Home› Main Category› Personal Defense
breamfisher
Posts: 14,104 Senior Member
Self Defense Instructors... some thoughts
breamfisher
Posts: 14,104 Senior Member
I'll preface this by saying I've never been in the military, LE, or been a civilian contractor. I've never taken a SD course at a Gunsite/Thunder Ranch or something like that.
However, I do tend to read on such topics and watch a few YouTube videos on it.
Perusing the internet and looking at some sites and such, I wonder: what criteria do folks use in choosing who to listen to or who to spend money learning from? Some of the instructors out there seem to be more competitive-oriented in their background, others are ex-military/LE, some don't list any qualifications, and a few actually list combat tours in the military or similar LE experience (SWAT, etc.) I wonder...
If someone doesn't have any actual experience with deadly force, what makes them qualified to really speak to the application of it and use of firearms? Unless you're presenting a curriculum that's been distilled from the experiences of others (LE and military instruction would be an example in my mind - though I could be mistaken) then how valid are the ideas being put forth?
Also, why is it that some instructors don't put up any qualifications or experience on their advertising sites?
However, I do tend to read on such topics and watch a few YouTube videos on it.
Perusing the internet and looking at some sites and such, I wonder: what criteria do folks use in choosing who to listen to or who to spend money learning from? Some of the instructors out there seem to be more competitive-oriented in their background, others are ex-military/LE, some don't list any qualifications, and a few actually list combat tours in the military or similar LE experience (SWAT, etc.) I wonder...
If someone doesn't have any actual experience with deadly force, what makes them qualified to really speak to the application of it and use of firearms? Unless you're presenting a curriculum that's been distilled from the experiences of others (LE and military instruction would be an example in my mind - though I could be mistaken) then how valid are the ideas being put forth?
Also, why is it that some instructors don't put up any qualifications or experience on their advertising sites?
Meh.
Replies
Of course, I suppose dealing with greenhorn gun owners, teaching basic gun handling might be a pretty simple thing to do, at least for a while. "Caveat Emptor!"
Jerry
If you are using someone else's information or curriculum, you teach from their experience. Not yours.
A good competitive instructor will tell a defensive class, "Look, I can teach you how to run your gun like a machine and I can teach you economy of motion. But, I will not teach you tactics."
Tactics should be taught by those who have applied them and found their strengths and weaknesses.
I'm not sure I've seen that with self defense....
And Zed, you bring up a good point: a competitive shooter may be able to teach you how to shoot quicker and more accurately. But I'm not sure they can teach you how to use a firearm in a deadly force situation. You can't pre-solve a defensive situation, and for competitions, that's usually what happens.
Then, after you explain to me the "whys".............I'll ask you to prove your actions. Once you show me it's effectiveness.............I'll then validate it for myself.
-Ask (how they do something/think they should do something)
-Suggest (a method if different/better)
-Explain (why it's better)
-Show (why it's better)
-Validate (allow the students time to prove to themselves)
"Since you've never personally used this technique against an armed, hostile opponent, why should I listen to you?"
Put it another way: say you're learning how to shoot behind cover from a top IDPA competitor vs. someone who runs the risk of getting shot at. The competitive shooter will tend to "game" the cover so you get the maximum amount of body out there so you can engage the targets quicker (from what I saw when I shot IDPA.) The other fellow will tend to use the cover more effectively so you stand less of a chance of getting shot. Little things. Like keeping your feet and legs inside the truck when you open the door to shoot out...
:sniff:
:theylistenedtheyreallyreallylistened:
:sniff:
Laughter that they were doing it and nightmares that they were teaching it.
Did a thread on them a while back...
http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?8175-I-think-I-finally-found-a-shooting-school-to-go-to&highlight=school
I needed that laugh. Thanks.
Would I get extra flash point for carrying folders or fixed blades?
I deal with a lot of people who have little to no firearms experience who want to learn; some ask a lot of questions, but more often than not, I hear them repeating garbage that they've picked up somewhere. You know, the usual myths about guns, shooting, and SD situations. I want to correct them on the misinformation, especially in a group conversation where they're spouting that crap, but I don't want to make myself out to be something I'm not.
I guess that's a long-winded way of asking where do you draw the line between speaking on what you know from talking to or reading from people who know, and speaking from your own experience?
How vs. why.
For the MOST part, I want to know "HOW", if the instructor can help me to get the "how" down pat, then it doesn't matter what their background is. It's only when we move beyond skill and into actual tactics that the "why" comes into play. For "why" I want someone who has BTDT.
Also, anyone that I go to for instruction HAS to be a student as well.
"Fortuitous outcomes enforce bad tactics and breed complacency."
If 30 years ago Buford T. Fife got lucky and dropped 3 bank robbers with his S&W Model 10, using a cup and saucer girp and Weaver stance, while standing perfectly still in the middle of the street, and still to this day states that "this is ALL you need to know, 'cause it's what worked for me"........then I honestly don't think he has anything to offer me as far as instruction goes.
The instant someone stops learning is the instant they cease to matter as a teacher.
What they need to be is SAFE, a great TEACHER, and have proven methods and cuirriculum. The two schools I use the most have instructors that pride themselves on going to other schools and learning from other instructors. I see no problem in an instructor learning what other people use and have done, and using it in their curriculum... as long as they are honest about it. I actually wrote up a short post on the subject of choosing a shooting school that was supposed to go on one of the blogs on G&A's home page, but it never went live (Probably a comment on my writing more than anything). Here is the post:
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
I myself have many credentials that i advertise but others are to myself and myself alone(hope you understand) having said that always check with others the quality of the instructor before spending any money ie: recommendations from previous students. So, does he need any combative experience? I can't say. And if i may, for your own good and being as your are involved in shooting and maybe even CC take some classes train and hope that some day that training may not be needed. Good luck.
"The Un-Tactical"
There is much wisdom here. I would add that ability to TEACH is at least as, if not more important than how many fleas lived in their Special Forces beard. They may very well be an extremely lethal Delta Operator Ninja Tactician (D.O.N.T.), but if they can't intelligibly convey what they know, they are wasted as an instructor.
I think a facility needs to be able to operate with a hard focus on both levels - all the sexy tactics in the world won't help you if you can't hit the broad side of a barn after successfully deploying them, and all the marksmanship in the world is useless if you get killed because you pulled the car up too close before getting out. The outfits that have "This is the dangerous end" classes as well as how to fast-rope from a Blackhawk, with a variety of instructors to suit are probably your best bet.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
This, however it should actually be two separate things. that are linked tightly together. Its my argument with Fudds when I hear 'Huntin aint shootin." for the same reasons. You can go runnin through the jungle as well as taking to the timber, but if you cant shoot, then you are not going to be effective.
I think if you are taking a course that is trying to teach you which end is the bangy part and then doing a helo rappel in a week is likely a waste of time.
I wonder how many classes are geared for folks that just want to feel "operator". There was a group that people were paying large to be trained shooting at a range I was at when my teammate and I were testing out his Mosin at 600. Supposedly there were cops that their depts paid large for so they could take this "Training". They were all concerned that we didnt know what we were doing and would interfere. We talked them into letting us take the far left side in the grass with warnings to not shoot their steel 1/2 person sil targets. We seemed to be OK I guess.
I gotta say that I wasnt impressed. Here was thousands of dollars in gear all over their section of the range and their senarios were set up like a "mortar squad" at 300yds that you had to "take out" (they never mentioned how you got to within 300 of said mortar squad) and then "take out" a squad back to front from like 300 to 200 yds. All of this with the instructor calling hits and misses, shot off a bench with scoped AR's. There may have been a target at 500 but I dont think so. It was day 2 so I dont know if they were doing other stuff before, and I know they did a night fire which would have been fun, but practical?? It was Black Hat so I dont know it they do other stuff and this was just a fun fire for some folks or what. Though some of it looked fun, and they seemed to run a safe range, I am pretty sure that I won't pay for it.
Yes. Exactly what I meant.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
You coach Chuck Norris, right?