Your words... failing is not completing the range qual successfully.
You said you see no issue if the instructor is setting a higher standard. Is YOUR standard better than the 2A? We're already dealing with th attitude from the state legislature. If you want to train to a higher standard, that is fine. If the law says 21 in the black, then THAT is your standard for pass/fail.
You're right. The instructor should teach only to the bare minimum standard, and if students want better quality instruction, they should have to come back and take another class and pay more money. What could he possibly have been thinking, giving them more than the bare minimum at no additional cost and in the same required amount of time. What a rip-off!
Would you pass someone who could get 21 of 30 in the black, but not in the 7 circle? Even after they went through your training and reshooting? If the answer is yes, then I have no issue. If you're going to keep making them shoot over and over until they get 21 of 30 in the 7 circle, then you're as bad as the state legislature, ATF, Dart and all others who want to impose their own standards on who can carry. Training to a higher standard is one thing. Not passing someone because they don't live up to YOUR standards is another. THAT was the OP on this subject.
I wouldn't know. I have yet to have a student that couldn't put 21 through the 7 ring on the second attempt. I have only had a very small handful who couldn't do it on the first.
Say someone shoots your class and hits 30 out of 30 in the black, but only 20 out of 30 in the 7 ring.
Do you make them reshoot? If so, do you provide the ammo for the 2nd round of shooting?
Seriously? You would complain about spending another $12 on ammo to have an instructor work with you for 15 more minutes to learn how to overcome your anticipation of recoil, as evidenced by the fact that you put 10 out of 30 rounds into the hips and thigh of the B-27 silhouette at 10 yards or less?
Reading these forums, it's apparent that there are many people who can barely afford the costs as they are... so I'm sure there are many who would complain about the additional cost.
Personally, my issue is with the fact that you would not pass someone who shot within the standards set forth in the law.
Maybe someone's nervous? Maybe they're shooting with a snub nose revolver, because that's what they intend to carry if the need ever arises for an up close and personal encounter. Maybe they're just not concerned about hitting within the rings, because the law doesn't say they have to? The reason doesn't matter.
To reiterate a point I've made in the past... before the FCCA was passed, the vast majority of members here (instructors included) were adamant that there should be no training required to defend oneself... but if it had to be included, it should be minimal and inexpensive.
The FCCA is passed and instructors come pouring out of the woodwork with training requirements and costs all across the board. Many who complained before were now touting they they wanted to go above and beyond to make sure their students were fully qualified... yet months before proudly proclaimed that there should be no training.
So in your case, I think that if you want to recommend that someone reshoot or get more training, that's fine. But if they refuse, and you choose not to pass them because of that... then you are 100% in the wrong.
Not a single student has complained or refused to reshoot. NOT ONE.
Not a single student has "failed" as a result of the range qualification. NOT ONE.
The overwhelming attitude of students I have trained is that they want to "get the highest score" on the qual. No, I do not "score" the targets, aside from pass/reshoot. But if I have two students in adjacent booths, one that puts 30 through the rings and the other that puts 29 through, the competition is there. I have had one or two who have passed the range qual with flying colors and STILL WANTED TO RESHOOT because they "wanted a better score". This is with no encouragement from me, and if time is tight, I don't let them reshoot.
fail - fāl/
1. be unsuccessful in achieving one's goal.
"he failed in his attempt to secure election"
2. neglect to do something.
"the firm failed to give adequate risk warnings"
Failing is not completing the range qual successfully. Failing is not receiving a certificate for the course. Not a single student of mine has "failed" as a result of the range qualification. I have had a few that did not receive certificates, mainly because they did not come back to complete the training. I have been fortunate enough to not have to ask anyone to leave my class because they were unsafe or because I was worried about their motives (also been discussed here). Not one of my students has been too strapped for cash to use a little more ammo to do a qual, and regardless, I have been known to open my own ammo can if someone is a few rounds short. No one is getting rich providing CCW training, and I am no exception. Ammo is a business expense, and one that I take into account when pricing my training. I have also been known to have students try one of my pistols, either to compare with what they have brought to shoot, or because their own pistol for whatever reason may be a little...unwieldy. Every class is different. Every student is different. But, hey...we should just put them all through the same cookie cutter because that is all the law requires, right?
I don't care about your past students, whether or not they complained, none have failed, etc.
A student takes your class and shoots 30/30 in the black... just to keep it interesting, let's say none of them are within the scoring rings.
Per state law, they passed... perfect score!
Would you fail them if they refused to reshoot?
Past students are irrelevant. Look above at the definition of "fail."
You also said that, for holding a student to a higher standard, you would supply additional coaching and allow them to reshoot.
But you're not answering (i.e. avoiding) a very simple question.
A student shoots 30/30 in the black, zero within the scoring rings. You offer the option of additional coaching and an opportunity to reshoot. They refuse, they passed IAW the FCCA, and they want their certificate.
Do you pass them and provide a certificate, or do you "fail" them and refuse to issue a certificate because they did not meet your standards?
Perhaps all this talk of the shooting requirements should be moved to it's own thread so we can respect Todd's wishes?Todd's deadline was the end of last week, so I assume he's gotten what he needs.
This thread was broken off from another just to discuss the proposed rules changes.
Per Todd V.-
'That being said, please list either your complaints, beefs or suggested changes to the carry rules here. I would like to get this document turned in by week's end, as I have other commitments next week. '
Mods, sorry to ask for more work on your part, but this discussion does not belong in this thread.