Well spent GA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gapped axe
Printable View
Well spent GA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gapped axe
Reading through this Bill999 has taken offence to something that wasn't directed at him but at the instructor that Koshogi experienced. If there is indeed such a poor level of training and instruction (maybe just from the one instructor) it does appear that there is a need for proper training (maybe just to this one individual).
I agree that the firearms test is a bit of a joke, with the help offered to people that obviously haven't studied and have all but no clue about firearms and their safety. Even in the US they have a handling section of the test (I've been told shotgun with 2 live rounds). There is definitely a need for a shake up, but that still won;t stop the idiots nor the crims. At least if you're trying to do it the legal way, you have the correct intentions.
Sounds like Koshogi would be an EXTREMELY valuable addition to the MSC and Bill999, you're all but telling him to piss off. Cool your jets Bill, take the offered assistance.
I found the the same course a bit mixed, I learnt a few things which was great, and was also surprized a few things were more opinions than anything else.
The thing that got me was the number of test fails, and they were told to go away and try again, and again, and again... What?????
I was happy to 100%, but it showed me that people who had not read or understood the arms code were being allowed to pass.
...grant
I thought you could only sit it twice beofe you got the big red rubber stamp?
Also Bill there is no need to get salty, OP could quite easily have come on here and made a thread along the lines of "hurrr msc iz stupid and I haet them so much durrr", but instead he has identified some problems and put forward some solutions.
Im not saying he should piss off at all, I think he would make a fine instructor - far better than the idiot that took his test, but I bet he wouldn't be prepared to do that - (which annoys me) someone picking holes in a job done by a volunteer but they arnt prepaired to give what that person is giving, their time on a regular basis to help other
Koshogi you SHOULD join the MSC and take courses where you personilise them to make them the best course they could possibly be, that way with more people in the ranks maybe the MSC could be more picky about who runs courses and drop the worst off the list
from what I understand this isnt possible due to the fact not many people are prepaired to give up their time to help
I found my course OK, but I had read and re-read the wee blue book until I had almost worn it out.
It is very basic and is why the push for you to join a club.
Bear in mind the cost is kept low that way no on is excluded due to the cost of it, or some Govn agency/dept would have to fund it.
I would appreciate it if you would stop making suppositions about me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill999
You are annoyed at me, based on your belief? Not on what I said or did, but what you believe that I would or wouldn't do. Seriously?
I am criticizing the way the course is structured and managed. If you wish to take that as a slight against you, so be it.
I don't want anybody dropped off the list. If a person(instructor) is not up to the agreed upon standard, you help them achieve that standard. By developing your volunteers, they become better instructors, and the public get a better education/course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill999
One person running a course to a higher standard, does not raise the standard for the other courses being run. There needs to be consistency amongst all the courses being run. This is why I am advocating for a standardized training package and ongoing assessment of the instructors/course.
I probably will, at some point volunteer for MSC. I had planned too some time ago, unfortunately personal commitments do not allow me at this time. I couldn't anyways right now, remember, I just applied for the licence. Which you said was a per-requsite for the "job".
I wasn't charged anything for the course.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven
From what I understand, funding for the course is from NZ Police.
I did a course through open polytech instead of the MS and it was really good. While still all theoretical it at least tried to go into some detail on how to operate different types of arms, appropriate cartridges for uses etc. We also had to go to a gun shop and get them to show is 1 to 1 how to operate a bolt, a semi and a shotgun then sign of that they had. A bit off topic but more comprehensive firearms education is available.
NONEQuote:
Originally Posted by ebf
Oh ebf do I have a story for you:)
I should probably keep this two myself but I think there's a lesson in it for us all, so no names will be mentioned.
Our local firearms course instructors (2) where hunting with a good mate of mine, a couple of years back, this is a true story.........
They where quad hunting a private hunting block for deer split between 2 quads, both the instructors, my mate and the land owner.
2 red hinds crossed the track when coming down the hill, the two instructors decided two cut down bedside the ridge two maybe get a shot off.
The bikes carried on down the steep track, my guy mate on the trailing quad who was a very experienced quad rider, some how got cross rutted and the bike rolled pinning him against the bank.
The lead quad had carried on unaware of what had happened.
Mate was in rather a bad way screaming his head off for help, the two instructors arrived after running back up the hill,
As they bent down two pick up the quad one of there unloaded guns slung on someones back went off blowing a hunk of bank two bits less than a foot from my mates head.......
These two instructors then debated whose gun it was that mysteriously went bang. I kid you not.
.these are the same two alluded two in my first post:)
Fortunately I think they have given up..........
Scarey shit alright
You got that right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
jeez thats a worry, suppose some mothers do have 'em
Getting a licence to own a fireman in NZ is a pretty casual affair compared to the UK. Back 15yrs ago when I lived there things were reasonably tight, today is even worse. You had to apply for both a shotgun licence and a separate rifle licence. With the rifle licence you even had to apply for the calibre that you were proposing to use before you were even granted it, for each calibre on the licence you had to put forward good reasons why you needed to own such a calibre. As a beginner or first time license holder the chance of getting a 300WSM was slim to nothing. One way of increasing the chance of getting a centre fire ticket was to take and successfully pass a British Deer Stalkers course. These were held several times a year all over the country and consisted of a three day course covering both practical skills and in-depth instruction on safety, ballistics, deer management, the law and equipment for deer stalking. The practical side not only consisted of shooting centre fire rifles at different ranges and positions but also the butchering and the care of the carcass after shooting. To pass the course you were expected to score 3 out of 3 at prone 100m, 70m sitting or kneeling and 50m standing, also there was a 100 question test that you had to get 80%. This was just the basic course and you could go on and complete advanced courses. Today in the Uk certainly in Wiltshire the county I come from you have to do this course to get a ticket. My point is that this might be the extreme but it gave me an extremely good grounding into the use of firearms and the shooting of larger game animals. Some where between this and what we have now in NZ would in my opinion be better for all. How we do it or who controls/runs it is open for discussion. Please discuss.
That has to be the longest first post I had seen on a forum :thumbsup:
Welcome aboard mushpush, from a fellow expat.
Welcome mushpush.
Just like to keep my mouth shut and then get it off my chest all at once! Its been something that has bugged me for a while especially when you hear all these reports of guys getting shot in the bush by their mates. I'm not saying that Pommes are perfect, cause they aint, its just that I cant recall many if any, fatalities amongst hunters/shooters in the UK, yet here it would seem not uncommon.
Do you have larges areas of bush that people can go to anytime and just go hunting over in England?
Not really Toby. You need to have permission to hunt on just about all land I think.
Imagine a country the same size as NZ but instead of 4 and half million people living in it, there are 65 million. Doesn't take a big imagination to realise that what public land there is, gets a lot more people using it for whatever purpose.
Thanks Pengy
I don't think their system is what helps not having people shot. I think it's lack of land available for everyone to go hunting on when they please.
The hunting is totally different in the Uk, the biggest issue is the close proximity of the general public, be they dog walkers, townies out for a Sunday stroll or whatever. You have to be on the ball all the time. Yes I agree there is not big areas of bush like there is here, most of the lowland stalking is done on open farm land and even the woodland stalking is done on the rides and edges, Maybe the big difference is that the stalking is generally done on ones own on a piece of ground where you have sole rights so the chance of bumping into another hunter is pretty remote. The greatest danger is a member of the public showing up at the wrong time since the right to roam act was past giving greater access to private land. I know from my own personal experiences you had to be bloody sure of your target and also the backdrop before you pulled that trigger. Stalking on open lowland farms brings its own issues because of the lack of back drops, this is were high seats come into there own because now you have a greater field of view and a missed shot ends up in the dirt.
I think most of the instances here occur for a similar reason. People think with so much bush available that a noise/movement must be a deer. We all need to treat everything as human until proven otherwise, no matter how remote we are.
I still think we should impliment at least some form of competency check prior to issuing a FAL.
Boom!! That's the paramount point NZ's hunting community need to be taught and taught and reminded of on a regular basis... It's really very simple. Say it louder Gibo...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
All together now... "EVERYTHING that moves in the bush is human, until there's absolutely no doubt!"
I've allowed many deer to run away and live another day since seeing a man walk into my scope cross hairs in dull light very early in my hunting career. I heard a faint twig snap, raised my rifle and waited for the 'deer' to walk into view. Wow! What a lesson that was. If I'd been taught to be any more blasé, I may well have pulled the trigger. Thanks dad :-/
Just an update for those following this topic.
I was contacted on Monday by a member of the MSC.
MSC is going to conduct an investigation into my complaint and remedy any issues found in the delivery of the training package.
An application for membership for the MSC was sent to me. I intend to join and contribute my time when my personal situation allows.
The MSC representative was disapointed that I had aired my complaint on this forum, and felt that it had belittled the work of the volunteers. This was my response to that topic;
"I do not believe that airing criticism about the management of the course on a public forum can be construed as being dismissive of the volunteers themselves. As I mentioned on NZHS, I think it is a noble thing to volunteer and applaud everyone who actively contributes to the improvement of their community. However, given the subject matter being covered, the volunteers and the MSC do a disservice to the community by allowing a course to be delivered in such a shoddy manner."
What is your opinion on me sharing my experience? I'm pretty sure I know yours Bill999;)
I think you did a good thing
I think that putting your concerns out there, so to speak, is a good thing. It opens the topic up for wider debate, and also means that your concerns are less likely to be quietly swept under the carpet. I am not suggesting that MSC would dismiss your complaint if it had not been aired here, but it does make it a little harder to ignore.
It's good. From my point of view and experience, it's something that needs addressing.
Koshogi for king of New Zealand tbh, his desire to get things done and excellent grammar would ensure my vote.
All power to your right arm Koshogi.
Thank s for bringing this up Koshogi, Ive long being a supporter for increased training for the general public. Like you we have a almost matching Qualifications.
I applied for a position within MSC as a hunts coordinator which also involved mentoring the volunteers who deliver the program and from memory they were all working towards a adult ed qualification.
I was surprised to here that instructors wern't following a set program, I guess it will always be a problem where people wander off on tangents and pass on their own ideas and very hard to keep every one on the same page. I don't envy the coordinators job one person and a huge job over the whole country and trying not to upset anyone cause lets face it not many of us have time to spare these days.
MSC is based on the help from Volunteers and only has a few paid employees
I full support the MSC and have benefitted from some of there excellent mountaineering training over the years.
lets support them to keep on improving what they deliver.
A lot of us on this forum have had millions spent on us buy our own govt and others around the world and others have the commonsence to be safe out there to.
My 2cents worth.
Cheers
I have over the years and at peoples request given them a little basic firearms training. mine is directly from my TF years and regular force instructors.
First quote -"make a mistake -my boot goes up your arse ,no exceptions". some people Ive simply refused to as I basically dont trust em.
one claimed he was in the market for a machinegun FFS"my mate has gang contacts ya know ,can get anything"- "go get yourself a good casket dickhead"
Ive heard a lot mentioned on here but i didnt have to deal with MSC when i got my FAL. one thing did crop up though.the spotlighting question . crusty old cop in hokitika went to mark me wrong for saying spotlighting is unsafe.his rationale -its OK no people round -my reply -yep even a .22 can travel a mile -no spotlight shines that far, smiling he marked me right 'lotta commonsense in your head lad"
I guess it shows you were thinking about it, which is half the battle with some people - he was right that spotlighting can be done quite safely, but you do have to be careful and pass up some shots that might be ok in daylight.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
My 2C - my course was shit too. It was an advertisement for two clubs in particular and very little other information was covered.
I sent a Facebook message to MSC which resulted in a two hour lunch with Nicole Mackay and a huuuuuuge amount of awesome, positive action being discussed.
MSC has an amazing program for safety that is slowly being rolled out across the country. Unfortunately it's not about soon and gloom and blood and guts, so the media isn't buying it.
Talking to your local AO or MSC representative is a great way to go to both put your mind at ease and also gain tips on how to be a better safety ambassador of the firearms community.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its a bit disappointing to hear that the MSC isnt delivering the goods. I was an instructor for nearly 30 years from the early 1970's to 2003 instructing at Porirua, Wellington and lower Hutt old and new Police stations and found generally most instructors were very good. The majority of instructors were NZDA members and had a keen knowledge and passion for hunting and firearms. We had an approved course we taught with practical details provided by our own experience .We were updated regularly with the new relevant legislation and firearm accident statistics which detailed the cause and effect of the accident which in turn was woven into the course. Our emphasis was always safety,safety and safety. In the few hours we had to run the course each night its not possible to cover everything in depth but all the basics were explained. We had a good variety of different firearms as teaching aids including damaged firearms ,blocked barrels etc that explained more than words. It was important to ensure that the safety laws were understood and the results of abusing the rules was injury or death. The main man in those days was Bob Badland whoes passion in driving MSC was infectious . Although we were all unpaid volunteers we did maintain close contact and would all meet at least once a year for a general get together and update.
When I did my original training as an instructor it was pretty basic involving a two day course held at the Wellington branch NZDA range . We were expected to be very familiar with the various firearms and hunting methods and the emphasis was on teaching methods. This is of course a very short time to teach a teacher . We always understood that our input as volunteers was by necessity limited and limited funding was available from The Internal Affairs dept ,then subsequently the Police . The firearms/ arms officer at most Police Stations then was also the lost property officer ,most of whom had limited hunting and firearm experience and were hugely overworked but who were proactive in supporting us few volunteers. It was not our job to vet anyone as our warrant was for instructing although we would on occasion communicate our concerns of anyone to the relevant people. This was a very rare occurrence. I think that all in all we did a good job instructing people with similar interests who took a great deal from the course and who subsequently became avid hunters and shooters and whose commitment to their sport and safety is shown by the literacy and concern expressed on this forum and who can in turn if they wish give something back.
I ceased to be an instructor due to work commitments in 2003 and have had little to do with MSC since that time but feel the MSC course is only as good as the volunteers who run it and that could be you.
My old mate 76 yrs old is still running them here, would get a more experience person to do it, has his board with diff actions and blown barrels on it, takes a full selection of drilled ammo, him and a mate run a very serious show!:cool:
I agree entirely with what Driverman posted on 6 September.
My involvement as a firearms instructor parallels his, except that after forty-something years I am still actively involved. We have, for decades, had a manual for use in instruction courses for new firearms license applicants, the latest edition being issued in 2012. While the manual has never been intended to be a minute-by-minute, word-by-word prescription of how the course should be run, it has always been stated – and I would have thought, clearly understood by instructors - that all the fundamental material in it MUST be included in the lecture. We have also used videos for decades, showing people in real-life hunting and shooting situations demonstrating the fundamentals of firearms safety.
It has always been the presumption that applicants would have been issued with a copy of the Arms Code, and have studied it, before attending a course. Most do, but a few don’t – and they are often the ones who fail the test. Some people with well above average learning abilities might be able to come to a course with a base knowledge of almost zero and still pass the test at the finish of it, but most could not, regardless of how good the instructors might be. NZMSC have always been well aware that different people have different learning abilities. Some learn best by reading, some by listening, and others by seeing real life demonstrations, either in-person or on screen. The course is set up to (hopefully) cover all three, even though it does entail some degree of repetition.
Questions for the posters who are complaining about the course and/or the instructors:
Did the instructors refer to the manual at all?
Did they show the video?
Did the instructors REALLY stand up on their hind legs and tell you things that totally contradict the material in the Arms Code and in the video?
If that is what happened, then those instructors must be made to either improve their performance or quit.
Of course the existing system could be improved on – given more volunteers and more funding - but those people advocating tearing it apart and completely rebuilding it – to conform with their personal preferences – need to stop and think about the longer-term implications. They could be a WHOLE LOT worse than what we have now!!!!!
I've come in on this late, but as an experienced adult educator, (as significantly different from a 'trainer') I would stress that to do the job well, one needs two "trades": the subject you're training (and I do not doubt the expertise/experience of our MSC and numerous other instructors) AND a thorough understanding of the adult learning process. Like several here, I've endured painful presentations by individuals who lacked one or t'other.
Volunteer organisations in particular are not all wise to the importance or even meaning of this.
Challenging the trainer within the forum is rarely productive, constructive criticism to those higher up the organisations food chain might, just might be. Sadly, there are some even higher up within whatever organisation we're talking about who simply don't comprehend what I call the "two trades" requirement, and so the poor training model continues.
In conclusion, I can only suggest that you apply a model the poor (as In poor quality) trainers are obsessed with; saying something often makes it 'right'. Therefore if you DO have valid, constructive comment to make about a training presentation, be prepared to make your point repeatedly, often, and even more than once!!!
Unfortunately, this is a fraught area; most of us blokes have learned that answering the "do I look fat in this?" question is risky and there isn't a simple answer. Good learning practices are the same.
Si
They referred to the Arms Code booklet. I didn't notice them referring to a manual, but I won't say that they didn't have one.Quote:
Originally Posted by redrover
No video was played.
Yes, they really did contradict material in the Arms Code, but more importantly provided information that would cause a person to contravene legislative acts.
I've almost completed doing Unit Standard 9131, Firearms Legislation and Safety. The course material came with a DVD which, I'd have to say, is very dated. There's footage of a chap and a young woman shooting a centrefire at a range and neither are wearing any hearing protection. Not saying that's a safety issue, it's not, it's a health issue, but with the increased focus on that sort of thing through WorkSafe these days, I think it should be sorted and the video updated. Also have found contradictions in the written course material which I will be feeding back to Open Politechnic.