Advanced Gun Training Program for Permit Holders
Jeff Johnson would like to see the Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act of 2003 brought to the next level. “Prior to 2003, critics argued that passing the personal protection act would turn Minnesota into the wild west. It didn’t happen. Critics argued that law abiding permit holders couldn’t be trusted. With rare exceptions, this also didn’t happen,” Johnson said. With seemingly countless laws on the book and proposals for more “gun control” legislation that have little to no effect on criminals, Johnson believes it’s time to focus on one segment of the population that can directly help the public and indirectly help the police...law abiding permit holders. “Gun control is a misnomer. It isn’t gun control that is the root problem. It’s personal responsibility control…or the lack of it.”
Limits of the Current Law
Although the Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act of 2003 provides qualified and properly vetted citizens the means to legally carry a firearm, it does not provide training that would qualify the holder to proficiently use a firearm in a violent encounter. “Shooting at a stationary target on a range in a controlled environment is very different than a sudden, highly dynamic close-range encounter with an assailant that lasts only a minute,” Johnson said. “The fact that the Minnesota permit is valid for five years with no proficiency requirement during that time allows the holder’s decision-making and shooting skills to significantly degrade. To carry responsibility means that permit holders will continually practice and refine their skills which takes a serious time commitment.”
Introducing Part Two: The Minnesota Citizens Enhanced Protection Act
Johnson’s proposal, the Minnesota Citizens Enhanced Protection Act has some similarities to the Minnesota Enhanced Driver License. “It’s the next logical level. The enhanced Driver License gives the holder additional privileges,” Johnson said. “I am not advocating the enhanced protection program should be a requirement for all Minnesota permit holders although it would be highly recommended.” In researching the idea for the enhanced protection act, Johnson noted the success of the Federal Air Marshal program for US airline pilots that arose from the ashes of 9/11. “Airline pilots who want to participate in the Federal Air Marshal program go through very intensive training appropriate to the airline industry. The Minnesota enhanced protection program would have a strong emphasis on armed encounters including active shooters, rioting encounters, home invasions, and defending others in close proximity.”
Why Now?
The world has become a much more dangerous place. Gun confiscation programs have failed miserably in curtailing crime. Gun free zones are not a deterrent to criminals. With looting and subsequent violent riots in Minneapolis and the mini riots in St. Cloud, it is time to give responsible, law abiding citizens additional training that can save lives. In St. Cloud, an assailant at the Crossroads Mall was stopped by an off-duty law enforcement officer who was well trained. Undoubtedly, the best-case scenario encounter with law enforcement was achieved. If a non-proficient permit to carry holder had to respond, the outcome could have been disastrous. However, an enhanced protection program certificate holder would have been equipped with advanced training. According to Johnson, “I think the Minnesota Citizens Enhanced Protection Act is a good idea because the number of carjackings have escalated rapidly. The alarming amount of sex trafficking, shootings, and other criminal activities has certainly gotten the attention of Minnesotans and they are demanding solutions from our elected officials. As an inventor and patent holder, I learned that some of my ideas are great and others are not.” Johnson argues that all political officer holders and candidates should be required to come up with at least one innovative idea that will help their constituents even if the idea falls flat on its face in terms of public acceptance.
Questions & Answers
Does the Enhanced Protection program provide Peace Officer Standards & Training (POST) that Minnesota law enforcement candidates complete?
No. It is envisioned that some instructors will be current or retired law enforcement officers so there may be elements of the curriculum that have POST attributes. Law enforcement instructors will emphasize what can and cannot be done by graduates in the enhanced protection program. The rights, privileges and responsibilities for program graduates are lower than law enforcement officer training.
Who would qualify to teach the enhanced protection program?
The program would use instructors who have a strong handgun background from civilian and military law enforcement. Other instructors (NRA instructors, criminal behavior specialists, etc.) can be used in various components of the curriculum under the supervision of primary law enforcement/military instructors.
Does the Minnesota Citizens Enhanced Protection Act deputize permit holders?
No. Permit holders who complete the enhanced protection program are not deputized. It is assumed that a sheriff would initially deputize recently retired law enforcement officers however enhanced program graduates could put themselves voluntarily on a list of availability for their local sheriff to consider deputizing if needed.
How would the Minnesota Citizens Enhanced Protection Act be different from the current training received by permit holders?
The current permit to carry program can be completed in one weekend. The initial enhanced protection program will be much longer (2 to 4 weeks) and would have additional course work. The enhanced program would have an extensive simulation and shooting component. Part of the enhanced protection program could have a specialization component based on the student’s needs. For example, the student in the program may be a retired homeowner who desires intensive training in surviving a violent home invasion attack. Another student may be a business owner who would like training in defending a business against looters. A specialization could be a female-only class that provides realistic training involving one on one situations like being ambushed in a parking lot. Private armed security firms and armored car companies may have an interest in a specialization unique to their discipline.
Are there re-currency requirements for enhanced protection program graduates?
Yes. Unlike the Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act of 2003 that only requires recertification every 5 years, the enhanced program would have continuing education requirements that would need to be met much more frequently to remain certified.
Who would pay for the enhanced protection program?
The student who enrolls in the program would be responsible for program costs.
Are there or could there be any privileges for enhanced protection program graduates?
Yes. Enhanced protection program graduates may be allowed to carry concealed in other environments normally off limits to regular permit holders.