Like 2
    • Agree 2

  13. Posted

    12 minutes ago, samiam said:

    I hope that everyone who applied is planning to make a very good digital copy of their permit as soon as it is issued. From what I've heard about the paper, you might even be able to produce a copy good enough that it is indistingishable from the original (at least, under most circumstances). That way if you did lose your permit, you would at least have a plausible copy to offer until it was replaced. I did that with my FID card, then laminated the official document. Now that I think about it, does an official procedure for replacing a NJ carry permit even exist? I wouldn't put it past this state to take the attitude that if you lose your permit, you are SOL until renewal time.  

    I believe some people who received their PtC have said that they were told if they want to add any new firearms on they could go back to the court to have it added. So I assume if you lose the card you could go to the court the same way to have a new one issued.

    As far as the card itself, since it’s just a piece of thick paper, I’m thinking we could fold it in half to fit it in our normal wallet. It’s not like there’s a picture or fingerprint or chip inside of it, it’s just ink on paper.

  15. Posted

    20 minutes ago, nooch450 said:

    The basis of my question was to find out if carrying without the permit on you has the same long term consequences as carrying without the permit at all.

    Meaning is it unlawful possession or does it get dropped when you show or prove you do have one but just didn't have the permit on you at the time.

    When I get mine, hopefully sometime soon, I plan to keep it in my wallet at all times next to my NJFID, FL, NH, UT permits.

    Even in this terrible state I can’t see them charging you with the same felony charges for carrying a firearm without your PtC card as if you didn’t have the PtC in the first place. 

    But I don’t doubt for a second that you’ll be taking a ride and having an unpleasant night. So if I lost my card, I would be very worried to carry until I got a new one. 

    • Agree 1

  17. Posted

    45 minutes ago, nooch450 said:

    I would carry it, but I like to fully understand the law. What if you lost or forgot your wallet by accident? Good to know what your potentially dealing with....

    I would be very worried carrying a firearm without the permit.  You might get a cop who believes that you have it and doesn't care.  You might get a cop who arrests you and you sit in jail for the weekend..   

  18. Posted

    2 hours ago, joeg said:

    What is the carry in car issue?

    If you look through the older pages in this thread you will see that Ocean and Monmouth County have issued permits with an insane court order. One of the many restrictions was that they are not allowed to be inside of a car while carrying their firearm. They have to remove the firearm and unload it and put it in their trunk before getting in the car. 
     

    Edit: I didn’t realize there was another page, someone already answered the question. 

  19. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

    $20K really is the bottom figure as you well noted. It just goes up from there. From what I've read, upwards of 100K in fees for a criminal defense case involving homicide, for instance, is not at all uncommon, particularly if expert witnesses need to be pulled in, etc. And I would think that those higher fees might be even more common in a high-cost, 2A-hostile state such as ours. That's a lot of expense. I dare say it's enough to ruin many households financially... while others with even less money would simply have to roll the dice and put their freedom in the hands of a young, wet-behind-the-ears public defender. Eegads! I'd say all of that heartache is worth avoiding for $200 a year.

    When you put it like this, it almost seems too good to be true. Is there any catch? 

  22. Posted

    No, unfortunately I’m not one of the lucky few who have received a card, so I don’t have the measurements.

    Personally, I don’t like the idea of having to carry a second wallet or holder because I might forget that one day, and that would be serious trouble if caught without it  

     

  24. Posted

    I’m one of those old farts who still has an FID card from 20 years ago when they were more reasonably sized and could just barely fit in a wallet if you cut it down.

    The new PtC is much larger and won’t fit into any standard wallet.

    What is your plan? Will you carry a secondary wallet that can fit the PtC (and maybe other firearms paperwork such as insurance card)?

    Will you fold your PtC to fit it in your current wallet?

×
×
  • Create New...