Online CHP Course Declined in Albemarle County

[ProShooter]

imported post

packingdressagerider wrote:

What doesn't make any sense to me is, if attendance at a hunter education course counts as "training" for a CHP (and there is generally a few minutes spent on this at a Va. hunter ed class with no range time), why is there such an objection to an on-line course?

No one ever claimed that a Hunter Ed course was all that good for training either, its just that the Commonwealth has deemed that training to be sufficient.

Its just like we've talked about earlier - the state takes into account a multitude of training experiences, which is nice. Its just that some training is not equal to the others. Someone who spent 20 years as an MP in the Army carrying a pistol has more practical experience than someone who spent 20 years swinging in ladel in the Navy. The state views both DD214's as equal. Everyone has their own opinion on this.

 

[packingdressagerider]

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

No one ever claimed that a Hunter Ed course was all that good for training either, its just that the Commonwealth has deemed that training to be sufficient.

Its just like we've talked about earlier - the state takes into account a multitude of training experiences, which is nice. Its just that some training is not equal to the others. Someone who spent 20 years as an MP in the Army carrying a pistol has more practical experience than someone who spent 20 years swinging in ladel in the Navy. The state views both DD214's as equal. Everyone has their own opinion on this.

Oh, I agree. Hunter Ed. CHP segment for a few seconds taught by a game warden is a poor substitute for a hands on class with actual range time.

 

[67GT390FB]

imported post

packingdressagerider wrote:

ProShooter wrote:

No one ever claimed that a Hunter Ed course was all that good for training either, its just that the Commonwealth has deemed that training to be sufficient.

Its just like we've talked about earlier - the state takes into account a multitude of training experiences, which is nice. Its just that some training is not equal to the others. Someone who spent 20 years as an MP in the Army carrying a pistol has more practical experience than someone who spent 20 years swinging in ladel in the Navy. The state views both DD214's as equal. Everyone has their own opinion on this.

Oh, I agree. Hunter Ed. CHP segment for a few seconds taught by a game warden is a poor substitute for a hands on class with actual range time.

just remember that not all "CHP" specific courses taught by a live instructor include actual range time either. A bunch are taught during gunshows or at venues that do not have access to ranges. There is nothing in the VA statute that requires range time as silly as that may appear from a practical standpoint.

 

[ProShooter]

imported post

67GT390FB wrote:

packingdressagerider wrote:

ProShooter wrote:

No one ever claimed that a Hunter Ed course was all that good for training either, its just that the Commonwealth has deemed that training to be sufficient.

Its just like we've talked about earlier - the state takes into account a multitude of training experiences, which is nice. Its just that some training is not equal to the others. Someone who spent 20 years as an MP in the Army carrying a pistol has more practical experience than someone who spent 20 years swinging in ladel in the Navy. The state views both DD214's as equal. Everyone has their own opinion on this.

Oh, I agree. Hunter Ed. CHP segment for a few seconds taught by a game warden is a poor substitute for a hands on class with actual range time.

just remember that not all "CHP" specific courses taught by a live instructor include actual range time either. A bunch are taught during gunshows or at venues that do not have access to ranges. There is nothing in the VA statute that requires range time as silly as that may appear from a practical standpoint.

Agreed. Our basic safety class doesnt have a range component either.

There is a difference though in a handgun safety class vs. a class that talks about tree stands, shotguns, and wearing blaze orange. We offer range training separately for those shooters that want to take their training to the next level but again, the Code merely states that you need a handgun safety course.

 

[packingdressagerider]

imported post

67GT390FB
just remember that not all "CHP" specific courses taught by a live instructor include actual range time either. A bunch are taught during gunshows or at venues that do not have access to ranges. There is nothing in the VA statute that requires range time as silly as that may appear from a practical standpoint.



That may possibly be the amazing part, about there being no range time requirement.

 

[67GT390FB]

imported post

packingdressagerider wrote:

That may possibly be the amazing part, about there being no range time requirement.

prior to the adoption of "Shall Issue" permits the "May Issue" Permits had no training requirement at all if i remember my facts correctly.

 

[packingdressagerider]

imported post

67GT390FB wrote:

prior to the adoption of "Shall Issue" permits the "May Issue" Permits had no training requirement at all if i remember my facts correctly.

You have a better memory than I do then. When the law changed, as soon as an instructor offered a course at VMI, I took it. Back then it was a seperate thing from Basic Pistol which I had as well the previous year. This was something all the area NRA instructors felt should be offered to those who wanted to apply for a CHP.

 

[spitfyr]

imported post

67GT390FB wrote

just remember that not all "CHP" specific courses taught by a live instructor include actual range time either. A bunch are taught during gunshows or at venues that do not have access to ranges. There is nothing in the VA statute that requires range time as silly as that may appear from a practical standpoint.

Silly indeed. Why would anyone WANT to take a CHP-requirement-satisfying course WITHOUT any range time?

Relative to this discussion, I can see a judge thinking "well an online course is no proof that they can actually handle a firearm, or even get their questions answered."

Which is part of why I did mine - sorry, ProShooter - at a place that offered range time with instruction as part of the course.

 

[TFred]

imported post

spitfyr wrote:

67GT390FB wrote

just remember that not all "CHP" specific courses taught by a live instructor include actual range time either. A bunch are taught during gunshows or at venues that do not have access to ranges. There is nothing in the VA statute that requires range time as silly as that may appear from a practical standpoint.

Silly indeed. Why would anyone WANT to take a CHP-requirement-satisfying course WITHOUT any range time?

Relative to this discussion, I can see a judge thinking "well an online course is no proof that they can actually handle a firearm, or even get their questions answered."

Which is part of why I did mine - sorry, ProShooter - at a place that offered range time with instruction as part of the course.

Lots of reasons. Many people have ample experience in handling firearms already. The law specifies a minimum training requirement, which does not include live fire, and that is what they are fulfilling. Almost literally, they are checking a box on a form.

Now for someone who has zero experience, and is wanting to obtain a CHP, it is probably wise for them to take a course with some range time, but when you think about it, no one short course is going to really be enough to take someone from zero to enough experience to be able to comfortably and confidently carry a firearm every day. Only additional training and live fire experience can accomplish that. But that is not part of the requirement for a CHP.

For most folks, who do have experience with firearms, it is almost certainly more helpful to have a course that covers the nuances of concealed carry law in Virginia, and self-defense liability issues than starting at step 1.

TFred

 

[ProShooter]

imported post

spitfyr wrote:

Which is part of why I did mine - sorry, ProShooter - at a place that offered range time with instruction as part of the course.

No harm, no foul.

As TFred said , many folks have practical handling experience. To them, its not a requirement. ObviouslyVirginia didnt feel it was a requirement either. In fact, I'm a Utah certifiedinstructor as well and as squared away as their program is, they dont feel its necessary either.

Now, we do offer optional range training and I highly encourage students to sign up for a session. We do ours in a different format than some other local training places because I feel that our live fire training offers more personalizedattention tailored to the individual. That's not to say that other programs don't do a good job, its just how I prefer to train in a live fire situation. Ask anyone who has spent an hour with me on the firing line and I'm sure that they will tell you that they got their money's worth.

To each his own....

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

I wonder how much simpler legal gun carry would be if all exceptions to infringements to the Second Amendment were required to be gratis or acknowledged as perfidious.

 

[jmelvin]

imported post

It's funny we discuss the requirements of the CHP, when anyone not prohibited from possessing a firearm may openly carry in 99+% of the places the CHP holders may carry. No license is needed to open carry and none should exist, same with CC as well.

While VA does give you various options to meet the CHP requirements, the AZ CCW training took a whole day to complete with range time included, but just like VA you could carry openly in 99% of the places you could carry with a CCW. Goofy.

 

[spitfyr]

imported post

TFred wrote:

Lots of reasons. Many people have ample experience in handling firearms already. The law specifies a minimum training requirement, which does not include live fire, and that is what they are fulfilling. Almost literally, they are checking a box on a form.

Now for someone who has zero experience, and is wanting to obtain a CHP, it is probably wise for them to take a course with some range time, but when you think about it, no one short course is going to really be enough to take someone from zero to enough experience to be able to comfortably and confidently carry a firearm every day. Only additional training and live fire experience can accomplish that. But that is not part of the requirement for a CHP.

For most folks, who do have experience with firearms, it is almost certainly more helpful to have a course that covers the nuances of concealed carry law in Virginia, and self-defense liability issues than starting at step 1.

Excellent points. I agree that no one course can do it all. And I definitely understand the benefits of a stepped program like what ProShooter offers.

At least 25% of the people in the CHP class I took last year were new to handgun ownership. One in particular brought a filthy Ruger P89 in a garbage bag and proceeded to hold it pointed at his gut (which was corrected by the instructor long before we started loading live rounds.) That is the type of person who needs more than an online course - or seminar with no range time - can offer. He didnt know what he was doing wrong and may have been dead by now if he wasnt told better by the instructor. So I guess what I fear is that these sorts of minimum requirements let people to do the minimum and think its all they need. You can get a CHP in VA even if you have never fired a gun in your life because the state says you can, whether its right or not. Then again I think its way too easy to get a drivers license as well. But those are much bigger issues I guess.

As for why I chose that type of course. I have owned and shot guns for 10+ years but I still appreciated the fact that a package deal was available in one day and I was able to learn and improve a few techniques as a result. It is far from the end of my training, actually come to think of it I have been meaning to set up a private lesson with ProShooter to work on a few more things. I dont ever expect to stop learning and improving. So it scares me that some people think an online course is all they need.

Sorry for the rambling.

 

[spitfyr]

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

Now, we do offer optional range training and I highly encourage students to sign up for a session. We do ours in a different format than some other local training places because I feel that our live fire training offers more personalizedattention tailored to the individual. That's not to say that other programs don't do a good job, its just how I prefer to train in a live fire situation. Ask anyone who has spent an hour with me on the firing line and I'm sure that they will tell you that they got their money's worth.

To each his own....

No doubt in my mind sir. As I said before I will be setting up a lesson or two soon to work on a couple of specific things plus whatever else you recommend. I guess my bigger point is that it shouldnt be "to each his own" when it comes to something as serious as concealing - or even just carrying - a handgun.

For instance the state requires significant testing to qualify for a motorcycle license. Including a variety of closed-course evasive exercises that are difficult for new riders. A buddy who used to work for DMV told me 1 in 3 people fail the first time, although he may have been exagerating. IMO thats how the drivers license test should be too - accident avoidance not just "ok you can make it around the block without hitting anything." And getting a CHP should be no easier, relatively speaking. These are all dangerous things with untrained operators correct?

"Once again ways the world would be different if I were god." :lol:

 

[ProShooter]

imported post

spitfyr wrote:

And I definitely understand the benefits of a stepped program like what ProShooter offers.

Thank you spitfyr - we're proud of our program. We like to think of it as a 'cafeteria style' where people can choose the segments of training that they want, when they want.


Jim

 

[ProShooter]

imported post

spitfyr wrote:

No doubt in my mind sir. As I said before I will be setting up a lesson or two soon to work on a couple of specific things plus whatever else you recommend.I'll be happy to assist you in whatever way that I can.

I guess my bigger point is that it shouldnt be "to each his own" when it comes to something as serious as concealing - or even just carrying - a handgun.

I tend to agree with you. I have my personal feelings on the training requirements like I'm sure, everyone else does. Some folks feel that the requirements are too lax, some feel that there shouldn't be any requirements at all. We do the best that we can with what we're given.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

In a perfect world..............everyone carrying, legal and well trained.
But then again in a perfect world there would be no need to defend.

Meanwhile do we set minimum standards so high as to exclude those not as fortunate as ourselves? Who shall we allow to defend themselves, when and at what level? How many hours of training before the tools can be hung from the belt?

Let's not argue that "no one can disagree that safety/training is a good thing." The right to defend oneself already has too many restrictions. Personal responsibility for improvement is the key and that should not be mandated by the state.

I am very pro training but not as to be required by the state.

Yata hey

 

[Mike]

imported post

What ever happenned to the guy who was issued his de facto permit? did he get his actual permit yet?

 

[razor_baghdad]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

In a perfect world..............everyone carrying, legal and well trained.
But then again in a perfect world there would be no need to defend.

Meanwhile do we set minimum standards so high as to exclude those not as fortunate as ourselves? Who shall we allow to defend themselves, when and at what level? How many hours of training before the tools can be hung from the belt?

Let's not argue that "no one can disagree that safety/training is a good thing." The right to defend oneself already has too many restrictions. Personal responsibility for improvement is the key and that should not be mandated by the state.

I am very pro training but not as to be required by the state.

Yata hey

Agree GS....

OK...I'm outed...I teach a Basic Handgun course at SEG for $50 for a 1 hour course that's honored for the CHP in Va...

Although I agree with the DD214 being sufficient, after watching many....MANY folks clear their pistols and longguns into the clearing barrel (some as many as 5 times-with the expression like 'WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS THING-IT KEEPS SHOOTING'), I recommend the 'extra' training ALONG WITH THE 214.

Just because someone passed BCT 20 years ago and have been to the sandbox doesn't mean they're proficient with a firearm....

What that means to me is that the $39.99 spent on the internet for 'no hands-on training whatsoever' vs. the 'hands on live training' spent to be shown how to 'load/clear/reduce stoppage' , the 'hands-on training' is much more important.

4 Hour training is $125.00...(150 rds) called 'Advanced Handgun'......8 hour is $250....(300 rds) .....and includes tactical shooting...(barricades/tactical re-load)....

My 2cents.

 

[leprechaun117]

imported post

Mike wrote:

What ever happenned to the guy who was issued his de facto permit?  did he get his actual permit yet?

Nope, still waiting. Carries every day though