Thread: HDPA does indeed lie about firearms

Originally Posted by res

To be fair, a fal like what most forum members have would make no difference to how well a cop acts with a gun.the difference in use and mindset is just to large, sure it's not the same as the army either.
For both the police and military proper training is needed-if the tick I. There training box is called a license does it really change anything?

If joe blow like you and I could Cary in public for protection then there would be a case for the licance story be the same

Problem is that govt budgets don't seem to have room to fund the training-lets not forget that it's not just the ammo it's the extra bodies to cover the down time caused by proper training. Unless the $ is there I'm anti arming the police, if the $ was there I'm open to it as I know I would want it if I was doing the job and I struggle with the idea of expecting someone to do something on my behalf with less tools/training than I feel I would want to to the task.

exactly this. Im anti full time arming of the police because they dont have the required level of training. It looks like they wont have the budget to carry out that training either, train the trainers. ammo, wear on firearms/maintenance, down time of officers while doing that training.

shooting is a perishable skill, hence why the military combat trades are constantly having weapons with them on exercise, be it tactical or not. Currently an NZ pistol license holder, doing the mandatory 12 shoots a year minimum, is more highly trained than an average officer.