Bad Instructor Story

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff White

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
37,876
Location
Alma Illinois
This link was sent to me in an email. I’ve never had to take a concealed carry class because of my LE background. I’ve heard other horror stories but is this representative:

https://sofrep.com/news/a-horror-st...ubmV0IiwgImtsX2NvbXBhbnlfaWQiOiAiSFZTM0NhIn0=

A HORROR STORY FROM MY STATE’S CONCEALED CARRY WEAPON CLASS
by Swift | Silent | Deadly

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by Justin “Graveyard” Fields for Swift | Silent | Deadly. This article contains affiliate links.

I recently had to attend my state’s concealed carry class. Most concealed carriers don’t get to attend these classes too often. I haven’t attended one in years, but through a bit of a fluke, I had to attend one to one to get my current state’s resident permit. Although I love training I ever disappointed in the class. Today I am going to offer a review of it

I’m going to split the review in two parts. Part I will cover instructorship and some things witnessed in the conduct of the class. Part II will be a follow-up post covering some of the incredibly bad information passed during the class.


I’ll be honest: I’m pretty salty about this class. I had to pay almost $100 to attend. For my money, I got to watch two instructors who have no idea how to run a class. They also, obviously, had made almost no effort to keep up with the latest and greatest in the self-defense community. Mostly, they just strutted around, impressed at how cool they were for being instructors, spouting one-liners, and telling “war” stories.

Sitting in this class was a personal embarrassment for me; there were a lot of new students that now think that’s how “gun guys” think and act. It was also a professional embarrassment: The attendees came to the gun community for their first paid, professional training, and this is what they got. It’s hard to overstate how embarrassed I was and continue to be. As I go through this, and the next article, it will definitely seem that I’m making some stuff up just to have things to complain about. I promise you I’m not.

Bad Instructorship: Introductions
I’ve written before that instructors should be able to introduce themselves in 90 seconds or less. I mostly just want your big experience bullet points, and things that are specific to the class you are teaching. If you were a cop at some point, that’s relevant to teaching a concealed carry class. If you have attended Andrew Branca‘s legal training, that’s relevant to the legality of lethal force. If you spent ten years at the School of Infantry teaching machine guns, that’s relevant to being an instructor. I don’t need to know that you were promoted to vehicle maintenance officer for your platoon on your second tour in Panama in ’87 or if you were the NCO of the quarter at the 673rd Space Shuttle Squadron, Q3 of 1995. That’s not relevant to a concealed carry class and I don’t care.

However, the only thing worse than a too-long introduction is no introduction at all. In my recent concealed carry class there was no introduction. I had to piece together firstly that there were two instructors (I thought there was only one) and secondly what their names and backgrounds were. Distinguishing the first instructor was obvious: He walked into the classroom, sat down at the front, and started talking. He did not provide his name, any sort of background, or list any credentials relevant to the teaching of a concealed carry class.

I was able to piece together each instructor’s background from vague anecdotes given throughout the class. I didn’t know their names until sometime after lunch; their names were presented on the very last slide of the PowerPoint presentation. Why on the very last slide and not the first slide? If you figure that out, let me know!

The primary instructor was incredibly vague about his background. He was a cop (no idea for what department or for how long) in the ’70s, and claims to have been a “merc” (his term) in the 1970s and ’80s. He claims a lot of gunfights in South America and Africa. Other than that really dated experience he presented nothing that is relevant to teaching a concealed carry class. He didn’t provide a list of training he has attended or qualifications he has attained. He didn’t even hint that he had attended any training since being a mercenary, possibly as late as the 1980s. Basically, no one in the class has any idea what the instructor’s actual level of training was.


Side note: he also looked like a walking Paladin Press title with 5.11 pants tucked into jungle boots, an IDPA vest, CZ-75 carried at 5:30…

Bad Instructorship: Assistant Instructor Conduct
The second instructor walked in midway through the first hour of the lecture. He walked right up to the front of the class, sat down in a chair in front of the first row, and began talking over the first instructor.

Permit me a little sidebar here: First, if you’re an assistant instructor, you don’t usually need to be at the front of the classroom. In fact, you probably want the class to completely forget you’re there and focus exclusively on the primary instructor, or whoever is currently teaching. By sitting in the front, you’re going to be more of a distraction than anything else. Every time you shift positions, pick your nose, cough, cross your legs, check your phone, etc. you’re going to catch someone’s attention and take it away from whoever is currently instructing. Additionally, every time you get up (to go to the bathroom, to get something for the instructor, because someone walked into the gun shop) you have to completely interrupt the class by standing up and walking back through the students. Find a seat in the back and stay there unless you’re demonstrating something, or helping the primary instructor in some way. And keep your mouth shut unless the instructor asks for your input or grossly misses something.

Where was I? Oh yeah — the second instructor talking over the first. This bugs me to no end. The second instructor sat in the front, throwing out little tidbits here and there as the primary instructor when through the class. If the primary instructor paused for even a second, the secondary instructor was all over it:

“Now, a 1911 has a thumb safety and a, uh…”
“Grip safety,” they both say in unison.

I don’t know why this bugs me so much, but I think it’s because of what it hints at. As I mentioned earlier, the assistant instructor should basically be neither seen nor heard unless needed. This guy seemed to need students to see, hear, and know that he knows stuff, too. So, he butts in when not needed to say stuff the primary instructor is in the process of saying.


The assistant instructor was a current law enforcement officer. I believe he was a county sheriff’s deputy and a member of the SWAT team. Again, this was never formally presented, I just picked up bits and pieces. Like the primary instructor he failed to provide even a partial list of his qualifications or training.

Bad Instructorship: Incomplete Mastery of Material
Obviously, the instructors weren’t “masters” of their domains. There were a few areas where this was blatantly obvious, and I’ll give you one. When he got to the slide covering the body’s stress response, he totally choked.

“I guess they say you’ll experience some of this stuff. I can’t really understand what they’re talking about here.” The “stuff” he’s referring to will be familiar to any serious student of self-defense: increased heart rate, loss of fine motor control, tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, etc. Basically, the fight-flight-freeze response. At least some of these things will be familiar to any non-psychopath who has ever been at serious peril of death or dismemberment.

The instructor claims to have been in numerous gunfights, but also claims to not know what the slide is talking about. This indicates that either he’s lying about his gunfight experience, he has been in gunfights and experienced the body’s stress response but is too macho to admit it, or he’s a psychopath who has been in gunfights but hasn’t experienced these phenomena. Either way, probably not the dude I want teaching entry-level students.

There was also a good deal of blatantly false information presented. Then, there was a lot of stuff presented that run counter to modern, informed ideas about self-defense. Although I can understand the omission of some ideas, since they are somewhat debatable (like the suitability of birdshot for home defense), others were dead wrong and demonstrably so. See my next article for more on this — I’ll cover a lot of the gun shop commando talk in that one.

Bad Instructorship: Lack of nuance around self-defense concepts
Now, there’s probably not a clear, right or wrong answer here, but I will relate one point that was hammered home pretty early in the class. It was the idea that you should provide medical care for the person you just shot in lawful self-defense. I don’t totally disagree for several reasons. First, I don’t want to kill anyone: I just want that person to stop doing whatever they are doing that poses a credible threat to my life. Secondly, if the dude doesn’t die, that immediately takes a couple of potential legal charges (against me) off the table. There are a few more things that are going to go into my decision, though.

First, I just shot a person. This means I had lawful justification for the use of deadly force — i.e. that person was doing something that posed a threat of death or grave bodily harm to me. Second, this person is not dead, as demonstrated by their need for first aid, which means this person may well continue to be a threat. At this point, it’s very difficult to say unequivocally that, “you should holster your gun and get hands-on with this person to provide first aid.” Again, in a perfect world I would absolutely provide first aid to that person, however does he or she still pose a threat? Does he or she still possess a weapon? Is he or she still acting aggressively toward me? What is my local EMS policy about approaching a dangerous subject without a police officer present? Who is watching my back against other threats as I apply first aid? Is my family there with me? If so, who is protecting them while I am providing first aid?

I’m not telling you to provide first aid and I’m not telling you NOT to provide first aid. I can’t even fully make that decision for myself without being presented with the totality of the factors. Yet, I know that there is a lot more that should go into that decision than, “it would look good to a jury if you did.”

Bad Instructorship: Safety
Now we get to the really bad stuff: safety. I didn’t see a gun pointed at a student, but there were definitely moments where the instructor had my undivided attention and my pulse exceeded 100 BPM. Here are a couple of examples.

First, the assistant instructor had a holstered handgun and his badge clipped to his belt (in a Fobus holster). Sometime after lunch he began teaching, and was demonstrating draw stroke with the Glock that had been on his belt all day. But here’s the thing: his handgun had a magazine in it, and he did not clear it before demonstrating. I decided that I had to say something, and fortunately, about that time he told the class to take a break. I waited until everyone filtered out, then approached him.

“Hey, I’m not trying to be a know-it-all, but if you’re going to demonstrate with your Glock, would you mind clearing it?”
“It’s clear. I cleared it this morning.”
“OK, it’s just that I see there’s a magazine in there and you haven’t shown me the gun is clear. Again, not trying to be a know-it-all, but I’m sure if I pulled my gun out and started showing you something you’d feel better if I cleared it first.”
“Sure, no problem.” At which point he cleared it, and it was, in fact, empty.

I guess I’m spoiled. I have never attended a class where an instructor would demonstrate with a firearm that he hadn’t just cleared immediately prior, in front of the class. In fact, almost every instructor I’ve trained under would have also asked someone in the class to verify that the firearm was indeed clear. “I cleared it this morning.” What is that? If I had cleared my gun “this morning” and was demonstrating with it, I would have also cleared it almost every time I handled it since.

I’m not just being sententious here — this presents a very real hazard. There is a chance that in some class, some day, the dude will have thought he cleared it “this morning.” For something truly tragic to happen a lot of things have to go wrong at the same time. Based on some of the other things I saw, they might.

The other big safety violation I saw was committed by the same instructor (the assistant instructor). Several times I observed him cupping the muzzle of a handgun with his left hand. For what reason I have no idea, he was just sort of mindlessly holding the handgun with both hands at chest level. The bigger violation was cupping his hand over the muzzle as he pulled the trigger on his Glock prior to disassembly.

Such bad safety practices are the reason that having to pull the trigger prior to disassembly is a problem. Pulling the trigger itself isn’t a problem; but people not clearing the firearm first, and not observing basic safety rules, i.e. pointing the gun to a safe direction, is.

Bad Instructorship: Safety Anecdotes
Both of these instructors told at least one story about negligent discharges (NDs) that they had committed. Both of them, with great relish, told their ND stories in a somewhat humorous fashion — not in the deadly serious tone I would have expected. I got the impression they viewed these instances as “boys will be boys”-type events rather than the deadly serious mistakes they were and are.

I admit that some of their error was stylistic: There is more than one way to tell a story. What I am absolutely inflexible on is that the point of such stories should be how dangerous an ND is. In one story, the “moral” was that that shot, “must have been the best shot I ever took because it went right through the Husqvarna logo in the front of his lawn mower!” In another story (about someone else having an ND) the “moral” was “and he didn’t get to finish his pitcher of beer cause I beat his ass!”

Let me tell you guys something: if I ever have a negligent discharge, I guarantee you I won’t relate it as humorous in any way, shape, or form. It will be one of the biggest embarrassments of my personal and professional life, even if it sails safely and harmlessly into a berm on a shooting range. And if I do tell anyone about it, I will absolutely impress upon them the seriousness: a negligent discharge can be just as deadly as an aimed, intentional shot. It isn’t something to joke around about, it’s something you should be ashamed of and determined never to do again.

What To Do?
I’ll be honest — this is kind of just a two-part bitch session. I’m incredibly frustrated and discouraged by that class. Students walked into the classroom in good faith. They assume the instructor knows what he or she is talking about. To most students, that instructor is the closest thing to a firearms expert they have interacted with to this point in their lives. For the vast majority, it will also be the last one they interact with.

This class makes us gun owners look like a bunch of idiots. Part of me wants to say the saving grace is that the students don’t know what they don’t know — but that’s also the biggest danger of this class. The students in this class were exposed to very shoddy gun handling by “experts.” Instructors committed blatant safety violations by flagging their own bodies, and demonstrating with guns that weren’t cleared in front of the students. Instructors even made light of negligent discharges they’d had. Students were also exposed to incorrect information. The lady in there with her old S&W Model 15 revolver (along with the rest of the class) was told that all revolvers with a hammer mounted firing pin are unsafe to carry fully loaded.

This is truly a shame. Instructors and classes like these do a disservice to all of us. They spread misinformation. They potentially create dangerous situations: They arm students with incomplete, inaccurate, or dead-wrong information — and this information is used in defense of life and limb! I wish I was closing on a happier message, but there it is. If you know of something we can do to improve this, contact me — I’m all ears.

If you want the real, unvarnished, down-and-dirty B.S. that was passed in this class, be sure to check out Part II: Wives’ Tales, Sea Stories, and Gun-Shop Lore!

Justin Fields was that weird kid that knew from five or six years that he would join the military. Sure enough, he enlisted shortly after high school and it was the best decision he ever made. The military sent him all over the world, including tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. It enabled him with a myriad of training that would be nearly impossible to duplicate on his own. But it didn’t stop there. After leaving military service, he continued deploying to high-threat environments with some other government agencies. After the sun set on that period of his life, he moved into his second professional decade. This period, which he's still in, was about passing information along to others. For five years he taught special reconnaissance for a U.S. special operations asset. At the same time he began developing his own curriculum in digital tradecraft, which would come to be his livelihood, and is still his profession. And now here he is, with the goal of passing on some of the knowledge, skills, and lessons learned to YOU. Check out his blog at https://swiftsilentdeadly.com/
 
Not to diminish anything this author said, but:

Concealed carry license classes are in the same category as traffic school, hunter’s ed classes, and similar: state mandated training where the only instructor qualification that matters is, “The state gave me a license and will accept that you took the course if I said you did.” The first CHL course I ever took was taught by a professional violin player who did classes as a side hustle because apparently freelance violin playing doesn’t always pay the bills.

The state says “Applicant must attend 8 hours classroom instruction provided by a licensed instructor. Training must include the following topics: A, B, c, and D, and applicanymust pass test ZYX/76543 with an 80% or better score.” The students just want the paper saying they attended and passed. The instructor just wants to get paid and keep his license. Covering the material for the test takes 2 hours. That leaves the instructors with 6 hours of time to burn through while nominally staying on the subject.

In a perfect world you’d get useful information. In the real world you get six hours of being a captive audience, forced to watch YouTube videos and listen to what amounts to gun store clerk prattle.
 
Pretty bad.
Being an Illinois guy, I had to suffer through 16 hours of instruction. The instructor was bad, the students were worse (most of them coming from the inner city of chicago with very little if any firearms experience, several didn't even own a gun to qualify with)and it was an utter waste of time to satisfy an arbitrary requirement.
I dread mandated training. I took my Florida permit class from a proper instructor, much better.
 
Perhaps it is because I was rifle and pistol trained in the Marines, spent time in direct combat, and have what I call common sense that I ave never taken such a course and PA does not require it and my AZ license did not because of my military training. But I have head and read so many stories like the article that I would be wary of any course for which informative credentials of the instructors were not available with the paper or online application or enrollment form. I want to see it in writing not hear about it from the instructor because it is vaporware if you cannot refer to it at will.

I have only taken one course in civilian life. It was in the Center Axis Gunfighting System. One of the things that reassured me was the instructors’ website. It contained brief resumes, videos of them instructing, and a list of their upcoming classes among which more than half dozen were courses for police department in North and South America. I took a five day course. It was superb in every way, and it matched their claims on their website. But they are an exception to the norm. Unfortunately, it is too eas for people to get an instructors certificate because they are a source of income for the issuers..
 
PA does not require it and my AZ license did not because of my military training

The thing to keep in mind is that these classes, even the one mentioned in the article, are delivering exactly what they promise. The classes exist because some legislators want a barrier to entry (you need a day or two of free time) and “training” is a hard excuse to argue against, so some state laws mandate a certain number of hours of “classroom training.”

That’s the service these classes provide, and they do so. A person who goes through such a class isn’t getting scammed. If you go into one of those classes thinking you are getting a day or two of actual training for your $80 or whatever they are charging, that doesn’t say very nice things about your grasp of reality.

The disconnect, and articles like the one in this thread, comes from people who apply “people are willing to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to learn something from an expert” standards to a “people want to pay the lowest price they can to satisfy a legal requirement of the state” class.
 
Having had this 'discussion' on THR many times over,I will once again state that I try VERY,VERY hard to get schooled by those that have been & done.

AND = then have the ability to break down what they learned [ often,the hard way ] and then teach what they learned.

I have been blessed,and only one class that I took a few decades ago was from one that was full of hot air.

It was on speed cuffing & weapon retention.The only instructor was a pudgy guy who could not carry my gun belt , let alone his own butt.

And yes,I was rude enough to say so in front of the class,it was on MY DIM E !.
 
The other half of the article is worse.
I have only had a few classes, oriented general, defense, and competition.
I took the Florida CCW prerequisite class and at the time it was classroom only, no shooting required.
 
I'm curious about the specific state where the training took place. My observations over the years is that specific CCW training requirements and instructor qualifications vary all over the map from state to state. Areas that may or may not be required for any specific state: basic firearm safety (classroom or online); live fire demonstrated minimal accuracy; state and federal laws on firearm carry; and legal aspects of self defense. In some states, documented experience under supervision in formal firearms competition, licensed hunting, or military service can substitute for the required training class.

I have taken two state-required concealed carry classes.
In Virginia about 15 years ago the requirements for a concealed handgun permit (CHP) were extremely broad, and really only required safe handling instruction. A DD214 indicating honorable or general discharge from the military, no matter how far in the past, could substitute for a class. Any NRA class, any class taught by an NRA Instructor, any hunter safety course, and any documented participation in formal firearms competition met the training requirement, and there was no recency of training requirement. A few years later online firearms safety training was added to the list. [As of 2020 all of this is changing in Virginia.]

Although I had my DD2114, I took an NRA Basic Handgun class (full day with live fire) at NRA Headquarters, both as refresher training and to go with my wife. Virginia did not require a live fire component, but we both wanted that training. The instructors were NRA HQ employees in the member services offices, only recently certified as instructors. Good part: they had to follow the NRA syllabus and cover all parts of the safety and handling training. Less than good part: the young instructors knew the syllabus but were not really knowledgeable experienced instructors on the range. We used their Glock 19 with the .22 adapter kit, so there were quite a few stovepipes and feed failures. They always blamed those problems on the students "limp wristing" the recoil reaction. While that may have been true in some cases, I believe most were due to the light force from the .22 ammo on thee 9mm-designed slide. Also, in the classroom there were too many unwise personal experience stories from the instructor.

Last year I took the Arkansas Enhanced Concealed Carry course. Much different experience. The state has a greatly detailed syllabus, requiring timed live fire with moderate accuracy demonstration, safe handling, and applicable state law that must be followed. The instructor is the owner of a gun store, former Army Infantry officer, active auxiliary sheriff's deputy, and told us of his ongoing advanced course completions.
My 2A attitude (admittedly unrealistic in today's environment) is that none of this should be legally mandated, but that everyone who chooses to possess firearms should seek out and complete training of the sort Arkansas requires for concealed carry.
 
I'm curious about the specific state where the training took place.

I can’t speak for the article, but my own experience with one Texas CHL class was only really different in the details (violinist vs. “cop 50 years ago”, etc.), and I’ve heard enough stories of other TX CHL classes to believe it’s a common experience here. Thinking back on it, the hunter ed class I took in California had different instructors for different segments and one of them was very similar, too, so I suspect it’s endemic.
 
My CCW courses have ranged from tolerable to laughable. The best I can say is I've never felt endangered by them. In general, though, they have been taught by loudmouthed braggarts with no verifiable qualifications other than that the state allows them to teach.

I take every opportunity to actually train, and am happy to spend money learning from better men than me. But as Ed Ames has pointed out, CCW classes, at least in my neighborhood, are just hoops to be jumped through, and I no longer expect anything useful from them.
 
We have no training requirement in this state in order to obtain/maintain concealed pistol licenses, so people who avail themselves of training do so strictly voluntarily, on their own dime. Thus, .I'd like to think that most of the entry-level training up here is a little better than what's described in the OP or some of the other posts. We have a great training facility, Firearms Academy of Seattle locally, and I've sent my family through all its core courses, as well as recommended the site to friends and co-workers, heard nothing but positive feedback. Regrettably, quality instruction IS expensive, must be booked well in advance (usually) and travel, lodging and gear/ammo expenses are not unsubstantial as well.

Yet I've heard from some credible people I know that they've felt taken advantage of when going through training at a couple of our local gunshop/indoor range facilities that offer their own training -- not quite as bad as the OP's story, but similar views of some of the "instructors" and the quality of the classes. Seems as though there's a metric butt-ton of "former LEOs" and ex-military who have flooded a market that is pretty much totally unregulated.

Unfortunately, with no credentialing requirements for firearms trainers almost everywhere (other than insurance for the training sites), firearms instruction as a commercial enterprise seems to have devolved into an arena where the prospective customer really needs to conduct some extensive research and look for credible reviews.
 
Sorry you had to go through that experience Jeff, but you also know it could've been even worse.

The selection of instructors, and especially for folks to serve as firearms instructors, has sometimes been ... puzzling. It's not a rare thing for some instructors to be dismayed and frustrated with how other folks manage to become "instructors", and/or seem to have the least amount of interest in doing the job as is possible to get away with demonstrating.

Training people how to teach other adults is subject all by itself. Adding firearms and discussions of the relevant laws to it? Death by PowerPoint? You can confuse and lose student attention and understanding of the material. Not good.

Safety issues and questions? They should be clear, unequivocal and addressed so everyone knows what they need to know before something bad can happen, or someone feels unsafe within the learning environment.

Making sure the instructors are subject matter experts is good, but if not "experts", at least make sure they're sufficiently well versed in the subject matter that's being taught in order to satisfy the needs of the specific type of "training" involved. Unfortunately, that may be ... problematic, or haphazard? Who's making such determinations, anyway, right?

It took me a few years to really start to feel comfortable teaching and training other cops, but it eventually reached the point when a lot of the guys & gals started asking when I was going to be teaching the next class or instructing during the next range session, because they wanted to be there when I was working. Ditto for the private citizen classes I started volunteering to help teach. Those after hours training classes were interesting to me because the nature of the training and course material for the private citizens was different than when teaching/training other cops ... and I felt I was helping provide a valuable service. It certainly didn't hurt to be appreciated.

Sadly, it's not like there's a shortage of some people who seem drawn to being a "firearms instructor" because it helps them stoke their egos.

I could say much the same things about the state of being an instructor, and who was selected to be an instructor, during my earlier days in the martial arts.
 
I've been to various firearms training classes over the years. Some of them pretty good. Most were sort of mediocre. As long as the instructors act in a safe way and stress safety I don't worry too much about other things.

I don't know what you wanted from a one or two day class that you paid $100 for to satisfy a state requirement that's primarily there just to put a hurdle in your way.

I would be willing to bet that most people who end up using firearms in self-defense never had any kind of self-defense class, at least not a formal one. The safety and practical marksmanship side of firearms can be learned in a few hours by most people. It is not all that hard to learn to reliably hit a man-sized target at 15 or 20 ft. Most firearms have far fewer controls than an average car and most teenagers can learn to drive a car in an hour or so. They may not understand some of the finer points but they can reliably operate the controls of a car with virtually no training. Firearms are mostly a whole lot simpler than a car.

The legal side of it boils down to don't shoot somebody unless you absolutely have to.

Jmnsho
 
If there's anything personal to take away from this, it's the following:

Being an instructor and giving training and/or writing exams is NOT easy for everybody. In fact, unless you've had some actual training on training, and then spent some time GIVING training under a qualified instructor, odds are you're going to suck.

Some people never get any serious, formal training/guidance on this subject and as a result do not learn how to properly present themselves, how to present the material, how to engage the students, etc. Nor are they given any feedback on strengths and weaknesses along the way.

After all...it's just standing in front of a class and talking about the material, right?

As for exams...pick a topic, then write two exams, ten questions each, which are scenario based and require the student to read and properly interpret the information and then extrapolate a correct answer. NOT a "which one of the following is a citrus fruit: apple, orange, banana, or peach. A properly written exam which engages a student and properly evaluates his/her level of knowledge and understanding takes quite a bit of effort.
 
NRA certification by itself is the lowest level of credential. By itself, it is not impressive.
 
NRA certification by itself is the lowest level of credential. By itself, it is not impressive.
GEM, you got me curious about what it takes to become a NRA Instructor. I found two relevant web sites:
BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
and
NRA Training
I learned that they have an instructor certificate for each different course you will teach. Thus. I might become an NRA Basic Pistol Instructor, but that would be meaningless for teaching safety and skills for shotguns.
Next, it appears that the most basic instructor certifications are really only about safety and safe handling, with minimal demonstrated skill in teaching actual shooting beyond hitting the target on a range.

Conclusion: Yeah, not impressive.
 
I did their instructor courses way back when, when I had delusions of grandeur. I also have studied under the best instructors out there and know their skill levels. I wouldn't recommend NRA as sufficient for being a trainer in anything beyond a paper and pencil course.
 
I did their instructor courses way back when, when I had delusions of grandeur. I also have studied under the best instructors out there and know their skill levels. I wouldn't recommend NRA as sufficient for being a trainer in anything beyond a paper and pencil course.

As Arte Johnson used to say - "Very interesting." ;)
 
I have not taken any of the NRA instructor courses. I do have several instructor certifications from the Army and law enforcement. I had an "H" additional skill identifier on my MOS when I was in the Army. That was awarded for graduating from the Instructor Certification Course. ITC was not designed to teach you to teach a certain skill, but it's goal was to teach the students how to present a subject so that the students got the most out of it. The course covered everything from writing lesson plans to how to deal with disruptive students.

An instructor not only needs to be very competent in the discipline he is going to teach, he also absolutely has know how to convey that skill to others. There are two separate and distinct skill sets here and an instructor must master both of them in order to be effective.
 
I’ve attended similar classes in two states. Unfortunately, both times it was definitely an “I’m taking this to get a permit” and not “I hope to learn something from this instructor.”
 
In South Florida, it seems like much of the low level training has been taken over by hucksters peddling self defense insurance. The is little if any training, just horror stories about how you need insurance (by some fly by night company that might find you a sober lawyer that will accept their bottom dollar rates if you are in trouble).

Beyond that it is really hard to find a good instructor for civilian training. Most civilians just take a class to satisfy the state requirements, and then rely upon their friends to train them up. If you are getting training to satisfy some requirement (CWP, HR218, RSO, etc.) just accept that it will suck, pay the $$, sit through it and take the certificate. Most good professional trainers focus on the law enforcement market, where there is enough demand to make a career out of it (just look at how many Glock armorers courses are at a police department vs. elsewhere). If you do find one of the good instructors, they usually have a whole series of introductory classes you have to take to work up to the more substantive training -- but then you often find yourself wasting a Saturday and $150 back at a basic handgun class with an instructor that may or may not be one of the good ones. Then you often have to wait an eternity to take the courses you want.

The BEST trainers are often unicorns of two flavors. (1) Competitive shooters that shoot every day/week for their own pleasure and can teach you an incredible amount if you can get an hour of their time -- but have no interest in training people professionally as they make tons of money in their day job, and (2) Police training officers that live at PD gun ranges and spend all day training up officers. Unfortunately these folks often have little interest in training John Q public, and are often precluded from outside employment. If you find one of these folks, become their best friend and do whatever you can to suck up as much knowledge as you can -- it likely won't last forever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top