Comment

My proposal for gun rights

37
Rightwingconspirator7/31/2014 10:21:17 am PDT

I’ll point out I’m in favor of a high level of training for family protection. Ican show it, link it, point anyone o great training. So who decides what level of tactical training is required to have a gun for protection at home?

I think the police already did. They have a good practical minimum standard to offer that’s good enough for new policemen and women.

cop asleep at home might have a partner, but that partner is probably not a cop and in bed with him. His day job partner is at his or her home asleep across town. that cop has 911 for backup same as you or me while at home.

Yes, I agree. Doesn’t really have anything to do with anything I said.

It has to do with what reality, i.e. actual events have shown so far. Have we seen a problem with people at home with POST level training? Show me the study or at least the raw data. I have no idea where to get it or the time to compile it myself.

And my proposal is not, of course, to let people keep guns at home but prosecute them if they use them in self defense, it’s to make sure that everyone keeping a gun at home is crisis-trained so that they could actually depend on their abilities using it in a crisis situation.

So how would that work if you had your way? Prosecute them with what charge? Er, what severity I mean. Felony? Just a fine? You skipped that question.

And again, if POST actually does this, that’s great. Let’s test POST-trained people and see if it does. Based on what I hear from my SWAT friend especially, but also my other shooting friends, there is a ton of overconfidence in the shooting world about how much range training transfers to crisis situations.

Is POST not a professionally created system as judged by professionals that understand lives depend on it? Caveat-My familiarity is LAPD and California ONLY. It gets real review by police trainers and executives. Certain incidents have changed the training so we know it can be responsive. If POST proved inadequate for simple home defense (unreasonable scenarios need not apply) it would be truly ground shaking in the LE community. If that training is inadequate for close up confrontations on the most familiar ground, and surrounded by walls all quite unlike the street they have a huge problem.

My impression is that again as a minimum starting point it’s fine. It’s a shame we don’t have some openly L.E. members to chime in here.

If we have any LE lurkers/readers please register and chime in!

About POST

Recruit-level training is designed to ensure that the officer-candidate has mastered the KSAs to perform essential job tasks. To the extent these tasks are universally adopted by POSTs across the country, the referent curricula are also adaptable. With modest modification to allow for local nuances, lesson plans, supportive audiovisual programs, and education aids would be suitable for open exchange among POSTs. The benefits are obvious. Less obvious, perhaps, is the potential for enhanced reciprocity among the POST agencies when considering the credibility of recruit level training already completed by an officer-candidate while a police officer in another state.

I am having a hard time assuming there is a lack of POST efficacy review among LE professionals like chiefs and head trainers.

I’m looking for the LAPD course guide for firearms but it may not be online.

What if he grabs the gun and shoots the child by accident because he hasn’t been crisis-trained? Hey, how about we just train him to reduce the likelihood of that happening?

I never said he should not get training. i said the opposite. You want a law that applies here and I need to know exactly how it works and what standard to apply in the required training to evaluate your proposal. But up front if that’s well beyond current standards for police just to start you lose me.