Hey Boomer,
Great reply, everything you touched on was pretty much discussed at length during the course, which would be difficult to reiterate into one reply. I must say everyone else thought the strong side carry was ridiculous too, and you would have fit right in, because like you said, it should be what suits us. Unfortunately, in order to carry in a shoulder, or cross-draw, holster, and even protected, was something you have to justify wjth the CFO, such as writing a letter, and taking pictures of you wearing your kit, videos, etc...
Also, the minimum cartridge was .357 Magnum, unless you were in polar bear country, which I think is fair because it was understood a gun too hot to handle is more useless than a gun you could shoot even though it had less power. I think that is why it was required that you bring the gun you intended to carry to qualify with. Bullet selection, and so forth, was talked about and how heavier bullets tend to penetrate better in most corcumstances, and how faced bullets did a better job and breaking through bone, as opposed to round-nosed bullets which could easily ricochet, etc. Interestingly, back in the day, they were approving guys for .45 ACP, .38 Special, etc., but will no longer issue ATCs, and ATTs for anyone wishing to carry those guns.
In regards to the course of fire. It was aimed at proving that you had reasonable control over your firearm and could hit an animal reliably. Although ideally you would smack them in the loonie sized snout, or the playing card sized spot between their eyes, but that is something that practicing will help a person improve. Not to sound like I disagree with what you're saying is best, but I would say most people who need an ATC for wilderness protection are not target shooters, so requiring them to be able to hit a bear in the snout at 10 yards, in order to pass is a bit unrealistic. However, these requirements were discussed and decided on by the training organization in Ontario, and the CFO. Each province is different, with BC rumoured as being especially stringent because of the grizzlies. I think what is boils down to is reasonableness, not what is most ideal. If only 1 person in 20 were capable of hitting a loonie sized snout target, or playing cars sized skull target at 10 yards, then what need is there for the CFO to continue to issuing ATCs and ATTs if nobody could hit the target that we decided was adequate? I think what you said is most important, that what is boils down to is practice, which is why they made it a requirement that ATC holders also must belong to a shooting club to maintain proficiency (which is a no brainer). Myself and the individuals taking the course were all target shooters, so it went without saying, but for those who weren't the instructor would heavily stress the practice part. Things could change though, and if you don't pass your recert, you have to take the course all over again until you do.
edit: by the way, that training drill looks amazing! I don't think my outdoor range would allow it, for handguns "no midrange targets, and all must go into the back stop." However, at the indoor range, the target holders move pretty fast....
