Was a bit of a worry how many failed the test...

Im sure this is common to see the odd person fail the first test, but when I attended my safety course, there were two people attending to retake their test after previously already failing it twice!
I do agree there is the odd question that appears designed to trick you or in some cases the safest answer is not always the correct one. The key is to read the question carefully and understand the context of what its talking about.
However, most of the questions are pretty common sense from what I can make, even if I had not picked up an arms code and read it, I think I would have been able to still pass.
I think about 3 people had to retake their test again at the end, the 2 people that had previously failed ended up passing but still managed to get the odd wrong answer.
I shouldnt be too judgemental, but when I was reading the arms code, i got the impression that if you failed the test both times that they would basically question your suitability as a "fit and proper person" to own firearms at all.

I expect the 3 that failed the test the first time likely would have passed on the second round, I heard the instructor telling them that they were common questions that people would get wrong. He was pretty good to them and explained the reasoning on why the answer was incorrect.

Im guessing many had not bothered to even read an arms code or thought they were going to learn everything on the day of the course perhaps before taking the test?

They also might have fresh out of school and are still struggling to read!;)
Or are dyslexic

It is not unusual for there to be fails.

No fails means you either have only the best and brightest students, or your test is too easy to the point of being useless.

Also, familiarity with firearms makes a huge difference - once people are comfortable handling firearms, the answers seem to be obvious, compared with when firearms are a theoretical concept.

The little group of people I did my test with in Dunedin were pretty bright, no fails but a couple of people (including myself) got one question wrong. It was something I don't remember being in the firearms code booklet.

I think it would be nice if everyone getting their license had to attend a practical hands-on firearms safety lesson. Those getting a first aid certification have to do practicals, not just multi choice exams, so I don't see why the same can't be applied to firearms licensing.

Honestly when i got my license I still felt ill-prepared since I had never handled firearms before, no one I knew was a hunter, and my only real experience was from reading and watching. I only felt more confident after doing the hunts course with NZDA and going out a couple of times with NZDA members.

Fails show the test is actually worthwhile. However, seems to be a lot of people leaving school without basic reading and writing skills, maybe that was the issue or just plain laziness on their part. Sorry, feeling like a proper grumpy old man today!

I was so excited to get my license (fresh out of school) I had been reading that arms code for months prior. Maybe longer.
I agree that reading it was a bit of a waste of time as it is all (well should be...) common sense.

When I was taking the courses it used to be the following:
80% pass, but there were core questions that you had to get right. Often people did not read the questions well (which were a mixture of positive and negative statements).
You could only sit the test maximum of 3 times.

There was a question in both the X and Y papers that we all thought not the correct answer - was always interesting to see the debate with the police about these.
BB

There was a question in mine I got wrong, at the end of the test when we got the results I took out the arms code and showed them the answer I had chosen was the right one and their marking sheet was wrong.

yes indeed there is a question in there that reads wrongly ,its a what is more safe??? if memory serves me correctly.... could be either of two answers and be correct....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JessicaChen

I think it would be nice if everyone getting their license had to attend a practical hands-on firearms safety lesson. Those getting a first aid certification have to do practicals, not just multi choice exams, so I don't see why the same can't be applied to firearms licensing.

---

That is now the situation. The course down here is run at the Edgar Centre and covers safe handling of all different types of firearms (bolt, lever, semi etc) and includes things like crossing a simulated fence safely. The guy that put the course together down here spent a LOT of dollars on buying guns from us and having them deactivated.

Greetings All,
Over 30 years ago I was a MSC Firearms Instructor. One test night I took my about 12 year old son along. He hadn't done any swot but while I was handing the test papers out I handed him one. I got one of the other instructors to mark his paper and he passed. Later he applied for his FAL, the little red book at that stage, and he was issued with it on his 16th birthday. I did get him to sit the test a second time with the same result. I do agree that at least one question and those bloddy rabbits gave a lot of people problems.
Regards Grandpamac.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JessicaChen

The little group of people I did my test with in Dunedin were pretty bright, no fails but a couple of people (including myself) got one question wrong. It was something I don't remember being in the firearms code booklet.

I think it would be nice if everyone getting their license had to attend a practical hands-on firearms safety lesson. Those getting a first aid certification have to do practicals, not just multi choice exams, so I don't see why the same can't be applied to firearms licensing.

Honestly when i got my license I still felt ill-prepared since I had never handled firearms before, no one I knew was a hunter, and my only real experience was from reading and watching. I only felt more confident after doing the hunts course with NZDA and going out a couple of times with NZDA members.

---

Yeah, I agree. When asked for a show of hands on who had used firearms, about half indicated they had never used a firearm.
I found the course covered the very basics, there could be alot more in-depth training for sure, but obviously time is limited.
There is indeed quite a bit to learn and get familiar with, especially if your new to firearms. I guess I have some advantage after using several of my friends ones over the years.
They do indeed do a practical hands on session nowdays.

Key points I took out of it was that lever action firearms should be avoided by beginners and that bolt actions are the simpler and safer to use. That is something I would agree with, having used one before.
They are also now using this new protocol called the 4 states of readiness which I think we will see published in the next edition of the arms code.
Apparently its something used in the military that is now being taught by all instructors.
Along with that, the practical hands on stuff we did was the 3 point safety check when first picking up a firearm and from going between each state of readiness.
We were using 22 bolt action rifles for the demonstration.
A friend of mine said they had to demonstrate fence crossings and another told me that they were all showed graphic photos of gunshot wounds and injuries, i dont know how many years ago that was.

Over the 22 years I ran the course, I found:

-women would invariably pass, even those with no previous firearms experience; the fails were usually young males. Moral of the story? Women listen, then put the learning into practice; young kiwi males know it all, so don't listen to the lecture, and crash/burn/die.

-I had several totally illiterate/dyslexic people, who we were permitted to explain the questions to. But I was concerned that if they couldn't read or understand English, how could they read a "No Trespassing" or "No Shooting" sign? A few of these were bus drivers, for Pete's sake! How did they get their drivers licence? They got a relative to sit it for them!

I got my firearms licence at 16 before my drivers licence (had priorities right from the start!). Failed one question, was one of those any one Q is correct, but there is one that was the most correct. Wasn't one of the 7 biggies I got wrong, so passed.

Don't recall any gruesome pictures, like off.the.grid, but it reminded me of a dcc forestry open day when i was in primary school. They had a display board with pictures of chainsaw injuries. I still remember the guys face with a diagonal kickback cut. It about 1cm deep from forehead between eyes and down the cheek. Now that picture gave me a healthy respect for chainsaws i can tell you!!!!

Yep My youngest son Failed his first sit this weekend. It was those ambiguous questions where you have 2 correct answers and have to pick the more correct one.
Z

Not sure if there are degrees of "correctness"? I'm picking only one of those answers was the correct one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ranger 888

Over the 22 years I ran the course, I found:-women would invariably pass, even those with no previous firearms experience; the fails were usually young males. Moral of the story? Women listen, then put the learning into practice; young kiwi males know it all, so don't listen to the lecture, and crash/burn/die.

---

@Ranger 888 I'm teaching a female mate how to hunt. And yup; she listens, doesn't pretend to know it all, has no ego/testosterone to try and boost, only has to be shown once, and generally is cool, calm and collected... The goat in the video below was taken on the spur of the moment. She was lining up on a black billy when I told her this big had just come out. It walked past the black one and she quickly lined it up and dropped it without thinking twice, from about 100m. I was really impressed that she'd been so calm and collected. It was only her second goat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65WkFb9gbUM

You do get a bit paranoid though. When I had my FAL renewed he asked to see my rifles and where I kept the keys. So I just told him I couldn't as I didn't know if he was a FAL holder. The way I looked at it; to do the checks etc (just ticking boxes really) you wouldn't need a licence. And if I told him then I would be breaking a rule. He just laughed, showed me his FAL and said it wasn't a trick question.

When I was asked about where I kept my keys I just said there is no point in me telling you as I will change the location as soon as you leave.
She said fair enough but was more interested in knowing that I kept them away from family members than the exact locating. I suspect I was being too suspicious of her motives.

Re hands on training and putting my suspicious hat back on. I wonder if its not a requirement because that training would be given by clubs and that would lead people to join clubs which would lead to higher membership which would bring firearms owners together in a "gun lobby". I use the term a little bit distastefuly but you get what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bumblefoot

@Ranger 888 I'm teaching a female mate how to hunt. And yup; she listens, doesn't pretend to know it all, has no ego/testosterone to try and boost, only has to be shown once, and generally is cool, calm and collected... The goat in the video below was taken on the spur of the moment. She was lining up on a black billy when I told her this big had just come out. It walked past the black one and she quickly lined it up and dropped it without thinking twice, from about 100m. I was really impressed that she'd been so calm and collected. It was only her second goat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65WkFb9gbUM

---

Good stuff, Bumblefoot! You are obviously a good mentor. Well done.