Jump to content
revenger

qualification thread

Recommended Posts

On 7/20/2022 at 7:27 AM, CAL. .30 M1 said:

In my sole opinion, if you are going to carry, and being this is NJ - if you God forbid end up in a situation where you need to use your weapon to defend yourself.  

I would want, as part of discovery, those looking into my history who may be trying to prosecute me - to see that I at least qualified to a standard that is accepted as part of the RPO qualification.

Additionally, there are those that carry reloads for self defense, it has been said you can.  I am not.  Specifically because I DO reload...lest they say I used a round that I "hot rodded' to kill and maime...above what would be at least acceptable for LE use.

If that day ever comes and I pray it never does, I want to have as little for those looking to jam me up, to have anything they can point to as a ding to my character. 

Overthinking? Maybe, but with this topic maybe we all should...

Why not just buy a box of ammo to carry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, samiam said:

Hopefully without reopening the NJSA/NJAC/NJSP-regs can of worms again, since you did write "statute": All that 2C:58:1 stipulates is that the initial approver (whether that be local police chief, or "NJSP Superintendent") and the ultimate approver (county Superior Court judge) must be satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that he "is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and that he has a justifiable need to carry a handgun." THe word "qualification" (or any reasonable synonym) is not in there. 

Reading some of the past denial cases atleast from Bergen County,  looks like they will try to get people in the areas of falsifying the application - checking the boxes for things that may have happened looooong time ago, seeking counseling interpreted as mental health issues or other silly stuff.   With justifiable need gone, likely they will double down and start taking crack at "good moral character" and "thorough familiarity with the safe handling" and other discretionary and open ended traps. 

We all know more lawsuits need to happen to get rid of all this discretionary crap.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CJack said:

With justifiable need gone, likely they will double down and start taking crack at "good moral character" and "thorough familiarity with the safe handling" and other discretionary and open ended traps.

I'm a choir boy and upstanding citizen in this township.  If they deny me, there's no hope for anyone.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CMJeepster said:

I'm a choir boy and upstanding citizen in this township.  If they deny me, there's no hope for anyone.

Atleast in Bergen County, they injected Prosecutor office  into the process with sole purpose of digging dirt beyond what local PD may already have done.  I was reading a case file other day where the Judge denied (pre Bruen) based on incorrectly checking a box on the form, while acknowledging the applicant poses no threat to society and lived positively.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought for those that say the HQC1 qualification CoF is too stringent and that nobody should be shooting more than 15 yards in an SD situation...if you miss all 12 shots at 25 yards in HQC1, you can still pass!

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
  • Crazy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

Just a thought for those that say the HQC1 qualification CoF is too stringent and that nobody should be shooting more than 15 yards in an SD situation...if you miss all 12 shots at 25 yards in HQC1, you can still pass!

Stu. Are you aware that police officers qualify with their service weapon that is most likely a Glock 17 with a 5" barrel?  That qual also allows them to carry a small back up or off duty pistol with say a 3" barrel that they don't have to qualify for. . Us civilians are at a distinct disadvantage trying to qual with a 3-3.5" barrel. This info on the police qual for off duty and back up weapons comes from a police relative.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DAHL said:

Stu. Are you aware that police officers qualify with their service weapon that is most likely a Glock 17 with a 5" barrel?  That qual also allows them to carry a small back up or off duty pistol with say a 3" barrel that they don't have to qualify for. . Us civilians are at a distinct disadvantage trying to qual with a 3-3.5" barrel. This info on the police qual for off duty and back up weapons comes from a police relative.

I know several LEO and they all have to qualify with any and all handguns they want to carry, on and off duty.

I have personally qualified with a Glock 26. A good friend carries a P365xl off duty and had to qualify with that too. It is not the gun that makes the difference - it's the nut behind the butt. My Glock 26 will easily shoot 4" groups off hand at 25 yards if I do my part.

The dept policy for your relative's department may be different.

ETA: @Smokin .50 and @Krdshrk were there when I did it.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.Stu said:

I know several LEO and they all have to qualify with any and all handguns they want to carry, on and off duty.

I have personally qualified with a Glock 26. A good friend carries a P365xl off duty and had to qualify with that too. It is not the gun that makes the difference - it's the nut behind the butt. My Glock 26 will easily shoot 4" groups off hand at 25 yards if I do my part.

The dept policy for your relative's department may be different.

ETA: @Smokin .50 and @Krdshrk were there when I did it.

Stu the point that I am trying to make is that civilians are not police. Most states understand this and have alternatives, none at all or very easy requirements for carry. Certainly seniors, women, and people that have a touch of arthritis in my knees as myself would have trouble firing from a kneeing position. I will try to to qualify with my Glock 26 and I will probably pass as long as I don't have to kneel down and shoot.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, DAHL said:

Stu the point that I am trying to make is that civilians are not police. Most states understand this and have alternatives, none at all or very easy requirements for carry. Certainly seniors, women, and people that have a touch of arthritis in my knees as myself would have trouble firing from a kneeing position. I will try to to qualify with my Glock 26 and I will probably pass as long as I don't have to kneel down and shoot.

I agree that a person with limitations that can't kneel, for example, can qualify without doing that. The point of my post was that even if you don't make any hits at 25 yards, you can still pass. As someone running quals, I would let you shoot standing and still pass you so long as you demonstrated safe gun handling. If you chose not to shoot the 12 rounds at 25 yards at all, but got hits on all the other stages from 15 yards and in, you would still pass objectively. You would score 48/60 - that's a passing score. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DAHL said:

Stu. Are you aware that police officers qualify with their service weapon that is most likely a Glock 17 with a 5" barrel?  That qual also allows them to carry a small back up or off duty pistol with say a 3" barrel that they don't have to qualify for. . Us civilians are at a distinct disadvantage trying to qual with a 3-3.5" barrel. This info on the police qual for off duty and back up weapons comes from a police relative.

This is total nonsense.

1) Police have to qualify with every gun they plan on carrying - both on and off duty. There is a “Significantly Similar” clause in the AG Directive, but a full-size pistol compared to a sub-compact one aren’t significantly similar. Maybe a G17 size to a G19 size would qualify, but not a G26. 

2) A shorter barrel doesn’t make it harder to qualify or put you at any disadvantage. That’s all in your head and is completely a software issue and not a hardware one. The G26 is the most mechanically accurate pistol in the Glock 9mm lineup.

I have shot a qual course with a Ruger Gen1 LCP .380 and scored 100%, repeatedly. The fundamentals are the fundamentals.

3) Also, there is no rule that says you can’t CCW a G17 if that’s your choice based on what you shoot the best.

1 hour ago, Mr.Stu said:

I know several LEO and they all have to qualify with any and all handguns they want to carry, on and off duty.

I have personally qualified with a Glock 26. A good friend carries a P365xl off duty and had to qualify with that too. It is not the gun that makes the difference - it's the nut behind the butt. My Glock 26 will easily shoot 4" groups off hand at 25 yards if I do my part.

The dept policy for your relative's department may be different.

ETA: @Smokin .50 and @Krdshrk were there when I did it.

“Listen to your friend @Mr.Stu. He’s a cool dude.” /Zoolander

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

It is not the gun that makes the difference - it's the nut behind the butt.

ETA: @Smokin .50 and @Krdshrk were there when I did it.

Stu can shoot the wings off a fly at 25 yards.  Best pistol shooter I know.

HQC1 ain't that hard.  I passed it even with stupidly rushing through the 25 yard shots.  I finished each string with like 20 seconds left.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

You need to get out and meet more people :B:):

When the majority of people I meet are at the 2A4E Diversity shoots and brand new to guns - yes....  But honestly - while some of us make the qual seem easy - it doesn't change the fact that you should still practice.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Krdshrk said:

Stu can shoot the wings off a fly at 25 yards.  Best pistol shooter I know.

HQC1 ain't that hard.  I passed it even with stupidly rushing through the 25 yard shots.  I finished each string with like 20 seconds left.

Must have been that Hi Power....  ;)

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DAHL said:

Stu the point that I am trying to make is that civilians are not police. Most states understand this and have alternatives, none at all or very easy requirements for carry. Certainly seniors, women, and people that have a touch of arthritis in my knees as myself would have trouble firing from a kneeing position. I will try to to qualify with my Glock 26 and I will probably pass as long as I don't have to kneel down and shoot.

You arn't going to get anywhere with logic here because some want to show how many testosterone pills they use per day rather then be rational about this -LOL...They keep making comparison of how a LEO/X-leo may need to qualify and to what Granny might need. As if they have the same "duty" with a gun. It stupid on the face of it...Now they are going to get outrages at this post and say "didn't you see the mall-mass-shooter slayer last week, Granny needs to be able to defend herself at 45 yards - don't you know!" as IF that event carries any statistical significants for Granny. And we don't need to make excuse for Granny or anyone at any age, healthy or not, who may just want their carry to defend themselves at (lets call it) statistically significant civilian SD distances, which everyone should know by now is about what this chart from lucky gunner shows (note this does not include police shootings because it would be statistically-stupid to do so. They have another graph for cop incedents). Oh look at that, 91% of the civilain SD shooting happen at less than 5 yards, and 95% less that 7 yards. If Granny needs to qualify at all that is the distance and no more, statistics, logic, and her Damm Constitutional Rights demands it. The rest is just BS.

rangemaster-chart.jpg

  • Like 2
  • FacePalm 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right answer is that granny doesn't have to qualify at all because you don't have to pass tests to exercise constitutionally protected rights.  Unfortunately we are going to have to do what NJ is requiring if we want to stay out of jail but it is odd to me that we have people here, on a pro gun forum, advocating for more difficult tests.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, maintenanceguy said:

The right answer is that granny doesn't have to qualify at all because you don't have to pass tests to exercise constitutionally protected rights.  Unfortunately we are going to have to do what NJ is requiring if we want to stay out of jail but it is odd to me that we have people here, on a pro gun forum, advocating for more difficult tests.

Precisely because it IS NJ, an unfriendly 2a state, where it's in your BEST INTEREST to show proficiency. 

Also, let's be frank, if you can't figure out a flipping passport photo for your application, should you *really* be carrying a firearm?

I know I am harping on this, but I am like holy hell batman....

  • Agree 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2022 at 7:02 PM, samiam said:

Hopefully without reopening the NJSA/NJAC/NJSP-regs can of worms again, since you did write "statute": All that 2C:58:4 stipulates is that the initial approver (whether that be local police chief, or "NJSP Superintendent") and the ultimate approver (county Superior Court judge) must be satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that he "is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and that he has a justifiable need to carry a handgun." THe word "qualification" (or any reasonable synonym) is not in there. 

Are you a "certified firearms instructor".  I am. I'm not going to be satisfied someone "is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns" unless they qualify on some course.

Read the statute again .  Basically it says qualification, use of force training, or safety course. I'm not satisfied unless I give all three before I sign anything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@samiam you need to understand I used to take every agent to the range after they returned from basic training. I decided if they were competent to carry a gun on their own.  This took anywhere from an hour to four 8 hour days depending on their experience and ability.

My agency was willing to put the time and money into this.  Most are not and are satisfied with whatever they did in basic training.

BTW, I don't think people have to shoot from 25 yds to get a carry permit.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2022 at 10:56 PM, Mr.Stu said:

Just a thought for those that say the HQC1 qualification CoF is too stringent and that nobody should be shooting more than 15 yards in an SD situation...if you miss all 12 shots at 25 yards in HQC1, you can still pass!

No offense to those who can't, but shit man. If I can score a 98% with a glock 19c, and a 94% with a smal P938 on the HQC1..

I think most people should be fine qualifying who put a little practice in. 

I spent an hour practicing the day prior to qualification, and hadn't shot any handgun in almost 2 years. 

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2022 at 7:26 PM, High Exposure said:

This is total nonsense.

1) Police have to qualify with every gun they plan on carrying - both on and off duty. There is a “Significantly Similar” clause in the AG Directive, but a full-size pistol compared to a sub-compact one aren’t significantly similar. Maybe a G17 size to a G19 size would qualify, but not a G26. 

2) A shorter barrel doesn’t make it harder to qualify or put you at any disadvantage. That’s all in your head and is completely a software issue and not a hardware one. The G26 is the most mechanically accurate pistol in the Glock 9mm lineup.

I have shot a qual course with a Ruger Gen1 LCP .380 and scored 100%, repeatedly. The fundamentals are the fundamentals.

3) Also, there is no rule that says you can’t CCW a G17 if that’s your choice based on what you shoot the best.

“Listen to your friend @Mr.Stu. He’s a cool dude.” /Zoolander

@High Exposure^^^The voice of reason, lol!

If a small barreled gun is shot correctly---at FULL EXTENSION---so the sights are as far away from the face as possible, THEN I'm in agreement that snubby's and their Glock/Sig/Other equivalent can easily pass the Qual. Problem is most Newbies crowd their "cover" and bend their elbows when shooting, which results in a sight picture that SUCKS at 25 yards. There's simply too much "play" between front & rear sights, especially with manufacturer supplied dot sights.

Many years ago at the OBR&PC PPC Match I'm the Match Director of, an "unknown-to-the-club Newbie" showed up with a tiny .357 Sig. He blasted away with full extension and scored over 500 x 600 on his first attempt. Flame was coming outta his muzzle. I asked him WHERE THE EFF he learned to shoot like that. Then he showed me his tin and ID from Homeland Security. Didn't mention @GRIZ but made me wonder in AWE! Not every Cop is a Barney Fiffe, some can actually SHOOT!

My then 16-year-old son stood at my side at Monmouth Co. R&P Club and shot the 60 round COF of the RPO. One yard to 25 yards in steps, with administrative reloading. He used my S&W 586 and speed loaders. Shot a 57 x 60 and won a box of ammo from a W. Long Branch Cop that was the MD. It was his FIRST attempt at any handgun Qual. That was almost 17 years ago.

I don't think you should have to qualify with a handgun to make use of a Constitutional Right, but PRACTICE is highly recommended. I also don't think you should write a letter to the editor using your 1st Amendment Right without having first brushed up on spelling, sentence structure and punctuation. No need to prove yer an idiot behind a keyboard OR a gun :)  

This B-27 is from a brand new COF that my league co-chair and I designed late last month for our July Match. I HOSED the target at 7 and 15 yards, not using the rear sight until 25 yards. The result was a 233 x 250. At 7 yards I did 5 shots in approx. 2.5 sec outta-the-leather with 5 seconds allotted. Similar hosings for the other short-yardage stages. I was trying to show our PPC "students" that the shorter times were (ARE) more than doable.  @Mr.Stu easily shot a 246 or 248 (used 2 different guns).

May be an image of 3 people

 

---Rosey

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Smokin .50 said:

I don't think you should have to qualify with a handgun to make use of a Constitutional Right, but PRACTICE is highly recommended. I also don't think you should write a letter to the editor using your 1st Amendment Right without having first brushed up on spelling, sentence structure and punctuation. No need to prove yer an idiot behind a keyboard OR a gun :) 

 

Lots of arguments back and forth on both sides (should have lots of training if carrying vs no training should be REQUIRED to carry) but i think most can come together in agreement on the above points...

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 124gr9mm said:

 

Lots of arguments back and forth on both sides (should have lots of training if carrying vs no training should be REQUIRED to carry) but i think most can come together in agreement on the above points...

It's all about personal responsibility and accountability. Should the government be allowed to restrict a basic human right to only those people who can pass an arbitrary test? No! In fact HELL NO!

Should anyone with any sense hold themselves to the highest standard they can achieve when contemplating carrying a tool capable of delivering death? I say yes.

Should anyone who neglects to build the skills they need to safely deploy a handgun and harms anyone else through their ineptitude, be held responsible for their actions? Absolutely yes.

It is down to the individual to decide how much risk they want to accept and what they are willing to do to mitigate that risk. If it is proven that someone recklessly deployed a firearm (because they took no steps to become proficient) and harm an innocent they should be held accountable. With rights come responsibilities.

Those of us that are advocating for people to subject themselves to a proficiency test are doing so to encourage people to know what they are capable of. Should it be government mandated? No. but if you don't test yourself you have no idea the level of risk you are exposing yourself to. That risk can utterly destroy your way of life.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • FacePalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

It's all about personal responsibility and accountability. Should the government be allowed to restrict a basic human right to only those people who can pass an arbitrary test? No! In fact HELL NO!

Of course not!  No one would dare apply that to voting rights ...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2022 at 10:50 AM, Mr.Stu said:

I am pretty much set up to run quals. Email me at [email protected] to make a booking.

Currently quals will be held at Phillipsburg Pistol Club where, in order to prevent a high volume of quals from preventing the general membership from using the facilities, the range can be booked from 8am-12pm Monday thru Thursday. I need to give them some notice to make the range booking and it needs to fit in with my day job. Right now, I could take a booking for Thursday morning (7/21) but you need to let me know today. Future sessions will available depending on my work schedule. I am also working on getting approval to run quals at EFGA which should make some evenings and weekends possible. It will take 20-30 minutes per person, per gun and I would prefer small groups rather than set up for just 1 person.

The CoF will be HQC1 - 60 rounds at a Q target from 1 to 25 yards.

You'll need to bring:

  1. the gun(s) you intend to carry
  2. 60 rounds per gun
  3. 2 magazines or a speedloader (there is a mandatory reload on the clock in the CoF)
  4. a strong side hip holster (IWB or OWB is fine. No AIWB, SoB or shoulder holsters allowed)
  5. a magazine/speedloader pouch is useful but not required
  6. eye & ear protection
  7. Appropriate outdoor gear (sun hat, rain jacket, etc.)

I will be signing the certification based on the shooter scoring a minimum of 80% (48 hits) and observed safe gun handling. Safe gun handling will be assessed based on the well established rules that have been used in IDPA/USPSA/ICORE for years.

The fees will be $65 per person for the first gun and $40 for each additional gun during the same session.

N.B. When you sign the qualification certificate you will be attesting that you have read the New Jersey Statutes pertaining to your responsibilities and liabilities regarding carrying a handgun, N.J.S.A. 2C:3-1, et seq. These statutes describe the laws pertaining to use of force in NJ. I am not qualified to teach use of force and will not be doing so. This is purely a certificate to satisfy N.J.A.C. 13:54-2.4 (b). I will include a copy of my certification as an NRA Instructor to satisfy N.J.A.C. 13:54-2.4 (c).

I am running a session this coming Thursday morning. If anyone would like to get their qualifications, please email me at [email protected]

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

I am running a session this coming Thursday morning. If anyone would like to get their qualifications, please email me at [email protected]

Ha, ha, ha, wow, now I know why you had such an "unbiased"-LOL! opinion about harping on quals at long distances. Nice little gig, I'm jelous ;-). This is just too much (in funny way)...The friendly ribbing aside, glad you are offering it so people can get their button. Still, I need to laugh a bit more - LOL!

  • FacePalm 5
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...