Cheaper Instruction....

As far as becoming a first rate target shooter? why not? In a self defense situation.. The B/G is a target... no? ...

Yes.....a MOVING target that isn't going to just stand there 7 yards away and more than likely isn't shaped like the sihlouette you're used to shooting. On top of that, I've never seen a still piece of paper induce stress and variable parameters in preferred lighting.
 
All your points are true Tuttle. I must agree. I still say that shooting at stationary targets with your service/SD gun reinforces your skills. Training is good, realistic practice is good, shooting paper is good.
 
Well, I’ve been a nobody instructor for awhile and I like to consider myself as competent, but would never say that I could approach the level, or type of instruction you can get at a big-name school. I had a fondness for Gunsite because of Cooper. He was a great man in my book. Not just because of his level of experience and his way of saying things, but for his desire to teach what he had learned. That desire is what I believe made him a great teacher, imo. To be clear, I never took a course from him and met him only in passing. I didn’t have the money to go to Gunsite until his health was failing, and that took away a lot of the desire since it was him that I looked up to. Though I had respect for the man for many reasons, the main reason I looked up to him as an instructor was his desire to teach. This was evident to me when he personally and fully answered letters and questions from nobody instructors … that he knew he wouldn’t make a dime off of. As long as the big names have that desire in addition to their knowledge base, they would make a truly great instructor imo, and I'd bet the current owners of Gunsite are ... due to the place's history … but what you can learn from them is still entirely up to you.

The clear advantage of the big names is that you pretty much know they have a superior knowledge base from which to teach and great facilities for a wide range of simulated situations, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to a great teacher. The nobodys are often an "unknown quantity" in that respect, and the standard NRA courses leave much to be desired in many areas, imo. The straight-NRA courses are geared toward safety and paper punching because that’s what they’re designed to be. The "Personal Protection" course is a PC kindergarten-level thing imo, but I understand the reasoning behind it being so. (and why I teach an addendum that I make sure the student knows is not sanctioned by NRA) They’re a good place to begin, inexpensive, and will easily put you in the top ten percent of the population … if you have an instructor with the desire to teach and has the sense to say "I don’t know" when he doesn’t, and you’re willing to learn from him.

One thing for sure … If you are convinced that only a big name will meet your needs, by all means ignore the smaller instructors and go to a big name because you are correct. No instructor can teach someone that doesn’t have confidence in them.

I’ve met guys that I think I could have taught a few things if they had been willing to listen. I’ve even told a couple of ‘em that I couldn’t teach them anything, unless they were willing to set aside a few ideas or "techniques" for awhile. (some have "learned wrong" or insist on trying to run before they can walk) I think those guys I dropped just decided that I couldn’t teach them because they had already advanced above my abilities due to DVDs, magazine articles, and such. Dunno, maybe they were right, but none were able to show it imo.
 
Last edited:
People discussing the relative value of training who have not yet taken a class from a nationally known professional instructor are like virgins talking about sex... :D

lpl
 
Thanks for that insight, Lee ! :D

Anyway - there's more to using a gun than hitting the bullseye. It's been said repeatedly. Wonder why the Army, AF, etc. always returns to realistic simulation training after some initial dismal war fighting results?
 
good one LEE ! … can be taken a couple of ways there …:D

but nah, you’re still a virgin until you get in a real-life situation. Instructors are just sex-ed teachers. Gym coach vs. Dr. Ruth maybe. Won’t even get into what the training devices and practice are like ...:D
 
Last edited:
Ranburr,

Right. Even as a kid I had some sort of mental block about transposing East and West with respect to Germany, and have always gotten corrected. It doesn't happen with any other geographical location. It seems I haven't outgrown that quirk. I never transpose the two anywhere else and am never surprised to hear it stated correctly. So I can't account for it?

What the hostage rescue team fellow said was that when the wall fell, it was found the Stasi had two kinds of member: the corrupt command structure and the operatives who were, by western standards, rather intense (I believe he used the word "crazy"). He said, as near as he could tell, the new government had dismissed the former and kept the latter. He described their original training including exercises western countries would not allow for safety reasons. I recall he described them doing serial diving rolls over barriers with a pistol in each hand, coming up out of the roll to shoot a target with each gun over the shoulders of the fellow who'd preceded him in the roll, and who was standing their waiting for him to do it. He said they had a lot of scars from training mishaps. He seemed pretty impressed with the results of their training if not enthusiastic about prescribing it for anybody.

This fellow, by the way, and to my surprise, only took second place in the shoot-off at the end of that class week, despite all that heavy training history. The winner was the fellow who eliminated me earlier. He was a California sheriff's department firearms instructor. I don't recall for which county, but it was apparently a large enough one to have him work full time at the position. He clearly practiced a lot. He was not in nearly as good physical shape as the HRT member and would have lost a rappelling contest with him in a heartbeat, but was older and probably a little calmer, which can pay dividends under match pressure.

One of the topics that has always interested me regarding firearms training, is personality type and how that influences the kind of training you respond to and can apply. Why it is, at one extreme, you can get a gunfight between two trained detectives and a drug dealer inside an elevator car in which all guns are emptied and nobody is hit except the detective who shot himself in the bicep while reloading (no, I can't figure out how to do that, either), but at the other extreme have Delf "Jelly" Bryce jump into a room where Jay Ray O'Donnell is in prone position across a bed with an innocent woman next to him as cover and a cocked 1911 already pointing at Bryce's midriff, yet Bryce draws and puts 5 .44 Specials into O'Donnell's head from the hip faster than O'Donnell can react to press the trigger? You couldn't write either case for a movie and have anyone believe it.

After J. Edgar Hoover acquired Bryce from the Oklahoma City PD, Bryce did some training work in addition to his work as an agent. I believe he introduced the FBI crouch position, but am prepared to be corrected on that point. But Bryce was never able to train other agents to do what he could do in a gunfight. The reason the FBI later went to two-hand hold training was the inability to get the one-hand instinct approach to hit consistently in actual fights. As Jack Weaver said, "a pretty quick hit is better than a lightning fast miss", so the compromise was made.

I have a suspicion that to be a Jelly Bryce or Bill Jordan or any other effective hip shot requires a personality that gets low numbers in a fear quotient test. I don't know what psychological conditioning the Stasi did, but undoubtedly they selected candidates and may have had a high elimination rate? But I'm meandering off into speculation. The bottom line is that something has to keep these folks from getting to the extreme fight or flight response state characterized by heart rates above the normal athletic range and by total loss of fine motor coordination.

I agree with Animal and Lee. When I took my first Gunsite class in '92, Cooper said he was, by then, getting a letter about twice a month that began with the words, "it works". He had over 5000 "ticket holders" (graduated students) by then, many police and military, so feedback from the field had become regular. Indeed, he and the other instructors made a point of asking us to provide detailed reports of any incident we became involved in, including those which did not come to actual gun play (the most common domestic type; situations resolved by attitude rather than combat) because that feedback helped provide improvements to the system. Statistically significant feedback is one big advantage an established school with a large student base has.

Not wanting to see the effectiveness record change is one reason Cooper was very careful about making changes to doctrine or equipment or anything else in the system. We I first met him he was wearing a molded plastic half-holster he said he'd been trying, and after about three years of satisfactory use he felt he was just about ready to give it the thumbs up. But not quite.
 
Last edited:
Unclenick,

I only caught the East/West thing because I spent some time with them after the wall came. Their human intelligence files were pretty staggering. The sheer number of spies that they had at every level in the west would blow your mind. This includes massive numbers on essentially every U.S. and Nato military base in the west (including my own HQ). Most of these turncoats were not true believers, rather they were ordinary people who had family being threatened in the east. I never thought much of the Stasi for their skills or training (though they were at a higher level than the GRU/KGB). What the Stasi had going for them was the fact that they really had no rules to hold them back.
 
Nice thread ya got here :p

Would you pay alot less for Instruction by someone who has taken Instructor courses from big name schools, or would you rather pay the big bucks and get the same material?

I have not done a big name school, but my participation in a local gun club has taught me a lot from people who are very helpful. I can't say what kind of training I would receive at a school, but I have shot IPSC scenarios,large bore rifle, small bore rifle, and cowboy scenarios. I'm not saying that it's a substitute for a one of those fancy schools, but if I ever find myself in one: The learning curve will not be as steep.
 
The learning curve will not be as steep.


That is what most people think. Your basic firearm skills are probably not going to be an issue. But, you will be surprised at how little you know when you get into the more advanced training. This will be more so when you get into force on force training.
 
Would you pay alot less for Instruction by someone who has taken Instructor courses from big name schools, or would you rather pay the big bucks and get the same material?

DD
If the man in question is an instructor. There are people who can shoot and can't teach no matter who they learned from. Your choice, do you have confidence in his ability to convey information and he is knowledgeable or some gun range cowboy passing on his own quirks?
 
It has definately been interesting to read some of the replies here. I have seen alot of talented shooters in the travels and ranges I have been too. I have seen alot of great instructors that really dont practice what they preach, but found a way to portait like they did. If you go into a class thinking you are not going to learn anything, then you are in the wrong mindset to begin with. I have have taken some great classes from people who have been there and done that, and probably doing it tomorrow. I have taken classes from people who have taken instructor courses from those I have just mentioned. Some of the better instructors and courses were from the instructors who gave you the theories and multiple ways to do the particular task, and not just do as I say and its my way or the highway mantality I did not like nor was not impressed with. You can learn a little bit from everyone as long as you are willing to learn.

DD
 
They go with the big name for the same reason people go to the big name colleges. I'd rather pay much less and get the same degree.
 
Yes, but that analogy doesn't hold completely. Research has clearly shown that the big name, prestige school leads to better jobs.

We don't have any data that is systematic on gun trainers. Givens has a great record with his students. But there's no accrediation and outcome research across the gun trainer world.
 
You're quite right, a big name degree will get you the better job but has absolutely no bearing on whether or not you'll keep the job. Research has proved this. My point is that it doesn't matter where the education comes from as long as you are learning what needs to be learned. The big name training schools are probably phenomenal but I'm sure there's some lesser name schools that are probably quite good as well. It just comes down to how much money you want to spend.
 
Basic firearms skills will most likely help you in a SHTF moment as long as you saw the attack coming in advance and have the time to react. When I hear comments like, "I dont need an Instructor to tell me I'm missing the target" or something to that effect, it makes me cringe. Good Instructors dont just tell you that you missed, try again! A good instructor will guide you & and help give reasons why you are missing and the corrective actions to take. If you havent taken a basic safety class that involves proper grip, stance, sight alignment & sight picture, trigger finger placement and trigger press, breath control and you think that you dont need any instruction because your father's brother's cousin's former roommate taught you how to shoot, then why are you even reading the Training and Tactics section of the forum?

In the cases where the Law Abiding Citizens made it out of the confrontation alive and sometimes un-scaled, without any training was, how can I put it? Lucky comes to mind. I have seen students when shooting at a stationary target, with all the time in the world, have great shot placement. Some of the great shot placement is due to natural marksmanship, or good family or friend's guidence and or amatuer instruction. But like someone posted earlier, paper doesnt shoot back, and a static target is alot easier to hit than a moving one. Now add in having to draw your weapon from the concealed garment, establish the proper grip and present gun to threat safely without muzzle flashing or inadvertanly shooting themselves, get a front sight/muzzle on target and press the trigger in a matter of 3 seconds or less. Have seen some of those same people bring the gun up and present it to the target the way they were shown, and not hit the sid of the barn because the gun was crooked in their hand.

Most of the deadly force encounters are B&E style break-ins. What happens if you hear a knock at the door, when you go to answer it, it comes flying open at you and you are rushed by an unknown number of "crim of the crop citzens who are all trying to straighten their lives out" some carrying weapons and some arent? Does that day of plincking at the range help you with multiple threats and possible 360 degree attack? No, it doesnt!

Can the instructor who has been taught how to engage those same threats and or has been in that situation or simular scenrio give you the mind set or teach you how to prepare or how to respond for that situation? Absolutely!
A good instructor teaching Personal Protection or Law Enforcement Officers will make sure the student knows the basics and will refresh on them for a few minutes to make sure everyone is on the same page. Knowing the basics will definately help with some of the shooting. Since alot of Deadly Force Scenarios occur at such short range you will most likely have to resort to one handed shooting. If you do not practice one handed shooting and or support hand shooting, I highly recomend you start now especially if you plan on attending a Personal Protection course.

DD
 
Lets not forget that some of this family member or friends instruction might not be the safe way or a preferred way. Then they turn around and teach those methods to the "student". And in some cases half of which have to be taught the proper basic fundamentals all over again. It is fustrating for an Instructor to have to do it, but a good instructor understands that, and hopefully has the patience and the ability to camly redirect the student to proper technique. Mind set and tactics arent for the most part instinctive, they have to be taught. Thats from what I have witnessed and collected over the last 20 years or so. The instructor will help you with proper grip, and draw and presentaion so you can make the first few shots count, because when the SHTF, thats all you are going to have. Some of your best instruction is from the "NO NAME" instructors. I have helped countless LEO's and Military members & civilians of all levels, improve their marksmanship and their tactical shooting and thought process. And I dont work for a big name school and all my students have been refferals.

DD
 
Last edited:
Back
Top