Official Notice: Any Shots Inside/Touching the Silhouette Count

[Molly B.]

Finally, after multiple meetings with ISP, JCAR, and discussions with the Governor, we finally have a public announcement concerning the erroneous requirement for shot placement to be inside the 7-ring. Just as we were informed, shots anywhere on the silhouette will count.

 

This is not about quality of instruction or what a concealed carry license holder SHOULD be able to do, rather it is about staying within the law and agencies not adding additional requirements or restrictions to the requirements.

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE TO CONCEALED CARRY INSTRUCTORS:

Effectively immediately, the Illinois State Police will be recognizing new Live Fire Scoring requirements. Instructors were previously provided information to indicate that in order for a round to be scored as a "hit", a round must break through the target within the scoring rings - Illinois Administrative Code, Part 20, Section 1231.10. The Illinois State police has now determined it is acceptable for a round to be scored as a "hit" if the round breaks through the silhouette picture. The Frequently Asked Questions on the Illinois State Police website will reflect this new information as illustrated below. A new CCL Instructor information package will be forthcoming.

Q: What does "Hit the Target" and "Scoring Area" in reference to the required range portion of Concealed Carry License Training?

A: "Hit the Target" and "Scoring Area" mean a round that has impacted within the black portion of the silhouette on a B-27 target. Any round that breaks the line between the black portion of the silhouette and the non-scoring area is considered a "hit."

Illinois State Police
Concealed Carry Firearms
Instructor/Curriculum Section
801 S Seventh Street, Suite 400-M
Springfield, IL 62703

[Tango7]

Already being discussed:

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=61110&hl=
























but thanks for the effort in getting this clarified.

[sirflyguy]

I think MollyB can post whenever and whatever she wants!

[Molly B.]

Already being discussed:

 

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=61110&hl=

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

but thanks for the effort in getting this clarified.

 

 

 

 

I noticed that, kind sir, but I thought we needed a notice here in the training forum as well.

[Sig Fan Boy]

 

Already being discussed:http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=61110&hl=

but thanks for the effort in getting this clarified.

 

 

I noticed that, kind sir, but I thought we needed a notice here in the training forum as well.

Thank you Molly B.

 

No offense to the other posters but an official proclamation makes me more comfortable.

[spec5]

Thanks for the update Molly B.

[gangrel]

Sorry, Molly. Didn't mean to scoop ya' on this story...

[C0untZer0]

No worries, I am throwing my full weight and authority behind this thread to prevent it from being locked !

[AuroraInstructor]

In

[BIGDEESUL]

In

+1

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

 

[BIGDEESUL]

Haha! Thanks Molly!

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

 

[RealityCheck]

Thank you for your tireless persistence in getting them on the record, Molly.

[Molly B.]

No worries, I am throwing my full weight and authority behind this thread to prevent it from being locked !

 

 

[borgranta]

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

[borgranta]

The following is from Todd Vandermyde from the other thread.

 

this has been in the works for a bit. After a couple of meetings with the Governor's staff, they pushed the correction through. I've been waiting for the roll out.

 

it came to a head after I taught a CLE seminar for the State Bar Assn. and a prosecutor from Dupage was putting out the BS about scoring rings citing the state police website.

 

that brought things to a head with ISP and my contact in the Governor's office. the Email from the prosecutor helped push them along.

 

It would be a good idea to merge the threads rather than having to follow 2 threads.

[C0untZer0]

Its sad that this nonsense had to come from DuPage. I expect it from Cook County but not DuPage.

[Mr. Fife]

before lol

[gangrel]

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

You find "Revised B-27 guidelines from ISP" to be confusing? Seriously?

[Molly B.]

 

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

You find "Revised B-27 guidelines from ISP" to be confusing? Seriously?

 

 

 

From a non-instructor, layperson sort of view, I can see where it might not be crystal clear . . .

 

[borgranta]

 

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

 

You find "Revised B-27 guidelines from ISP" to be confusing? Seriously?

I was afraid that the ISP revised the guidlines to make it harder to pass.

[Bubbacs]

 

 

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

You find "Revised B-27 guidelines from ISP" to be confusing? Seriously?

I was afraid that the ISP revised the guidlines to make it harder to pass.

Don't laugh, guy in the other thread doesn't understand WHY they made it back to simpler..........

[gangrel]

 

I was afraid that the ISP revised the guidlines to make it harder to pass.

Don't laugh, guy in the other thread doesn't understand WHY they made it back to simpler..........

 

I started the other thread, and there have only been 19 replies. I saw no one state any such sentiment.

[gangrel]

 

 

This thread has a better title than the other thread and reduces the likelihood of countless poorly described threads discussing the same subject popping up and using up valuable server storage.

You find "Revised B-27 guidelines from ISP" to be confusing? Seriously?

 

 

 

From a non-instructor, layperson sort of view, I can see where it might not be crystal clear . . .

 

 

LOL well, I guess there's that...

[sirflyguy]

 

 

I was afraid that the ISP revised the guidlines to make it harder to pass.

Don't laugh, guy in the other thread doesn't understand WHY they made it back to simpler..........

I started the other thread, and there have only been 19 replies. I saw no one state any such sentiment.

I think there are 3 or 4 of these threads out there!

[Bubbacs]

 

 

I was afraid that the ISP revised the guidlines to make it harder to pass.

Don't laugh, guy in the other thread doesn't understand WHY they made it back to simpler..........

 

I started the other thread, and there have only been 19 replies. I saw no one state any such sentiment.

 

 

This was posted by Terry9595:

 

I received an e-mail from the ISP Instructor Curriculum section. It says that when scoring targets now, any shot that is on any part of the silhouette is a hit. The shot does not need to be in the scoring rings. This includes shots that just breaks the silhouette line counts.

Is this for real? How simple do they want to make it? I know there are a lot of people that believe that no training should be required. They need to sit in on a range session of the classes. You get students that do not know how to shoot. So lets make it simpler????

I took that to mean it was or is already too simple.

And that he was in line with harder restrictions on scoring.

Maybe Im reading it wrong, but its in his post! Check it out......

[gangrel]

 

 

 

Don't laugh, guy in the other thread doesn't understand WHY they made it back to simpler..........

 

I started the other thread, and there have only been 19 replies. I saw no one state any such sentiment.

 

 

This was posted by Terry9595:

 

 

I received an e-mail from the ISP Instructor Curriculum section. It says that when scoring targets now, any shot that is on any part of the silhouette is a hit. The shot does not need to be in the scoring rings. This includes shots that just breaks the silhouette line counts.

Is this for real? How simple do they want to make it? I know there are a lot of people that believe that no training should be required. They need to sit in on a range session of the classes. You get students that do not know how to shoot. So lets make it simpler????

I took that to mean it was or is already too simple.

And that he was in line with harder restrictions on scoring.

Maybe Im reading it wrong, but its in his post! Check it out......

 

Ok...different thread, I guess...

[Glock23]

 

Ok...different thread, I guess...

 

 

Yeah, it was the other other thread.. lol

[C0untZer0]

http://www.illinoiscarry.com/forum/uploads/monthly_01_2014/post-3474-0-95975300-1389157600.gif

[Glock23]

http://www.illinoiscarry.com/forum/uploads/monthly_01_2014/post-3474-0-95975300-1389157600.gif

 

Nice.

 

And yes, I counted to make sure there were 30 hits lol

[C0untZer0]

An applicant for a new license shall provide proof of certification by a certified instructor that the applicant passed a live fire exercise with a concealable firearm consisting of:

a minimum of 30 rounds; and

10 rounds from a distance of 5 yards;

10 rounds from a distance of 7 yards;

10 rounds from a distance of 10 yards

at a B-27 silhouette target approved by the Department.

A certificate of completion for an applicant's firearm training course shall not be issued to a student who:

during the range firing portion of testing fails to hit the target with 70% of the rounds fired.