PAL/RPAL Practical Exam

here's the thing that makes me go .hmmmmm, while the majority of people commenting here have a passion or interest in firearms and would no doubt easily pass the tests even if they were done as per the defined rules...........what about the "yahoo's" that want a licence just to tramp around the woods because they think it would be neat to kill something (at least one of those guys in the duck killing video that caused an uproar a while ago was licenced). I've also had many people take/challenge the test strictly for work purposes, no interest at all, just needed it to work for CBSA, Brink's etc. Many of them don't have a clue (disclaimer: the twits are usually a very small percentage but they stand out the most in my memory). When they are coached on how to pass, how do you feel when they show up on the range and swing muzzles all over the place or try to load incorrect ammunition or want to fix guns/continue shooting while you're downrange!
I do not support the BS that the government shoves down our throats, but people that take YOUR money and fail to deliver are just as bad (or worse, we just seem to be more forgiving if they are in the firearms industry).
 
I picked up and proved so many guns during that course....

If there weren't cleaning rods and you didn't actually look down bores, no matter how many guns you handled during the course, you never actually examined a bore. Without doing that step in a properly run test you would lose at least 10%. Personally, I think there's way too much attention paid to examining the bore, but that's what you're supposed to do in the course. Hopefully, you and your classmates don't find yourself in the same situation as the hundreds in Ontario who had to redo the tests after their instructor was criminally charged and decertified (see the 8 hour PAL scam thread in the Alerts forum).

CZ-bruno, regarding having to prove a gun after laying it down - in Ontario some guidance was sent out for instructors concerning when ACTS & PROVE is not necessary. It seems some examiners were being idiots/anal and penalizing people for not repeating ACTS & PROVE when they laid down a proved gun to pick up something they need to complete some action. If the gun is under the student's supervision the whole time and they haven't walked away from it, the student doesn't need to do PROVE again. Seems obvious to me. Are there still some examiners penalizing students unnecessarily? Who knows...

There is one practical test that is used across the country and instructors are supposed to read it word for word and follow the very detailed scoring guide exactly. Instructors even get a video showing them how to set up and administer the tests. It shouldn't be the inconsistent mess that it is...
 
If there weren't cleaning rods and you didn't actually look down bores, no matter how many guns you handled during the course, you never actually examined a bore. Without doing that step in a properly run test you would lose at least 10%.
I suppose what you say is true but I also doubt anyone in my class is going to look at a real cleaning rod later in real life (or in any other examiner's test) and then proceed to pantomime the Examine part. In the course's videos they all showed using the cleaning rods in the Examine part.

I do understand your point. You want the test to be applied exactly the same. I agree.

At this point I can't say anything more defending a course that I just took as a student. I'm not the instructor. I'm new to this hobby and may not even go further. If I thought I had been cheated or felt I was dangerously ignorant I would feel differently obviously. But honestly none of the points brought up where this may have varied from other courses / tests is totally alien.
 
Im a PAL/RPAL instructor.

You wil get lots of hands on time with the firearms. The instructor will show you exactly what is expected on the test. Take your time, talk yourself through it( out load if nesessary) and dont try to reinvent how to PROVE a firearm and it will all go fine.
 
Back
Top Bottom