carry205 Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:48 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:48 AM Hello all...couldnt find a place to post this, so I started a new thread... I have a coworker who took his concealed carry class last weekend. He told me his instructor (an active US Marshall) told the class that changes may be coming to the licensing process...namely, making it mandatory that you qualify with the firearm you will carry, also, if you carry more than one, i.e., switching between firearms, that you will have to qualify with each one you intend to carry. He also informed them that the fee to renew your carry license will be cut in half, down to $75.00 from $150.00. Has anyone else heard about this or is this just scuttlebutt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggun 1 Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:55 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:55 AM some of the dem politicians are pushing this but nothing solid yet as far as i know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sctman800 Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:56 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:56 AM "scuttlebutt" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:57 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:57 AM Scuttlebutt so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mic6010 Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:59 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 01:59 AM I think the least likely thing that will ever happen is the state cutting the renewal fee in half. Yeah right lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggun 1 Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:07 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:07 AM ^^^^what he said^^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanook Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:09 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:09 AM The same rules, if adopted, should also apply to the bodyguards of those politicians that passed the laws. Goose, gander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carry205 Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:23 AM Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:23 AM I think the least likely thing that will ever happen is the state cutting the renewal fee in half. Yeah right lol.Lol...You’re right, considering how broke this state is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capotwosix Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:33 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:33 AM Hello all...couldnt find a place to post this, so I started a new thread... I have a coworker who took his concealed carry class last weekend. He told me his instructor (an active US Marshall) told the class that changes may be coming to the licensing process...namely, making it mandatory that you qualify with the firearm you will carry, also, if you carry more than one, i.e., switching between firearms, that you will have to qualify with each one you intend to carry.Sounds like a backdoor to firearm registration. Never trust an Illinois democrat, or any Illinois politician for that matter. Does this also mean that they'll be forcing all the gangbangers to qualify with there carry weapons, or is it safe to assume this only applies to law abiding citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec5 Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:34 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:34 AM If the changes were to be pushed by Madigan the bill will be named the scuttlebutt Bill. Another way to put it the Bill will be asinine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:44 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:44 AM I think requiring qualification with each firearm is a silly idea for the public, but I cannot see getting worked up, unless there is an official proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:02 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:02 AM ... but I just don't see the fees going down, this is Illinois. If anything they will double not be cut in half.There are bills filed in ILGA to reduce fees but they have not been assigned/scheduled nor do I expect to see them assigned and called this legislative session unless a miracle occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeper13 Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:14 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:14 AM "namely, making it mandatory that you qualify with the firearm you will carry, also, if you carry more than one, i.e., switching between firearms, that you will have to qualify with each one you intend to carry." Sounds like somebody has been reading Australia gun law. http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia Gun Ownership and PossessionIn Australia, only licensed gun owners may lawfully acquire, possess or transfer a firearm or ammunition GeneralReason Required for Firearm PossessionApplicants for a gun owner’s licence in Australia are required to establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm, for example gun club membership, hunting, target shooting, firearm collection, pest control, and narrow occupational uses.In law, personal protection is not a genuine reason Minimum Age for Firearm PossessionThe minimum age for gun ownership in Australia is 18 years, or as young as 10 years while under the immediate supervision of an appropriately licensed adult Gun Owner Background ChecksAn applicant for a firearm licence in Australia must pass a background check which considers criminal, mental health, physical, addiction, domestic violence, residential and other records Refence Required for Firearm LicenceIn Australia, third party character references for each gun licence applicant are required for some licence categories in some jurisdictions Domestic Violence and FirearmsWhere a past history, or apprehended likelihood of family violence exists, the law in Australia stipulates that a gun licence should be denied or revoked Firearm Safety TrainingIn Australia, an understanding of firearm safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practical training course is required for a firearm licence Gun Owner Licensing PeriodIn Australia, gun owners must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licence every one to five years depending on the licence category Licensing RecordsIn Australia, authorities maintain a record of individual civilians licensed to acquire, possess, sell or transfer a firearm or ammunition Limit on Number of GunsLicensed firearm owners in Australia are permitted to possess only the number and type of firearms specified on their licence or acquisition permit Limit on Quantity, Type of AmmunitionLicensed firearm owners in Australia are permitted to possess ammunition only for those firearms for which the purchaser is licensed, with a limit on the quantity of ammunition that may be purchased in a given period Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:34 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 03:34 AM There's already a dozen+ firearm bills up for committee when the ILGA returns. I'm sure we will see plenty more before the end of May. I've read there is even talk of mag confiscation over 17 rounds so I expect we will be seeing much craziness in the next 8 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richp Posted March 30, 2018 at 11:20 AM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 11:20 AM Hi, At least a portion of that proposal would vaguely mirror what the state did for retired LEOs, who must qualify with each type -- repeat, type, not actual weapon -- of firearm their license covers. If you want to interchange the type of gun you choose to carry from time to time, you bring both kinds of guns to the range for qualification. And the qualification fee is greater for both autoloader and revolver than it is for just one type. Could be where the idea arose... FWIW. Rich Phillips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:40 PM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 02:40 PM Being required to qualify with different handguns would be a waste of time for the qualifier, instructor, and for the ISP processors . At the distances required, if one can hit the target with one type of handgun, one can do it with virtually any type of handgun: pistol, revolver, .45, .357, 9mm, etc. The variety in performance would be insignificant. Some law enforcement departments specify which weapon(s) an officer must or may qualify with and carry. I think that is more of a risk management strategy. In stressful situation, officer flips safety the wrong way, or trigger pull is very light, and a bystander or cooperative suspect is shot. City faces big law suit. Political decisions are made to policies are established to regulate caliber and type of ammo an officer may carry on duty. In large departments the armorer would not have to train on additional weapons. In the case of a private citizen, the government is not concerned with any law suit you might face. Gun maintenance is your problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted March 30, 2018 at 07:49 PM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 07:49 PM Instructors allow students to qualify with 22LR pistols, because their job is to get students qualified. From a civil liberty point of view, it's not a problem, because the 2nd Amendment applies to everyone (or at least what the forefathers called a "virtuous citizen"), not someone who has demonstrated proficiency. I personally have two thoughts about people qualifying with 22LRs.I think the responsible thing is for everyone who carries to know their firearm. In an ideal world, people would do this on their own. In the real world, they might need a kick in the butt. Not being able to carry the caliber of their choice because they haven't qualified with it may be the kick they need.When I took my CCL class, I was struck by the fact that a significant fraction of the class had never even touched a gun up to that point in their lives. If nothing else, the instructor handing them a 22LR at least provided them with an opportunity to use a gun once before they got a license. So the range qualification isn't so much an obstacle to a license as it is yet another learning experience along the way.Given my view on civil liberties, I'm inclined to lean more on #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted March 30, 2018 at 09:37 PM Share Posted March 30, 2018 at 09:37 PM I no longer own the pistol I qualified with. I traded it in on two different pistols. So would I have to re-qualify under those terms? I'm not to worried about this happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blck10th Posted March 31, 2018 at 12:15 AM Share Posted March 31, 2018 at 12:15 AM Hi, At least a portion of that proposal would vaguely mirror what the state did for retired LEOs, who must qualify with each type -- repeat, type, not actual weapon -- of firearm their license covers. If you want to interchange the type of gun you choose to carry from time to time, you bring both kinds of guns to the range for qualification. And the qualification fee is greater for both autoloader and revolver than it is for just one type. Could be where the idea arose... FWIW. Rich Phillips But that has gone by the wayside. It says semi auto or revolver or both now to my understanding. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richp Posted March 31, 2018 at 03:29 AM Share Posted March 31, 2018 at 03:29 AM Hi blck10th, I would be delighted to see that change. But as of this past August, it was still separate courses of fire (and additional cost) for me to qualify with both types. And the FAQ on their web site says, "The IROCC application fee is $75 for one firearm type, or $100 for both Revolver and Semi-Automatic." That has been the setup every year since the program went into effect. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blck10th Posted March 31, 2018 at 04:06 AM Share Posted March 31, 2018 at 04:06 AM Hi blck10th, I would be delighted to see that change. But as of this past August, it was still separate courses of fire (and additional cost) for me to qualify with both types. And the FAQ on their web site says, "The IROCC application fee is $75 for one firearm type, or $100 for both Revolver and Semi-Automatic." That has been the setup every year since the program went into effect. Rich Yes correct. I was speaking to the if you qualify with x semi auto you must use that semi auto. Or if you use x revolver you carry that revolver. That was my understanding as it was previously explained. Yes there’s a upcharge which I think is pretty dumb but this is IL. Now from my understanding if you qualify with a glock 19 you can also then carry a sig p320 without issue. Just my understanding of what has been explained to me Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted March 31, 2018 at 04:13 AM Share Posted March 31, 2018 at 04:13 AM LE types who are instructors seem to keep this mythology alive, because LE department qualifications, IROCC and IL Armed Security qualifications use some variation of specific firearm qualification. The complexity and quantity of specific firearm qualification recordkeeping that the regulatory agency would have to do to keep track of all that would be ludicrous, and even the anti's at ISP understand that it would be a massive headache for them with no benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45b Posted March 31, 2018 at 03:42 PM Share Posted March 31, 2018 at 03:42 PM Instructors should teach facts only and current law, not their guess as to the future or opinions. This causes much stress on new students, don't hear the possible or maybe and take this as the truth, and could possibly end up violating the law unintentionally. I get at least one student every class that says "Bob, over at the local gun store says I have to qualify with a .45 ACP Automatic and can't carry anything else". And "Bob" is almost always an idiot that has no clue as to the laws. I tell my students, to call me if they run into any questions concerning the law or changes, and if changes happen, I will find out the correct answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oohrah Posted April 1, 2018 at 03:08 PM Share Posted April 1, 2018 at 03:08 PM Texas actually used to do this, if you qualified with a revolver, you could not carry an SA, it was marked on your license. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed. Trivia question of the day: Where does the term scuttlebutt come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted April 1, 2018 at 03:42 PM Share Posted April 1, 2018 at 03:42 PM Texas actually used to do this, if you qualified with a revolver, you could not carry an SA, it was marked on your license. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed.My favorite was that you could not qualify with a semi auto without qualifying with revolver first. Nowadays there are tons of people who've never shot a revolver before. I think the "must qualify with revolver first" may still apply to IL armed security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted April 1, 2018 at 04:44 PM Share Posted April 1, 2018 at 04:44 PM Texas actually used to do this, if you qualified with a revolver, you could not carry an SA, it was marked on your license. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed.My favorite was that you could not qualify with a semi auto without qualifying with revolver first. Nowadays there are tons of people who've never shot a revolver before. I think the "must qualify with revolver first" may still apply to IL armed security. I'm pretty sure the "revolver first" rule doesn't apply for armed security officers in Illinois. I don't know if that was ever a rule. I've never heard of it myself, and I've had an FCC/FAC/Tan card since 1990. I've had Revolver, Semi-Auto, and Shotgun authorizations on my "tan card" over the years. I qualified for Rifle authorization for one job, but changed jobs before that change went into effect. This, like so many other things, is why I don't understand why people think police officers make the best CCL instructors. Use of Force rules for civilians and police are different, as well as the requirements for qualification shoots. Police officers are the ones who thought we had to put 21 out of 30 rounds inside the 7-ring when qualifying. Even the curriculum requirements were written by police officers, but not with civilians in mind. We are still required to teach a segment about the public storage of firearms at a public or private facility. Why? Because police officers are required to lock their firearms up when entering a courthouse or jail. As civilians, we can't even bring our guns into the building without risk of being arrested. Sorry for the rant... -- Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim123 Posted April 1, 2018 at 06:43 PM Share Posted April 1, 2018 at 06:43 PM Texas actually used to do this, if you qualified with a revolver, you could not carry an SA, it was marked on your license. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed. Trivia question of the day: Where does the term scuttlebutt come from???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WitchDoctor Posted April 1, 2018 at 07:30 PM Share Posted April 1, 2018 at 07:30 PM Scuttlebutt, the water cooler talk of 19th century seafarersNowadays, office workers catch up on the latest scuttlebutt around the water cooler, and when they do, they are continuing a long-standing (although not necessarily honorable) tradition. That kind of gossip sharing probably also occurred on the sailing ships of yore. Back in the early 1800s, the cask containing a ship's daily supply of freshwater was called a scuttlebutt; that name was later applied to a drinking fountain on a ship or at a naval installation. By the early 20th century, the term for the water source was also applied to the gossip and rumors generated around it, and the latest chatter has been called scuttlebutt ever since. From Merriam Webster web site... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchet Posted April 2, 2018 at 07:05 PM Share Posted April 2, 2018 at 07:05 PM Texas actually used to do this, if you qualified with a revolver, you could not carry an SA, it was marked on your license. Fortunately cooler heads have prevailed.My favorite was that you could not qualify with a semi auto without qualifying with revolver first. Nowadays there are tons of people who've never shot a revolver before. I think the "must qualify with revolver first" may still apply to IL armed security. When i finished up my armed security training i used a 45 semi auto the entire time. You can use either or. You get qualified for both with either one. This was +/- 10 years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semper1911 Posted May 1, 2018 at 01:28 PM Share Posted May 1, 2018 at 01:28 PM It is just scuttlebutt so far, don't believe it. However, I know the law does not mandate, as other states do, that you qualify with what you are carrying, but why wouldn't a person use that firearm for the qualification? I go into detail as to the reason why one should, in my class, as well as, what to do if decide to carry another firearm. It just offer's a level of protection, if you can not "qualify" with that firearm, do you think you really should carry it? As far as price goes, I don't see this State doing anything lower any rate of income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.