MSP Got one... Instructor caught cutting corners, permits invalidated.

[Biggfoot44]

. It's almost suspicious that they were treated so "kindly" by MSP.

OR , being that they are amongst the highest volume of trainers in the state , they feared the backlash of revoking thousands of students .

 

[linkstate]

Not necessarily . Once upon a decade it was state of the art to record your own lectures . That would assure that you covered exactly the same points in exactly the same way for consistency . Instructor is still in the room , and has follow up and Q&A . This is for individual subjects , not a complete "class" .

Makes sense. I was just assuming/thinking they were like, here, watch this 8 hour video and come to the range tomorrow or something. When I went to their website and saw they were on the higher end of the cost spectrum, it just rubbed me the wrong way. But at the end of the day, I have no stake as a customer in what PTP does.

I think the whole training requirement is BS. I took a class for the checkbox with plans to take additional training that focuses more on shooting fundamentals.

 

[ASTC]

What about the people who did everything as needed and the instructor in a later class phoned it in and so they still lost their permit? That sounds like easily won lawsuit. But still who wants to go through all that after already jumping thru the hoops. It's like holding the son accountable for the sins of the father.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

I will respond as best I can, but I am not sure what you mean by "the instructor in a later class phoned it in"? Once the student completes the class, they receive and sign the MSP Certified Qualification Score Sheet. The student then fills out the application online and submits it with a copy of the score sheet they signed. (I am not aware of the instructors phoning anything in.) The score sheet clearly states "a minimum of 16 hours" and the student signs the form under penalty of perjury, so I don't know how the student can later claim they didn't know about the number of hours required? I think they should think carefully before they sue the State of Maryland, as some have suggested on this blog, who might then decide to charge them with perjury. (No, Maryland won't do that!)

 

[Lomara210]

Well for those of who dont know where was it taught?

Odenton

 

[BigWilly]

I will respond as best I can, but I am not sure what you mean by "the instructor in a later class phoned it in"? Once the student completes the class, they receive and sign the MSP Certified Qualification Score Sheet. The student then fills out the application online and submits it with a copy of the score sheet they signed. (I am not aware of the instructors phoning anything in.) The score sheet clearly states "a minimum of 16 hours" and the student signs the form under penalty of perjury, so I don't know how the student can later claim they didn't know about the number of hours required? I think they should think carefully before they sue the State of Maryland, as some have suggested on this blog, who might then decide to charge them with perjury. (No, Maryland won't do that!)

I meant that if student "A" took a class with an instructor who in that class did the correct training - 16 hours instruction with a passed firing qualification and received his HGP. Then say, 2 months later, the instructor decided to not follow the proscribed training, like only did 8 hours total and there was in auditor in that class. So now all the previous students HGPs are invalidated. Student "A" did everything per the requirements and now has to go through it again. Regardless if they have to pay, there is another 16 hours + wasted. That in my opinion should be an easily won lawsuit.

Student A would be penalized for something they had no control over. They did everything they were supposed to and yet still get screwed.



Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[Melnic]

Time for Bloomberg, Soros and their ilk to start paying ringers from Demanding Moms, Everytown et al to go to class and file complaints. Doesn't matter if the class goes the full 16 hours.

Anyone think that this has not been discussed?

They may be too afraid that the ones they send end up liking shooting the guns and feeling equalized with the ability to defend themselves and learn enough that they become CCW license holders and turn 2A on them.

 

[ASTC]

I meant that if student "A" took a class with an instructor who in that class did the correct training - 16 hours instruction with a passed firing qualification and received his HGP. Then say, 2 months later, the instructor decided to not follow the proscribed training, like only did 8 hours total and there was in auditor in that class. So now all the previous students HGPs are invalidated. Student "A" did everything per the requirements and now has to go through it again. Regardless if they have to pay, there is another 16 hours + wasted. That in my opinion should be an easily won lawsuit.

Student A would be penalized for something they had no control over. They did everything they were supposed to and yet still get screwed.



Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

I now understand your point and totally agree with you. The words "phoned in" confused me. I was attempting to address those on the blog that were saying that some students were "unaware of the required hours" and should sue the MSP. Since they signed the form, I don't think that is a good idea. (It's never good to wave a red cape at a bull.)

 

[Mark75H]

Anyone who signs a form without reading and understanding it puts themselves at risk. The Wear and Carry class/scoring form is not that elaborate.

 

[FrankZ]

Anyone who signs a form without reading and understanding it puts themselves at risk. The Wear and Carry class/scoring form is not that elaborate.

I dunno, in my class they had to put up a slide with a char showing hits and total with the percentage. Tricky... very tricky.

 

[Mark75H]

I'm talking about the part that says the student took a 16 hour class. It says that, the student signs it saying they took a 16 hour class.

 

[Jimdick2949]

This had been going on for some time. I was one of the 1st Instructors doing HQL & W & C. After about a year a new instructor started "Teaching" "Selling" classes like 4.5 hrs for a W & C class. A complaint was filed and MSP called the complainant and nothing was done about it as he continued on. He was having 15-20 students per W & C and were cutting times on all. He did a HQL in about and hour for an I dividual one afternoon. It's about time somebody was held accountable. As far as the 16 hr requirement I think it is needed as everyone can use a refresher no matter how good you are. And the requirement for prior service military being exempt from training is not a good idea. Most veterans never shot a pistol as their weapon used was a M-16. Big difference wouldn't you say. I advised all prior service they were exempt and offered the class free to them. About 40% took advantage of the class. Again as far as training being a requirement, I had a friend ( as well as others)that only shot his carry firearm on his initial class and every three years. I suspect this is a common event for a lot of individuals as we are all to busy these days and practice is on the back burner.

 

[Boondock Saint]

This had been going on for some time. I was one of the 1st Instructors doing HQL & W & C. After about a year a new instructor started "Teaching" "Selling" classes like 4.5 hrs for a W & C class. A complaint was filed and MSP called the complainant and nothing was done about it as he continued on. He was having 15-20 students per W & C and were cutting times on all. He did a HQL in about and hour for an I dividual one afternoon. It's about time somebody was held accountable. As far as the 16 hr requirement I think it is needed as everyone can use a refresher no matter how good you are. And the requirement for prior service military being exempt from training is not a good idea. Most veterans never shot a pistol as their weapon used was a M-16. Big difference wouldn't you say. I advised all prior service they were exempt and offered the class free to them. About 40% took advantage of the class. Again as far as training being a requirement, I had a friend ( as well as others)that only shot his carry firearm on his initial class and every three years. I suspect this is a common event for a lot of individuals as we are all to busy these days and practice is on the back burner.

No mandatory training. Much less 16 hours worth. Nonsense.

 

[swinokur]

I tried to get a prayer permit.

I was told it wasn’t needed

The 2A is no different than the 1A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Biggfoot44]

This had been going on for some time. I was one of the 1st Instructors doing HQL & W & C. After about a year a new instructor started "Teaching" "Selling" classes like 4.5 hrs for a W & C class. A complaint was filed and MSP called the complainant and nothing was done about it as he continued on. He was having 15-20 students per W & C and were cutting times on all. He did a HQL in about and hour for an I dividual one afternoon. It's about time somebody was held accountable. As far as the 16 hr requirement I think it is needed as everyone can use a refresher no matter how good you are. And the requirement for prior service military being exempt from training is not a good idea. Most veterans never shot a pistol as their weapon used was a M-16. Big difference wouldn't you say. I advised all prior service they were exempt and offered the class free to them. About 40% took advantage of the class. Again as far as training being a requirement, I had a friend ( as well as others)that only shot his carry firearm on his initial class and every three years. I suspect this is a common event for a lot of individuals as we are all to busy these days and practice is on the back burner.

As to the first 1/3 or so , I'm with you that IF there is a mandatory requirement , the training providers should be held accountable , and on a level playing field .

But that's about it .

As to being proper , or a good idea , big nope .

If you're offering some of your services pro bono , I'll cut you some slack for being merely punctilious and smug , rather than the usual appeals for Firearm Instructors Full Employment .

 

[antco]

What's this about PTP Ryan shooting himself in the leg? Any substance to it? Or merely internet rumor?

 

[csanc123]

This had been going on for some time. I was one of the 1st Instructors doing HQL & W & C. After about a year a new instructor started "Teaching" "Selling" classes like 4.5 hrs for a W & C class. A complaint was filed and MSP called the complainant and nothing was done about it as he continued on. He was having 15-20 students per W & C and were cutting times on all. He did a HQL in about and hour for an I dividual one afternoon. It's about time somebody was held accountable. As far as the 16 hr requirement I think it is needed as everyone can use a refresher no matter how good you are. And the requirement for prior service military being exempt from training is not a good idea. Most veterans never shot a pistol as their weapon used was a M-16. Big difference wouldn't you say. I advised all prior service they were exempt and offered the class free to them. About 40% took advantage of the class. Again as far as training being a requirement, I had a friend ( as well as others)that only shot his carry firearm on his initial class and every three years. I suspect this is a common event for a lot of individuals as we are all to busy these days and practice is on the back burner.

Nope. He'll no.

 

[jrumann59]

This had been going on for some time. I was one of the 1st Instructors doing HQL & W & C. After about a year a new instructor started "Teaching" "Selling" classes like 4.5 hrs for a W & C class. A complaint was filed and MSP called the complainant and nothing was done about it as he continued on. He was having 15-20 students per W & C and were cutting times on all. He did a HQL in about and hour for an I dividual one afternoon. It's about time somebody was held accountable. As far as the 16 hr requirement I think it is needed as everyone can use a refresher no matter how good you are. And the requirement for prior service military being exempt from training is not a good idea. Most veterans never shot a pistol as their weapon used was a M-16. Big difference wouldn't you say. I advised all prior service they were exempt and offered the class free to them. About 40% took advantage of the class. Again as far as training being a requirement, I had a friend ( as well as others)that only shot his carry firearm on his initial class and every three years. I suspect this is a common event for a lot of individuals as we are all to busy these days and practice is on the back burner.

WTF. I have two other state NR permits, MD W&C training only taught me about the supremely effed up way MD law is interpreted, nothing new about when to use force that my other Permits did not go over. Oh and then another 8 hours of waiting to receive my qualification cert.

For someone that has not ever had a carry permit the training would be beneficial on the safety, law, best practices but it should not be mandatory

 

[swinokur]

The punishment for breaking the law through ignorance due to a lack of training should be deterrence enough

Carrying a deadly weapon is serious business


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blaster229]

I heard that one of his students posted on social media that they got finished early, blah blah blah and that may have tipped MSP.

 

[dblas]

How can DC make this work but MD can’t?

Pretty pathetic


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

DC requires an instructor to submit the entire curiculum they are going to teach, and DC either approves it and makes them an instructor, or they don't.