Without going into all the legal and procedural details, as of July 17, 2023 New Jersey has a new law that requires ordinary carry permit holders to pass a qualification test equal that of professional law enforcement officers. There is some debate as to who must pass this very difficult qualifier when. Also, a Motion has already been filed in Federal District Court to get this new and onerous qualification requirement ruled unconstitutional.

In any event, I have decided to take two hours of private holster draw lessons at my local indoor range. This will allow me to draw and shoot at that range. After I gain proficiency I will take the new qualifier ASAP.

FYI this is copied from the actual regulation establishing the new requirements:
The above requirements are officially listed here beginning at p. 11

If you think this is confusing you are correct

__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly

Ha, most LEOs could not pass…..

I think it would be easier to move to another state..

__________________
Remain Viable

First off I think it’s outrageous that you need to do this and don’t believe you should need to pass a test like this to exercise a constitutional right.

The courses of fire don’t look too too bad assuming 2 things: you’re using a semi automatic weapon for the reload courses of fire and you’re allowed to wear a service belt with magazine holsters over your clothing.

The courses of fire look relatively similar to what we do in the navy and those have always been a joke. We have total morons pass on a practically guaranteed basis. We shoot out to 15 yards but it looks like you have so much time at the 25 yard line that those should be guaranteed points hits. It also doesn’t look like it matters where you hit as long as it’s within the q target outline? The wording is confusing.

I don’t know if I would pass this with my CCW setup but I could do it in an open carry semi automatic setup easily. I carry a revolver with no reloads in the real world and I think that’s completely reasonable. This course of fire seems more relevant to non civilian situations.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that you can easily pass this given a little training and depending on what their rules for weapon and reload set up are. If it’s all supposed to be concealed and you need to only certify on exactly how you’ll carry that’s outrageous. I also have a problem with them regulating what type of action you can fire in. This isn’t a military operation or watch and it isn’t law enforcement. A civilian CCW situation is drastically different. They shouldnt make you reload at all, the odds of you needing to perform a tactical reload and then shoot offhand are mathematically non existent and irrelevant to your right to keep and bear arms.

The legislature makes the paperwork approval timeline shorter to get a carry permit; then, lays this minefield down so most people won't bother going after a permit.

I'd be researching the sponsors of this bill and the members that voted to pass it. Then, I'd spend a few bucks on a private investigator to open some closet doors.

Seems harder to read th requirements than it would be to pass the test
I’m pretty sure I would pass this test cold , but I’d have to reread the test a couple times :-)
If a guy couldn’t pass this test , he should practice more .

__________________
the rules? there are no rules

That's not a difficult qual shoot. It's the standard for LE in your state and something similar is often used by agencies nationwide.
Altho it is kind of funny when people say they can shoot better than cops yet when they see a course of fire like that they claim "cops couldn't even qualify on that." Yeah they can and do. And have to.
Now, whether that course of fire is necessary for a CCW is another matter open for debate.

__________________
183rd FBINA

[expletive deleted]. More red tape.

State seems like the absolute Pits. Anything to discourage people is of course the reason. A move to a different gun friendly state is the best way out.

Browsing thru the qualifications standard, I noted several stages require kneeling. How does that work if you are handicapped? What about the ability to use both hands? Have provisions been made to handle those situations, or are such folks now unsuitable to carry a handgun?

Frankly, not a hard course for many, but for new or inexperienced shooters, or those lacking a duty rig, maybe not so much.

Maybe the right to free speech should require a literacy test, or the right to vote a dexterity qualification first, to protect you from pushing the wrong button, or pulling the wrong lever.....

Larry

25 yard qualifications?

If you shoot someone from 25 yards there's a strong likelihood you're going to jail.

So the woman who wants a j-frame in her purse in the case of a mugging-but is not a gun enthusiast-and likely won't make any shots over 10-20 feet has to qualify at 75 feet in double action with a snub nose?

I'm with Breakaway, move to another state. With the genius's making laws like that, there's no hope for your state.

Come to Georgia...no permit required for concealed carry if legally eligible to own a firearm.

Except that most people either cannot move , or just plain do not want to . It's a shame that leaving your home is the best way to deal with ridiculous gun laws . Most people just want to live their life and be left alone .

That's the most absurd requirement for handgun ownership I have seen anywhere. Amazingly, here in the gun-friendly state of Mississippi you have to take a concealed carry qualification course or have prior training documentation from the military to have a concealed carry permit. I have weapons training from my USAF service, but decided to take the qualification course anyway. It was vastly different than my military training. Half the course was in the classroom (four hours) on weapons handling, the decision to use deadly force and state law governing such use. Then there four hours of range time some dry fire holster drills and about 35 rounds of live fire on large silhouette target. The focus was on draw, aim and rapid fire. None of the ranges exceeded 15 yards and most of it was up close and personal at 5-10 yards. It wasn't an FBI qualification course which is what the NJ course appears to be.

Decocking? Really? None of my guns have decockers. Do they expect you to lower the hammer on a live cartridge??

Reminds me of one of the favorite sayings here in MD..."We suck less than NJ!" 14 hour class if not training exempt and shoot at the same Q target at 10 yards from low ready, no holster. Currently MD is "shall issue" but trying to get around Bruen by making the entire state a "Sensitive" area.

What are the dimensions of "within the border of the Q-target silhouette?"

("To achieve a passing score of 80%, the participant must place a minimum of 40 shots within the border of the Q-target silhouette.")

A Q target is about the size of a slender adult’s head neck and torso.

__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly

I guess I’d fail since I don’t know how to decock my 1911’s.

My 1911’s must be defective since Colt forgot to install the decocking devices NJ apparently requires.

Ridiculous qualification requirements for a civilian. That's all I have to say.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

It would appear those in "power" would be A LOT happier if there were no guns----never mind having mere citizens walking around "packing".

We too, in Tennessee, were obliged to pass a class of sorts, ending up with live fire of 48 rounds (if memory serves) at a FULL SIZE silhouette target at a whopping 7 yards----keeping all rounds within scoring areas----somewhere. Many, if not most of the folks, apparently fearful of failing, showed up with .22's---and fired slowly and carefully. Perhaps motivated by the opportunity to show off, I showed up with my regular, everyday 1911 Government Model---and a handful of loaded clips, and proceeded to fire away as fast (and as loudly) as I could---placing all rounds within the little scoring area within "center mass"---I mean--7 YARDS???!!!! Give me a break!!

The instructor came down the line, checking results. He shook his head and scowled when he saw my target. To this day, I don't know why he scowled----might be he recognized showing off.

Ralph Tremaine

I don't know why people keep repeating that line. Totally not true. They think because they couldn't hit an elephant at 25 yards then it must be too far for a righteous shoot.
I've investigated many many shootings. Never ever has that been an issue.
So what you're saying with that line is that if someone is shooting at you from 25 yards they're not a threat to you. Totally bogus thinking. And simply not true.
Can't hit at 25 yards? Then that says a lot about the shooter.
I was teaching one class and as in nearly every class there's that one guy who thinks he knows more than everyone else and likes to blow a lot of smoke. He made the comment that at 100 yards he'd stand there all day and let someone shoot at him with a 2" revolver. 2" guns were only accurate for a few feet.
When we went to the range I set up a B-27 target. We went to 100 yards. Using my S&W 49 I fired 5 rounds and we all went to check the target. All 5 rounds hit COM. The guy started laughing and said I was a lucky shot and couldn't do it again. So back to 100 yards, 5 shots, all COM. By then rest of the class was laughing at the know it all. He left the class.
It really wasn't difficult. Rest the head on the front sight and the rounds drop in COM.

__________________
183rd FBINA

I am a 36+ year retired LE, former Chief and Undersheriff who worked the street my whole life. I am also an NRA pistol instructor with many years of teaching firearms to civilians, new gun owners and everywhere in between. I am all for some sort of practical training involving proper handling, function safety etc. as well as some holster work involving the type of carry that the person plans to utilize. Some states have a CCW class where the student doesn't even have to draw from a holster which in no way prepares them for CCW IMHO.
Our HR218 retired LE qual is a joke (gimme) that is an example of what is should not be! In my classes, I try to take the inexperienced/new shooter and make them comfortable and at least somewhat competent with their firearm for either HD or CCW. Those that feel that they can purchase a firearm and take one of the extremely basic CCW courses and that is all they need are truly fooling themselves but it is clear to me that this NJ qualification requirement for a civilian is an attempt to disqualify many who are not willing to comply with what is clearly over the top.
I also agree with one of the earlier posters who said that most cops couldn't pass, to which I say that you do not know what you are talking about. Most police qualifications that I have been aware of or part of are at least that stringent and in many cases harder in terms of time limits for the various stages and they must pass with a minimum score.I am also very aware that there are cops that can't shoot worth XXXX!

Our state LE qual in AZ is similar, but with more difficult timeframes. It was recently changed to eliminate the string from the 25 yard line, and is now 15 yards and in. For LEOSA, we have to shoot the state qual, and you need to be on your game with a revolver to make some of the reload times... not that it's difficult for an experienced revolver shooter, but the 'average' shooter would find it challenging.

I have mixed feelings on a 'qualification' for CCW. It's a right, so should not be regulated unduly by the state... it's the responsibility of the individual to be competent if you make the choice to carry.

That said, having seen the level of competence of the 'average' shooter, I sometimes think a qualification isn't a bad idea.

As much as I am loath to display my ignorance, what is the meaning of "COM"-----as used in Post #21 above?

Ralph Tremaine

MA has no range qualifications, although some municipalities have (probably illegal) qualification requirements. Basically don't shoot yourself or the police officer doing the qualification and you pass.

RI has a qualification requirement. 50 rounds into an Army L course over 30 minutes with a minimum score of 195 out of 300. You can only carry up to the caliber with which you qualified, so most people use a .45. I used my 457.

SC has a classroom portion along with a qualification course. The course of fire is similar to NJ, but only out to 15 yards. It requires both holster draw and shooting from ready gun. It wasn't difficult. I used my 6946 for it.

When we move to TX, I'll get a LTC even though it's not required. There qualification doesn't look to difficult.

That said, NJ is doing what I expect some states will do in order to discourage people from getting a permit. It is no different than poll taxes or literacy tests used to keep blacks from exercising their right to vote. I expect onerous requirements in NJ and other places to meet the same fate.

__________________
Can open, worms everywhere.

"center of mass"

Thank you, Sir!

That dawned on me---mere moments after I asked---as in "A day late, and a dollar short.".

RCT

You're missing the point. What I'm saying is that you have options when someone is 75 feet away. I'm not going to shoot someone who's yelling at me from 75 feet away with a knife in his hand. At that distance I have options. Is he a threat? Yes. Is my life in imminent danger from that distance? I don't want to find out what a DA and a jury think if I can avoid a shooting.

Read the post. My example is a woman who is not a sport shooter but wants to protect herself. Can she shoot pistol targets at 50 yards like we do? Probably not and she shouldn't have to in order to carry a firearm. Most self defense shootings are done at close range. Thus, no need to qualify at 25 yards.

This is why people keep repeating it. Many states ( especially in the northeast) have an obligation to retreat when possible. Well, who’s to say what’s possible. You want the same people who made these laws deciding if you broke them. I don’t.

Attached Images

IMG_7466.jpg (77.2 KB, 48 views)

I don't remember seeing that in the Constitution.

Have been shooting since the early 60s, AMU after Vietnam , managed a large indoor shooting range, NRA instructor and continue to shoot several times a week. 15 years ago had to qualify to carry in Va. for my work. Qualified 3 times missing the max score by 1-3 points all 3 times. On couple such the Sheriff of the county was standing behind me. When finished he asked where in the hell did you learn to shoot? I laughed and told him. I saw how the LEOs shot and thats why I posted the, “ most LEOs cant shoot. From knowing many for years( all regular shooters) they will quickly tell anyone most other LEos cant shoot very well. Sadly the days are long gone when most LEOs were “ gun guys”. Today most carry because they have to. Departments dont have the resources or incentives to Train, let alone the $$$ for lots of ammo for LEOs to shoot to become “ good”. Its all a sign of the times.

Bless you Bushie for sticking it out. I know If I still lived there I'd be doing it too @ 70 y/o instead of 35. I'd probably be doing the test more than once much like my driving test in 1970. Joe

__________________
Behavior Creates Destiny

Disagree. The skill level the test requires is far above anything needed for a private citizen to defend themselves or family from an attacker. Keeping your shots on a large cookie sheet sized target out to 10 yards max is good enough.
Almost no attacks take place at distance. Most are at contact distance or out to maybe 15 to 20 feet.
Would be pretty hard in a Lefty state courtroom to justify firing at an attacker at 20-25 yards. The prosecution would say the attacker was too far away to have posed an imminent threat.

I don't think the issue is whether you can pass the test or not . At least , it shouldn't be .

My thinking is that a person should have the precision and muscle memory to drive the bullets home
Every shot fired lands somewhere , an untrained or unpracticed person could put rounds anywhere under stress
I’m certainly no expert , I just feel being familiar with your tools will make any job easier

__________________
the rules? there are no rules

The requirement that revolvers have to be fired double action eliminate the person who uses a Colt SAA for defense.
The requirement that I decock my S&W M442 has me confused.
If they don't make reasonable accommodation for disabled persons, they will run afoul of the ADA. I read a post some time ago that said requirements for classroom and range work should be designed so that an 85 YO grandmother in a wheelchair can pass using her grandfathers WW1 Webley revolver. I agree.
I am pretty sure that I could hit the target outline at 15 yards, 80% of the time, with my sling shot or long bow, but not at a very fast rate of fire. If I want to carry a cap and ball revolver, I might need a longer reload time.
Finally, Washington State wants to outlaw most guns that could be used to pass this test. They already have outlawed all semi rifles, including 22LR Rugers, and I suspect that they have their sights on semi handguns, on the theory that anyone who goes that far won't stop there!

73,
Rick

This course is not onerous. It is almost identical to the one I (and many others) must shoot every year to maintain my LEOSA qualification.

None of the guns I shoot has a decocking lever but suspect that requirement applies only to guns equipped with such in the instant case.

Re: kneeling, it is made very clear that you must and the instructors will NOT assist you in getting down or standing up. That said, the gun is not drawn until you are “down” and is reholstered before getting “up” in an attempt to minimize the chances of negligent discharge.

I am 74, have shot this course for decades, and have never had a problem.

Be safe.

Not everyone has healthy knees. What about people with disabilities? How could someone who is confined to a wheelchair pass this qualification? Or are the disabled not allowed to qualify? Oh, if that is the case, can you say "discrimination" boys and girls? Sure, I thought you could.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Well, if you need to do everything LE does why shouldnt you get LEOSA?

When this type of training is required for other constitutional rights such as requiring training and education prior to receiving your "permit to vote" card then we'll see. the end result of pulling your trigger on your gun or pulling the lever on a voting machine without being properly trained or informed will most certainly end in a disaster

It is ABSOLUTELY onerous! For all the reasons everyone has stated. It is also discriminatory. These things are designed to make people not bother getting a permit. NY for example has made the process expensive and time consuming. The financial burden makes it impossible for the people who need it most. Those living in low income, high crime areas. Perhaps disability advocates should get involved. Handicapped and elderly individuals are an easy target. Grandma can’t conceal an 18” 20ga.

We have a NJ member that is disabled, lrrifleman ?. I hope he chimes in.

Too bad I can only like that once. Joe

__________________
Behavior Creates Destiny

I am all for some sort of required proficiency test but this one seems way too strict. Who wants an untrained/unpracticed individual firing away in some sort of public emergency? I don't even like that sort of person next to me at the shooting range. The second amendment rights do not come without obligation to exercise them in a proficient manner.

That's not what you said in your post. Apparently you forgot what you wrote "
Originally Posted by sjbrdn View Post
25 yard qualifications?
If you shoot someone from 25 yards there's a strong likelihood you're going to jail."
My answer still stands regardless of you changing your scenario. That's a totally bogus assertion.

If you've done any training for non-LEO people then you know that the person who comes in to do their CCW training or any shooting is a very poor shooter. LEOs can't shoot? The average gun toter can't either. Average non LEO hitting a target at 25 yards? Good luck with that. The ones I've seen go thru the course can't hit the target at 5 yards. Then claim they don't need to hit at 15 ft because shootings are usually closer. Excuse for being a poor shot.

__________________
183rd FBINA

MA requires retreat when possible, even in your own home. The original version of the bill included abandoning your family in the home with you to their fate while you ran away like Brave Sir Robin.

That was changed some years later.

The law still only provides for an "Affirmative Defense" at trial if you are indicted. Which history in this state shows is about a 90% certainty.

__________________
Can open, worms everywhere.

And there in lies the problem with proficiency tests. A blue state can jack up the requirements to the point where it's almost impossible to pass for most people.

For that matter they can jack up the educational requirements to the point where a law degree is required to pass the written test.

Or they can make the required course so expensive that few can afford it.

__________________
Can open, worms everywhere.

Qualification to exercise a Constitutional Right.

Sounds like a literacy test to me.

__________________
Bill

How far down the rabbit hole do we want to go. Showing proficiency is an infringement on a constitutional right! If I have a bad stutter and can’t speak worth a damn, am I not allowed free speech?!?!?!?! Shall not be infringed means just that! Period! Let’s not confuse constitutional rights with a drivers license.

You're still missing the point. You're assumption (based on your response) when you read my post is that someone is shooting at the CCP holder from 25 yards and I'm saying "don't worry about it, he can't hit you from that far." I suggest you read it again.

My point is that "self-defense" shootings from that distance are subject to scrutiny from LE and the DA's office. There are many circumstances where shooting someone from that distance will land you in jail-either temporarily or for a more extended stay.

My second point, which is more relevant to the OP, is the fact that most self-defense shootings happen at relatively close distances. The bulk are ten yards or less. If you don't believe me, look up the stats from both the FBI and the NYPD.

So why should a citizen (non LEO) have to qualify from 25 yards?