carry permit application question

Straightshooter · Oct 9, 2014

Then you also realize that MSP has added "hitting the target" to that one HQL round. Keep in mind that MSP did not add the one fired round to the HQL requirement without the approval of the panel that held the COMAR hearing. These other additions have been made without legislative oversight.
Do you also know that the time period in which these classes need to be taken prior to application is listed as 2 years in COMAR but up until I started bitching and writing emails and making phone calls, the MSP site said 1 year. That has now been changed so don't think that nothing can be done. If we don't start shouting then getting nothing done is guaranteed.

kenpo333 · Oct 9, 2014

Straightshooter said:
Well, your instructor would be WRONG! If you want to qualify to stop an attacker, take a course like the PPITH, not a state mandated course for a wear and carry permit. When individual instructors start putting their own little spin on this, then continuity disappears and extra hurdles get added.

This course has nothing what so ever to do with marksmanship or self defense. It is simply an effort by the state to place hurdles in the path of as many citizens as possible in their quest to exercise their 2A rights.

Here is the directive that was put out by the MSP. Even a moron can figure out that after they locked the number of shots at 25, there is no longer any need for a percentage or a point score. At that point it becomes a "Pass/Fail" dependent on hitting the black at least 18 times.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5nrJ9x-BphXN3ltM0hVRDh6V1NHczQyRlgyZ3Z1OUw1OWZR/edit?pli=1[

You are right. Some people just can't read the directions.

HeatSeeker · Oct 9, 2014

It seems that what you are arguing is the fact that many instructors are just not willing to do the bare minimum outlined in the directives for the classes they are teaching.

You ask what I am going to do about the discrepency.....nothing, because I don't think there are any. All the basics were covered plus some. I also don't think any instructor cares if you think they are not teaching their class word for word from the directive. After all we choose them voluntarily. If we don't like how they are conducting their class I'm sure they will invite us to leave and fine someone else.

Straightshooter · Oct 9, 2014

HeatSeeker said:
It seems that what you are arguing is the fact that many instructors are just not willing to do the bare minimum outlined in the directives for the classes they are teaching.

You ask what I am going to do about the discrepancy.....nothing, because I don't think there are any. All the basics were covered plus some. I also don't think any instructor cares if you think they are not teaching their class word for word from the directive. After all we choose them voluntarily. If we don't like how they are conducting their class I'm sure they will invite us to leave and fine someone else.

Are you not getting the point? Yes you chose the instructor expecting to receive instruction and evaluation consistent with state requirements. You knew nothing about the more stringent live fire requirements he was using to determine your suitability to carry a handgun in Maryland. Yes, you passed, good for you, but what if those requirements were set at a level that you could not meet but your abilities fell within the state guidelines? Then I suppose you'd have a problem.

The requirements written into COMAR are to assure that everyone plays by the same rules. The class is not taught or layed out in the guidelines for the live fire evaluation. When you get to the firing portion, you are not longer in the learning mode but are now in the testing phase.

If you don't see any discrepancies, then you obviously have failed the reading comprehension part of this thread or refuse to even read the law and guidelines because it's as clear as black ink on white paper. Were you tested in the manner listed in the guidelines? By your own admission, NO. Were you scored in the manner listed in the guidelines? By your own admission, NO. And you don't see any discrepancies? And you don't have a problem with MSP making these guidelines outside of the criteria allowed in COMAR, without legislative approval or oversight? WOW!

daggo66 · Oct 10, 2014

We are screwed at every turn. The only answer is to vote more republicans into the legislature. You answer to the problem is to complain to the legislature that the law they set in place isn't being followed.

Do you think the current make up of the legislature gives a rat's ass about your assertion that instructors are requiring more stringent testing than what they put into law?

HeatSeeker · Oct 10, 2014

daggo66 said:
We are screwed at every turn. The only answer is to vote more republicans into the legislature. You answer to the problem is to complain to the legislature that the law they set in place isn't being followed.

Do you think the current make up of the legislature gives a rat's ass about your assertion that instructors are requiring more stringent testing than what they put into law?

This^^^^^^^^!

SS, I get your point. I understand exactly what you are saying. There were differences in what my instructor required and what the state guidelines called for. I just do not have an issue with it. IMO, there was nothing required in my class that was set at a level that anyone that wants to carry a firearm on their side at all times should not be able to meet. I'm sure your opinion will differ.

I don't think we can dictate to an instructor what he must do in any given class that he has to sign off on and that he makes sure covers the basic requirements. Maybe you would need to shop around and interview your prospective instructor to see if he plans to require a bit more competency or if he is a bare minimum instructor.

I procrastinated a bit on my renewal class. After a few weeks of not having any luck trying to find a class that I could make it too, I found a guy that was willing to do a one on one at a convenient place and time. The price was also very reasonable, so I set it up and did what he asked.

Straightshooter · Oct 10, 2014

HeatSeeker said:
This^^^^^^^^!

SS, I get your point. I understand exactly what you are saying. There were differences in what my instructor required and what the state guidelines called for. I just do not have an issue with it. IMO, there was nothing required in my class that was set at a level that anyone that wants to carry a firearm on their side at all times should not be able to meet. I'm sure your opinion will differ.

I don't think we can dictate to an instructor what he must do in any given class that he has to sign off on and that he makes sure covers the basic requirements. Maybe you would need to shop around and interview your prospective instructor to see if he plans to require a bit more competency or if he is a bare minimum instructor.

I procrastinated a bit on my renewal class. After a few weeks of not having any luck trying to find a class that I could make it too, I found a guy that was willing to do a one on one at a convenient place and time. The price was also very reasonable, so I set it up and did what he asked.

You are so far off base with your analogy that you can't even see the pitcher's mound.

Nobody said anything about "dictating" anything to the instructor. That has been done by the legislature and the MSP. My question to you would be, at what point would you object to more stringent requirements than those required by law? If the instructor had placed you at the 50 yard line, shooting at a 8" round target (that big M-3 target is way too big), with 3 seconds per shot and oh yeah, let's make the passing grade 80%, would you have a problem? After all as you said, the stiffer requirements show that you are in fact proficient to a level greater than the basic requirement. Wouldn't you want to show just how good you really are? At what point would you say "Mr Instructor, I don't want to make you angry and get tossed out of your class, but I'd like to know why these test criteria are so much different than required by law?"

Next time you go to MVA to renew your driver's license would you speak up if the lady behind the counter says "BEEP" you didn't read those Rs, Ts, and Fs fast enough" or "now that you've passed the vision test, let's go for a test drive and after that we'll ask you to demonstrate changing a tire, you'll have three minutes". Other than the vision test, none of that is allowed under COMAR, but wouldn't you be a much better driver for having proved you can do more then required as a bare minimum. Wouldn't that make them a better MVA employee too?

Many of us here sat through, testified at, and attended committee hearings, committee voting session, joint committee hearings, floor discussions, final votes and COMAR hearings and witnessed the clear, loud voice of people like Mike Smiegle and Nancy Jacobs fight to assure the law define and limit those standards to 25 rounds, max 15 yards, score hits of 70% . PERIOD!
MSP wrote guidelines that fall outside of those parameters, that is where we need to pointing fingers and filing complains, emailing legislators, and raising hell.

HeatSeeker · Oct 10, 2014

Of course your hypothetical qualifying situations would be unacceptable, but none of that happened. All of your posts are about , what if they did this and what if they did that, and when would you speak up? You just seem so extreme and almost irrational when debating this. You are, talking about dictating to an instructor that he has no right to require us to do anything more than what is laid out in the guidelines of the course. I keep reading your posts and thinking....but none of that happened. I will just agree that you cannot see my point and I cannot agree with yours so there is no use in any further discussion. Interesting couple of days though, Thanks.

HeatSeeker · Oct 10, 2014

One last thing. I do see your "pitchers mound". That is that you totally disagree with any type of classes or requiremnts to apply for a carry permit. I did too, but I also think that a class to show proper and safe handling of a firearm for those applying to carry one, is not a bad idea. I would like to see a shall issue state that issues after passing a background check and taking a class to show proficiency with a firearm.

Straightshooter · Oct 10, 2014

I did say "one last time" so I'll stock to it. Thank you for enjoying the extra anal probe that was inserted to judge your suitability to carry.

carry permit application question

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Straightshooter

Ultimate Member

kenpo333

Ultimate Member

HeatSeeker

Ultimate Member

Straightshooter

Ultimate Member

daggo66

Ultimate Member

HeatSeeker

Ultimate Member

Straightshooter

Ultimate Member

HeatSeeker

Ultimate Member

HeatSeeker

Ultimate Member

Straightshooter

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Share this page