Disappointed in my class...
My wife and I just finished our CPL Class / Training in SW Michigan... they came highly recommended... I interviewed them a couple of times too! Last minute change the week of the class was, "because of ammo shortage" we will only be shooting 30+ rounds... I didn't know the difference - until reading this blog now - but, was very disappointed to see on the certificate at the end of class... "Non-NRA Course"! I asked about that and wasn't given a specific reason.
Is there any way to complete the NRA course without having to take the whole thing again? The course information seems to follow the outline above... just not the shooting requirement??
We will NEVER recommend this place for training! I've owned a couple of businesses... and have found that "bad news" travels a lot faster than good news... but, referrals are the "life blood" of a small business!
NRA Legal portion of PPITH
I just completed the Instructor course (BIT),Instructor for Basic Pistol, and Instructor for PPITH. So, I am obviously NOT an expert, however the Instructor Trainers were very explicit that the legal part of the PPITH MUST be taught by a lawyer, that no police officer meets the NRA requirements in Michigan. I am going to abide by this when I teach, as this is what I was taught. However, a LOT of courses I am aware of do not abide by this, most of my friends who took an NRA course had the legal taught by a retired LEO. What say you?
CPL class use of deadly force
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garymac
Explain this....
(iv) Firearms and the law, including civil liability issues and the use of deadly force. This portion shall be taught by an attorney or an individual trained in the use of deadly force.
I know that some people believe that "an individual trained in the use of deadly force" means cop but the statue does not say that. The statute does not specify the type or scope of training in the use of deadly force, just that someone has been trained. Consequently, couldn't anyone "trained in the use of deadly force" be qualified to teach this section?
Absolutely, the way the law is written. I contacted the Michigan AG office and asked them to make a determination, (or at least give me a definition or other statute) however, no one, including the State Law Research Library could find anything.
This is something that we may have to wait until the courts make a ruling. No one would argue that an active military or combat veteran, police officer, or other security personnel haven't been trained in deadly force.
This is common sense.......however, common sense is not so common.