Good time today.....

RHZig · Post by **RHZig** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 8:35 pm

We went out with our bersa 9mms today and my girlfriend also brought her kel tec .380 along with her. She isn't bad for a beginner.

My bersa 9mm from 21 feet.

My girlfriend isn't Dead Eye Dick just yet...but she still loves shooting.

HooG19 · Post by **HooG19** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 8:49 pm

at least she is getting it on the paper...

when I took my shooting test for the CHL, I was surprised how one of the other shooters seemed to place them all over the place on the target, yet still passed. It makes me wonder if maybe the state's standards are too low...

frankie_the_yankee · Post by **frankie_the_yankee** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 8:53 pm

HooG19 wrote:at least she is getting it on the paper...

when I took my shooting test for the CHL, I was surprised how one of the other shooters seemed to place them all over the place on the target, yet still passed. It makes me wonder if maybe the state's standards are too low...

I'm long past wondering. They are IMO. But still, there is no indication that CHL's are hitting innocents via indiscriminate "spraying", so maybe it's my opinion that is wrong.

mcub · Post by **mcub** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:44 pm

As for as the CHL standards go , I was told they couldnâ€™t agree on how to separate the limitations of a very small pistol/ revolver from the larger ones, so they based the standard on what could be expected from a 2 inch revolver, with an average skill level.

Now as the legitimacy of that statement I donâ€™t know, I've never seen any place, an explanation from the state , onhow they came up with the scoring.

Then again, do we want our political adversaries to have something else to pick at??

T3hK1w1 · Post by **T3hK1w1** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 10:17 pm

One of the men in our CHL class was off paper 6 times and hit someone else's target once...he still passed.

HooG19 · Post by **HooG19** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 10:27 pm

I didn't mean to hijack this thread...

but, the sad thing about this shooter/applicant is that at 3 yards, the spread was like 10"...

I can see the argument about the smaller calibers and shorter barrels...

I guess at this point I can just pray that we all go to the range enough to improve our accuracy at any distance, not just to squeeze off a couple hundred rounds to hear the bang...

RHZig · Post by **RHZig** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 11:22 pm

T3hK1w1 wrote:One of the men in our CHL class was off paper 6 times and hit someone else's target once...he still passed.

What could he have been doing?
Geez!

KBCraig · Post by **KBCraig** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 1:35 am

RHZig wrote:
T3hK1w1 wrote:One of the men in our CHL class was off paper 6 times and hit someone else's target once...he still passed.
What could he have been doing?
Geez!

Looking at the target instead of the front sight.

That's by far the most common problem I see with people who shoot all over the target.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:30 pm

frankie_the_yankee wrote:But still, there is no indication that CHL's are hitting innocents via indiscriminate "spraying", so maybe it's my opinion that is wrong.

Statistically, most CHL holders will go to their grave without having to draw a weapon; and in at least half the cases where they do, they won't have to shoot.

The right to keep and bear arms is not predicated upon any level of skill, either.

Having said that, I don't know how someone with an ounce of pride or dignity can shoot that poorly and not feel compelled to improve. It's not that hard. I've taught several people to shoot handguns, and they were hitting the bullseye consistently within an hour.

- Jim

para driver · Post by **para driver** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 2:07 pm

seamusTX wrote:Having said that, I don't know how someone with an ounce of pride or dignity can shoot that poorly and not feel compelled to improve. It's not that hard. I've taught several people to shoot handguns, and they were hitting the bullseye consistently within an hour.

- Jim

I was totally shocked/frightened/amazed at my last class..
I personally would not have signed off on several people.

We had 12 people in my 'first time' class.. I let my license lapse, so I had to do the full course again... 6 felt they could shoot and pass 'no problem', the other 6 were very new shooters.. some shot glocks that they had NEVER touched before, some shot weapons they had for years.

The 6 new shooters, I doubt they had ever been to a range before, or if they had it was a long time ago. they disobeyed commands, fired 6 rounds when told to shoot 1, limp wristed shots, jams, one guy cut his thumb open.. there was some safety or malfunction related stoppage on every string. I would hope they get more training on how to handle their firearm, as they were not minimally proficient in my opinion. However they passed.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 2:30 pm

Scary, indeed.

It's my understanding that failing to obey a range rule or command should result in failure. ElGato told me that you could shoot 250 and fail because of something you did afterward.

- Jim

Post by **Charles L. Cotton** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:15 pm

AndyC wrote:Sounds like a lot of people would benefit by attending a pre-CHL course to familiarise themselves with the operation of their firearm.

Problem is, of course, most of those same people wouldn't bother because they aren't obliged to attend

Sad but so true. This is one reason I like txinvestigator's idea for an Advanced CHL Course that combines the State-mandated CHL course with an NRA pistol course.

RHZig, keep her going to the range and focusing on the front sight and she'll do just fine. Thanks for getting her to try.

Chas.

ScubaSigGuy · Post by **ScubaSigGuy** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:27 pm

When I took my class there was a woman qualifying with a KelTec that had never been shot before. It jammed repeatedly until the instructor finally gave her a bersa from his fanny pack to use. There were a couple of folks that had malfuntions and had no idea of what to do. It was slow moving that's for sure.