The Truth About Police Firearms Training v. Concealed Carry

Published on October 15, 2021
Duration: 2:24

This video emphasizes that both concealed carriers and law enforcement officers often fail to pursue training beyond minimum requirements. The speaker argues that individual responsibility is paramount for anyone carrying a firearm, advocating for continuous training that exceeds basic certification or annual qualification standards. The core message is that proficiency requires ongoing effort, not just meeting minimal legal or departmental mandates.

Quick Summary

The majority of concealed carriers and even law enforcement officers fail to train beyond basic certification or mandatory annual qualifications. Instructor Mike stresses that individual responsibility requires continuous, advanced firearms training to achieve true proficiency, as minimal standards are often insufficient for real-world effectiveness.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Inadequate Training for Concealed Carriers
  2. 00:15Law Enforcement Training Deficiencies
  3. 00:23The Core Problem: Lack of Advanced Training
  4. 00:34Individual Responsibility in Firearm Proficiency
  5. 00:46Holding to a Higher Standard
  6. 01:02Critique of Basic Certification and Qualification
  7. 01:15Real-World Examples of Training Needs
  8. 01:36The Necessity of Continuous Training
  9. 01:58My Standard vs. Official Standards
  10. 02:07Why 16 Hours Isn't Enough
  11. 02:17Beyond Qualification: The Need for More

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is basic concealed carry training often insufficient?

Basic concealed carry courses typically provide only 16 hours of training, which is widely considered inadequate for developing true proficiency. This minimal training often fails to cover advanced techniques or scenarios necessary for effective self-defense, leaving many carriers unprepared for real-world situations.

Do law enforcement officers receive adequate firearms training?

While law enforcement officers qualify with firearms twice a year, this is often seen as a minimum standard that doesn't equate to advanced proficiency. Many officers do not pursue additional training beyond these mandatory qualifications, leading to a similar training gap as seen in the civilian concealed carry community.

What is the speaker's main argument regarding firearm proficiency?

The speaker's primary argument is that individual responsibility is key to firearm proficiency. Both concealed carriers and law enforcement must actively seek training beyond minimum requirements, as official certifications and qualifications are often insufficient for real-world effectiveness.

How does the speaker define 'adequate' firearms training?

The speaker implies that 'adequate' training goes far beyond basic certification or annual qualification. It involves continuous practice, advanced skill development, and a commitment to exceeding minimal standards, ensuring readiness for potential threats rather than just meeting a legal or departmental requirement.

More Training & Techniques Videos You Might Like

More from Instructor Mike

View all →