Question For the Instructors on the Forum

[BigPoppa]

There's a lot of "minimum" mindset on this thread, and that was the thrust of my original comments. People who want a HCP but want it at:

Minimum price, minimum rounds fired, minimum drive time, minimum hours in class, teach only the minimum material the TDOS gives us.

My point is that that mentality, in both trainers and students, may give good people a false sense of security that they are any better prepared to defend themselves or their family than they were when they arrived at the class in the morning.

Shooting 48 bullets in broad daylight at a motionless paper target and hoping there are 34 holes in the black does not prepare you for the gunfight. Neither does the little more than that that we do, and I stress to my students to take more training, even if it's not from us, from a QUALIFIED, REPUTABLE instructor.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

Wow...I went the hard route I guess.

My class was stretched over one day a week for 12 weeks of 2 hrs each session (IIRC). Of course, it also qualified for a college PE credit

[The Rabbi]

There's a lot of "minimum" mindset on this thread, and that was the thrust of my original comments. People who want a HCP but want it at:

Minimum price, minimum rounds fired, minimum drive time, minimum hours in class, teach only the minimum material the TDOS gives us.

My point is that that mentality, in both trainers and students, may give good people a false sense of security that they are any better prepared to defend themselves or their family than they were when they arrived at the class in the morning.

Shooting 48 bullets in broad daylight at a motionless paper target and hoping there are 34 holes in the black does not prepare you for the gunfight. Neither does the little more than that that we do, and I stress to my students to take more training, even if it's not from us, from a QUALIFIED, REPUTABLE instructor.

Uh, oh.

It is perfectly natural for people wanting an HCP to pick a course that is going to fulfill that requirement. It equally natural they should want it at the minimum cost and maximum convenience. We all lead pretty busy lives with economic stress thrown in.

And the truth is that most private citizens involved in self defense shootings have not had any more than the minimum training in how to operate the gun. And they come out fine.

So if someone wants more training and experience, there are plenty of excellent courses out there. But I think reading and practicing will deliver more "bang for the buck".

[Cruel Hand Luke]

My random observations over the course of 10 years......

The OVERWHELMING majority of folks only want the BARE MINIMUM. Many view the class as an inconvenience rather than an opportunity to learn something that might actually save their life. You cannot convert those folks. You will only get frustrated. Most folks just are not interestied in getting continuing training. VERY few even ask about where to go to get further training.

So if you try to be a crusader and make competent gunmen out of them in a 1 day class, that leads to immense frustration on your part and more material than they can digest on their part. I add some material dealing with awareness and people who approach you on the street, but I keep to the state syllabus as much as possible. If they want further training I welcome it with open arms, but few even ask, even after I tell them this class is a BARE MINIMUM and that further training is a really good idea since the class covers so little.

Folks who have never been in a dangerous situation seem to be the least motivated. Those who have seem to be the most motivated....hmmm....imagine that....

Most folks who are "self taught" really do need the marksmanship training even if it is a bit remedial for the good shooters. A good many NEED remedial training. I have lost count of folks who show up trying to use the "cup and saucer " grip, or folks gripping the gun with their thumb behind the slide -(usually a self solving problem), and folks who are obviously cross dominant eyed who are shooting with the wrong master eye. While you might argue that you can get away with this in a defensive shooting I say knowing how to do it RIGHT solves a lot of problems. And making them do it correctly takes less time than letting them figure out on their own why their pet method they have "always used" is not getting good results.

It is amazing how the proper grip, trigger control , sight focus and forward leaning upper body posture makes shooting down right simple.....

There is no point in spending a lot of time on reloads when no matter how much you might want them to, 95+% are NOT going to carry spare ammo anyways. I'd say that over half will rarely even carry the gun anyway. We are teaching "normal folks" not gunfighters. Not being cynical here or sarcastic just being realistic.

The video has issues. The knife stuff in the video is just not right in the real world. If you wait for someone to approach you, pull the knife and tell you they are going to gut you , then it is likely you will not be able to keep from getting stabbed. There are some other issues and we discuss them after they view the video. I show another vid demonstrating the Tueller drill so they can see for themselves just how fast distance gets covered.....

Obviously we don't shoot the guy on the side of the road whittling a stick, but we also do not need to wait until a knife wielding assailant has closed to within touching distance before we take any action....There are a few other issues with the video , and I discuss those also.

Most people for some reason think you cannot carry a gun in a bank......

Most people think you SHOULD be able to shoot people who are stealing stuff.....

It is EXTREMELY gratifying to see people who are very nervous about passing the shooting part shoot a fist sized group just by doing it the way we teach it. The confidence they gain from that is hard to put a price on...

Again, these are just random observations..

Edited March 20, 2008 by Cruel Hand Luke

[GLOCKMEISTER]

For the same reason I take any other training. The same reason you (and I) go to PRI. To learn, to stay fresh, to get another look at stuff and see what I can use to better myself and the product I put out for sale. And sometimes, to see what doesn't work so well.

We don't teach a lot of tactics, but we do shoot more than 48 rounds. We spend more time on how to AVOID a gunfight, and how to stay out of harm's way in the first place. We talk a lot about stuff like "If you wouldn't go there without a gun, don't go there WITH a gun !" Is that kind of material in the state outline ? No. Is it important ? I submit that it is crucial, and reduces my liability as an instructor, not increase it.

Please dont take offense... but...

You talk about others here with "minimum mindset" however it appears by your own admission you use that same "minimum mindset" you criticize others for having, to develop your own course...

If your a State Instructor and you go and take multiple classes covering the same material you teach... then your basically.. going to spy? Right? I mean thats the truth... If I go to class at Gun Site, PRI or Thunder ranch... it doesn't cover anything in the TCA... or anything about the Tennessee carry permit. Its about me getting better at extreme firearms and self defense tactics. But if thats your thing, its not like it top secret.. then so be it.. I guess its just me, I have been frustrated for 15 years over others stealing my ideas, as simple as they are, and using them because they lack originality. Co-dos to you for having time on your hands to take permit classes while others are busy teaching them... I guess its just money in others pockets....

Btw.. I agree with what you say prepares you for a gunfight... but the permit course wasnt meant to prepare people for a gunfight either. Want that, find a level 2-3 course. Now if you want to talk liability, call John M. L. Brown and ask him why they teach the 8 hour course at PRI? You take their classes right, must be for a reason???

Hope I didnt offend...im out..

Edited March 20, 2008 by GLOCKMEISTER

[Fallguy]

Ok...I'm not an instructor either. But I guess when it comes to a HCP I am one of the "minimum mindset" people because I don't think you should have to get a permit from the state to carry in the first place, let alone be "forced" to take training for it. I don't think there are proportionately any more incidents in the states that don't require a permit for Open Carry or VT which doesn't require permits at all than there is in TN

Now....I would recommended any level of training for someone that wants it or needs it.

[Marswolf]

The OVERWHELMING majority of folks only want the BARE MINIMUM. Many view the class as an inconvenience rather than an opportunity to learn something that might actually save their life. You cannot convert those folks. You will only get frustrated. Most folks just are not interestied in getting continuing training. VERY few even ask about where to go to get further training.

I have to agree, and I'm one of those who view the class as just an inconvenience.

But I tend to, admittedly, smugly put myself apart from the standard class participants. I'm old enough to have had a Federal carry permit at one time. Reality is reality. I took the class. Scored 100 on both the written and range qualification, of course.

I think most folks want the certificate, so they can be legal rather just carry and be illegal. I absolutely understand that concept. It's like wisely, but illegally, carrying in Applebee's.

As I've said before, the carry permit card is basically a reassurance of good citizenship.

But in a way, that assurance is not necessarily an indication of being the best citizen. Sometimes the best citizens are also rebels.

[Guest ETS_Inc]

Please dont take offense... but...

You talk about others here with "minimum mindset" however it appears by your own admission you use that same "minimum mindset" you criticize others for having, to develop your own course...

If your a State Instructor and you go and take multiple classes covering the same material you teach... then your basically.. going to spy? Right? I mean thats the truth... If I go to class at Gun Site, PRI or Thunder ranch... it doesn't cover anything in the TCA... or anything about the Tennessee carry permit. Its about me getting better at extreme firearms and self defense tactics. But if thats your thing, its not like it top secret.. then so be it.. I guess its just me, I have been frustrated for 15 years over others stealing my ideas, as simple as they are, and using them because they lack originality. Co-dos to you for having time on your hands to take permit classes while others are busy teaching them... I guess its just money in others pockets....

Btw.. I agree with what you say prepares you for a gunfight... but the permit course wasnt meant to prepare people for a gunfight either. Want that, find a level 2-3 course. Now if you want to talk liability, call John M. L. Brown and ask him why they teach the 8 hour course at PRI? You take their classes right, must be for a reason???

Hope I didnt offend...im out..

I always heard that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. None of what I, you, or any other instructor teaches was invented by us. It's all just different ways of expressing the same information. By learning from others, it makes us better instructors. Too many people get into a rut and think that they are doing things perfectly. They might be doing a good job, but just maybe someone else has a better way of making the information easier to understand. That's why I think it's a good idea to study from others. To that end, I've been planning to take Carry Permit classes from several other area instructors over the summer. It's not that I think I'm a piss-poor instructor, or lack originality. If I sign up to take someone else's class, it's probably because I've heard good reviews about that instructor, and I want to be as good as they are, so I can provide my students with the quality of instruction they deserve.

Did you learn everything you teach on your own? Everything, including how to hold a gun, how to shoot it, and the law? I doubt you are 100% self-taught. In fact, you had to have taken at least one class from someone else in order to have been certified as a carry permit instructor. Does that mean you lack originality, and that you've stolen that instructor's ideas? No, it means that that instructor taught you and you're passing that information along to others. That's what professional instructors do. A professional doesn't get his knickers in a wad because someone else wants to continue learning, in order to further develop his own style, technique, and material. Again, I highly doubt you created a new wheel when you wrote your curriculum.

[Smith]

Is it just me or is there a lot of inconsistency here? We don't like big daddy telling us what "privileges" we can have, yet some of the instructors here seem to have the mentality that the incompetent masses need their instruction above and beyond what the gov't requires.

Might I add that they are requirements for something that shouldn't even be regulated as such in the first place!

With that in mind, I guess I am one of the incompetent masses that don't really care for all the rigmarole in getting my HCP. If i want "extra" I'll take an extra class. Besides i don't think very many people take advanced driving courses in order to get their license. Do they?

[BigPoppa]

If your a State Instructor and you go and take multiple classes covering the same material you teach... then your basically.. going to spy? Right?

guess its just me, I have been frustrated for 15 years over others stealing my ideas, as simple as they are, and using them because they lack originality.

Yes, I am engaging in high level corporate espionage. I am pilfering top secret techniques such as how to charge a magazine, sight alignment and sight picture, handgun nomenclature, and much more !!

Co-dos to you for having time on your hands to take permit classes while others are busy teaching them...

Smugness noted....but don't cry for me Argentina, we've trained almost 150 students in the last year...all satisfied customers. Sometimes it's quality and not quantity.

Edited March 21, 2008 by BigPoppa

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I always heard that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. None of what I, you, or any other instructor teaches was invented by us. It's all just different ways of expressing the same information. By learning from others, it makes us better instructors. Too many people get into a rut and think that they are doing things perfectly. They might be doing a good job, but just maybe someone else has a better way of making the information easier to understand. That's why I think it's a good idea to study from others. To that end, I've been planning to take Carry Permit classes from several other area instructors over the summer. It's not that I think I'm a piss-poor instructor, or lack originality. If I sign up to take someone else's class, it's probably because I've heard good reviews about that instructor, and I want to be as good as they are, so I can provide my students with the quality of instruction they deserve.

Did you learn everything you teach on your own? Everything, including how to hold a gun, how to shoot it, and the law? I doubt you are 100% self-taught. In fact, you had to have taken at least one class from someone else in order to have been certified as a carry permit instructor. Does that mean you lack originality, and that you've stolen that instructor's ideas? No, it means that that instructor taught you and you're passing that information along to others. That's what professional instructors do. A professional doesn't get his knickers in a wad because someone else wants to continue learning, in order to further develop his own style, technique, and material. Again, I highly doubt you created a new wheel when you wrote your curriculum.

No I actually didnt take any class to be a permit instructor, I was already qualified to teach back before we were fighting to get the original legislation passed in 1993.

Anyway... Frank your absolutely right, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery... and for the last 15 years ive been extremely flattered, thats all. It just strikes a nerve with me. So hey, its no biggie... your time and your money. I'll be busy teaching.

Keep your powder dry...

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Yes, I am engaging in high level corporate espionage. I am pilfering top secret techniques such as how to charge a magazine, sight alignment and sight picture, handgun nomenclature, and much more !!

Smugness noted....but don't cry for me Argentina, we've trained almost 150 students in the last year...all satisfied customers. Sometimes it's quality and not quantity.

Brother its not big deal, Im sure you teach a fine course and when you have been doing it as long as I have you will see what Im saying.... You may also discover the same things me and the guys at PRI have figured out.

Peace out...

[Guest Legally Armed]

I posted the third response on this subject and said:

This is just some background data on me because I think it will be hard for an 'active' instructor to answer your questions without getting himself or herself in trouble with other instructors.

What is happening on this subject is what I meant.

Everyone who instructs takes additonal training to help them learn more on self-defense for themselves, and to see what they can take from other trainers. You take what you believe is beneficial, and leave what you think does not work [after analyzing the tactics]. Most trainers have taken something from the Glock instructors course, Sig, Front Sight, Gun Sight, and others. You re-certify your credentials and in the process might learn some new techniques. After awhile, you forget that you learned a specific technique from another trainer. Down the road some other trainers will eventually take what they learned from you and if they think it is beneficial, will incorporate in their training. This is the norm.

Some trainers think they are qualified to teach in areas that they are not and, this causes problems for their students. The student if they are new to tactics will take what they learned as 'fact'. It might take some time for the student to break the bad tactic they learned or, learn the hard way when they don't work. This is unfortunate and this is why it should be important for any student to learn some background data on the trainer, and the school.

NRA basic instructors are qualified to teach a CCW course and basic gun safety training. I won't go as far as Buford Tune said in the Kansas City Star Newspaper that "most trainers don't know how to spell gun". But are they qualified to teach advanced tactics if they have not received additional training from other groups or organizations. It is that simple. Survival training in the military does not always teach a person how to survive in a 'Urban enviorment' if this is not the type of survival skills they were taught. Not that they might not get themselves out of the jam but, are they qualified to teach someone else?

Firearms training is not the same as medical training. The moves, equipment, and learning curve is different. Smarts are required more to be a nurse or doctor than a gun trainer. I say this even though I know a few doctors and other medical people who are also gun trainers but, most gun trainers are not doctors or nurses.

Trainers who can show others how to survive with good information are important. They do what they can in the time frame they have. Good Trainers have spent many hours on their instruction so they can do a good job with their students. After all, what is taught might help the student survive a deadly attack. That is what it is all about. Not the money. It is about passing on knowledge on how to stay alive. A trainer knows they did a good job when one or more of their students let them know that the training they received, helped them stay alive. Six letters I received from all the people I trained, are some of the most important documents I own [of course they come in after my divorce papers]!

Edited March 21, 2008 by Legally Armed
spelling

[BigPoppa]

I'm curious as to precisely what techniques, tactics, information, etc. that you have been so ripped off in the last 15 years that make you so indignant. Can you elaborate ?

[PackinMama]

My random observations over the course of 10 years......

Most people think you SHOULD be able to shoot people who are stealing stuff.....

Seems that the majority of the people on this board feel this way too ....based on some other posts I've seen on here.

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

Seems that the majority of the people on this board feel this way too ....based on some other posts I've seen on here.

i think you should only shoot if yours or your love ones life is being threatened. you can steal anything you want of mine just dont try to steal my two dogs if you do you will get shot

[strickj]

Depends on how you plan on stealing from me.If im not home,oh well

If I am home and you plan on coming through me to get it,then thats another story

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

Depends on how you plan on stealing from me.If im not home,oh well

If I am home and you plan on coming through me to get it,then thats another story

i have to agree

[Guest ETS_Inc]

No I actually didnt take any class to be a permit instructor, I was already qualified to teach back before we were fighting to get the original legislation passed in 1993.

Anyway... Frank your absolutely right, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery... and for the last 15 years ive been extremely flattered, thats all. It just strikes a nerve with me. So hey, its no biggie... your time and your money. I'll be busy teaching.

Keep your powder dry...

You had to have met some requirement in order to be qualified to teach, right? What made the State decide that you were qualified to teach? Just your good looks and all-around demeanor? Or was it because you were an NRA Instructor, or a POST-certified Police Instructor? Or, was there some other factor that caused the State to judge you qualified? There had to some form of standard for quantifiing your qualifications. I would bet that one of those standards was provable previous experience. I doubt they just let Billy Joe Jim Bob walk into a gunshop and say "My grandpa taught me to shoot, and I say you know how to carry a gun." I would be willing to wager that you had to show them that you had earned your qualifications by learning them somewhere. Nobody from Dept of Safety stopped you on the street and said "Hey, you look like a smart guy, go forth and teach others."

It must be nice to know that you're the best instructor in the State, and that there is nothing another instructor can teach you, or that every other instructor is simply stealing your intellectual property. (You did invent the Weaver, Chapman, and Isocolese stances, right? Because if not, and you teach them, you're simply stealing from those who did invent those techniques. Or, have you invented a newer technique that no one else knows about?)

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

You had to have met some requirement in order to be qualified to teach, right? What made the State decide that you were qualified to teach? Just your good looks and all-around demeanor? Or was it because you were an NRA Instructor, or a POST-certified Police Instructor? Or, was there some other factor that caused the State to judge you qualified? There had to some form of standard for quantifiing your qualifications. I would bet that one of those standards was provable previous experience. I doubt they just let Billy Joe Jim Bob walk into a gunshop and say "My grandpa taught me to shoot, and I say you know how to carry a gun." I would be willing to wager that you had to show them that you had earned your qualifications by learning them somewhere. Nobody from Dept of Safety stopped you on the street and said "Hey, you look like a smart guy, go forth and teach others."

It must be nice to know that you're the best instructor in the State, and that there is nothing another instructor can teach you, or that every other instructor is simply stealing your intellectual property. (You did invent the Weaver, Chapman, and Isocolese stances, right? Because if not, and you teach them, you're simply stealing from those who did invent those techniques. Or, have you invented a newer technique that no one else knows about?)

or maybe he just stayed at a holiday inn j/k

[PackinMama]

That's hilarious!

[Marswolf]

Might I add that they are requirements for something that shouldn't even be regulated as such in the first place!

I think this is a valid point.

We seem to be discussing how much training we should have to get a carry permit. Maybe the answer is "none." I don't recall hearing about bloodbaths in Vermont and Alaska from people going crazy while carrying legally but without a license.

[The Rabbi]

I think this is a valid point.

We seem to be discussing how much training we should have to get a carry permit. Maybe the answer is "none." I don't recall hearing about bloodbaths in Vermont and Alaska from people going crazy while carrying legally but without a license.

I'm always torn on this point. The state constitution gives us a right to bear arms. If it requires a permit then it isnt a right anymore. OTOH I think the permit course is very valuable because it does teach stuff that people would just be unlikely to go learn on their own. Look at how many misconceptions are aired here, by people who have taken it. The permit also tends to separate the good guys from the bad. The good guys have permits, the bad guys dont. I know thats a generalization but sometimes that's all you've got.

I wouldnt mind a system like VA, where anyone can open carry but concealed requires a permit.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

You had to have met some requirement in order to be qualified to teach, right? What made the State decide that you were qualified to teach? Just your good looks and all-around demeanor? Or was it because you were an NRA Instructor, or a POST-certified Police Instructor? Or, was there some other factor that caused the State to judge you qualified? There had to some form of standard for quantifiing your qualifications. I would bet that one of those standards was provable previous experience. I doubt they just let Billy Joe Jim Bob walk into a gunshop and say "My grandpa taught me to shoot, and I say you know how to carry a gun." I would be willing to wager that you had to show them that you had earned your qualifications by learning them somewhere. Nobody from Dept of Safety stopped you on the street and said "Hey, you look like a smart guy, go forth and teach others."

It must be nice to know that you're the best instructor in the State, and that there is nothing another instructor can teach you, or that every other instructor is simply stealing your intellectual property. (You did invent the Weaver, Chapman, and Isocolese stances, right? Because if not, and you teach them, you're simply stealing from those who did invent those techniques. Or, have you invented a newer technique that no one else knows about?)

wow Frank I never thought you were this much of a smartazz... Sorry I didnt think to list all my lifelong nonmilitary accomplishments in my sig. Thanks for your service btw...

I never said I was the best... actually if you could read I actually stated the opposite, in this thread. You said "have to take" if I remember... and there were several people in this state in 1993 that were already NRA and POST instructors, so no we didnt HAVE to take anything.. we already met the qualifications. You guys that have came around sense that are walking in our footsteps HAD TOO. And yes I use allot of the same stuff everyone else does, but I dont go around taking what I consider remedial classes to "better" myself either. Classes taught by my competition... Im sure you and your little friend both teach a fine school...never said or implied otherwise.

So we agree to disagree... are we done here?

Edited March 21, 2008 by GLOCKMEISTER

[molonlabetn]

Seems that the majority of the people on this board feel this way too ....based on some other posts I've seen on here.

It's simply a matter of stopping someone from taking what one has worked hard to provide for themselves and their families...

People who put up no resistance to being robbed, when it is within their power, effectively deserve to lose what has been taken. That in no way advocates taking a life over property... but it certainly means that it's ridiculous to say that it's only right to have the mentality to not be a victim only in the worst possible scenario.

Saying that robbery/theft should not be resisted means that someone else other than yourself is responsible for preserving your way of life... and that is a mentality which I cannot agree with.

If I'm not home when stuff is taken, oh well.

To see this from a larger perspective... what if vital food/medical/energy/whatever supplies of a country were regularly pirated by outside marauders, leaving the people wanting? Would that country not be justified in protecting what is theirs with force? Or, should the thefts be simply allowed, since the sovereignty of the country, and the wellness of its people aren't worth a war, because there was no direct attack?