An interesting discussion on training and how it sometimes plays out in court

[starling]

It's not that it's unimportant, it's that is a completely different subject then the mechanical aspects of shooting and defensive tactics. These are two separate subjects. I doubt there are any trainers out there competent to teach both subjects simultaneously. I wouldn't want to learn defensive shooting or open hand defensive tactics from the guy who taught verbal judo and I wouldn't want to learn deescalation techniques from the a firearms instructor. I absolutely agree that both are important, but expecting that in a shooting class is like going to a podiatrist for a toothache.

There is no one stop shopping when it comes to these things. The best person to teach you to shoot and handle an armed encounter probably isn't going to be the best person to teach open hand combatives or verbal judo.

Good points and I hear ya. I am pretty confident in saying the best person to learn deescalation, verbal judo, and the ability to keep your mouth shut is a wife. So everyone needs to try and find a good sheela and commit themselves to help guide their defensive training. Having Kids can help one to learn ones trigger points as well. So as true firearms enthusiests, everyone might as well take the plunge and focus on family as much as possible for proper growth in circumstances of stress and chaos involving firearms. Side benefit is you get to pass down that knowlege and love of firearms to your children.

In all seriousness though people would do well to focuss more on the mental aspects of CCW handling and all that comes with it. Poor temperment wrecks peoples lives along with their families. You start throwing firearms into that mix and all hell can break loose. Its kind of an old saying I was told when I was very young from my first FFL dealer (very wise man). " All people should have the right to carry a firearm does not mean all people should necessarily cary a firearm". I am not an advocate of mental health screenings for CCW holders BTW. Thats a true pandoras box IMO. For me its all up to the individual to make that decision for themselves. No guarantees in that of course but its the only way that can work. I respect people that wont carry CCW as much as I do those that do. Thats a decision people have to make for themselves and its not something to be taken lightly IMO. Pulling the trigger on a person is a whole lot different than a target.... and it should be.

Unfortunately there are some psychos running amoke in the world so in that case the goal is just survival with firearms being a last resort. Hopefully none of us here have to ever face it or.... face it again. I am one hell of a nice guy and always use good manners when out in public because I would rather avoid it all together. The individual plays a big part in setting the environment that surrounds them. Usually when you are nice to people they are nice back.

 

[CDW4ME]

Training used against you? That potentially affects maybe a dozen people.

 

[ClicheBro]

Nobody knows what training I have. I don't even know because I don't keep records.

 

[Ethan Verity]

I would have thought training would be an advantage in court, as it shows you take the responsibility of carrying seriously... but alas, this proves that thinking wrong.

 

[Kleanbore]

I would have thought training would be an advantage in court, as it shows you take the responsibility of carrying seriously... but alas, this proves that thinking wrong.

What does? How?

Nobody knows what training I have. I don't even know because I don't keep records.

That would work to your extreme detriment. The finders of fact will be instructed to judge what a reasonable person in similar circumstances, knowing what the defendant knew at the time. would have done. Any number of things, such as Tueller distances, the number of shots fired, and so on can cause the prosecutor or plaintiff to question whether the defendant knew about those things at the time of the event. That's why training records are important.

 

[GEM]

The prosecution will use what it can to make its case. I'm not in the mood to write a review but there are several cases where competition and training were brought up to indicate that the defendant was blood lusted and trained and thus prone to use lethal force inappropriately. Seemingly blood lusted statements, like have a plan to kill everybody in the room, from trainers were brought up.

Expert, pro gun defense attorney have suggested that quality training can be a benefit if you show that the training includes the advice for avoidance, etc. Neck beard, kill them all - perhaps not.

As far as the prosecution not knowing your training, that's a laugh - in a serious case, they will take your history apart. They will talk to those who know you, search your internet and social media.

Your gear can be brought up if it is too tactical, whatever that means. I know a case where the sentencing was influenced by the judge thinking the holster was too 'tactical' indicating a propensity for violence and thus he increased the sentence. Sorry, can't give details.

 

[Ethan Verity]

What does? How?

Yeah, nevermind.... "proves" was too strong a word. I was more just commenting on no matter what you do, it can be manipulated and used against you in court... but most of us already know this anyway.

 

[starling]

I would have thought training would be an advantage in court, as it shows you take the responsibility of carrying seriously... but alas, this proves that thinking wrong.

Well hold on there.. not necessarily. Being court related people could attempt to twist things into something its not but I cant see how haveing someone helping you in sound gun handling, shooting, and education on Laws or defense scenarios can get mangled too far out of whack.

Just dont get crazy and turn into some real life version of Robin Williams in "The Survivors" (Early 80s film). There is a little of that out there. What that Lady talks about in the start of the video is Self Fulfilling Prophecy stuff. Its not a HUGE deal as long as people are aware of it. Same thing goes for Analysis Paralysis.

I wont tell to not get training if they need help. Thats kind of silly. I do think its a progression and people need to be introduced to fireamrs in stages. Someone who has never shot a handgun just jumping into "tactical" training is pretty stupid IMO. That was not even the case in the Army.

Maybe think about it like this... Guy new to firearms walks into a gun shop because he wants to carry. Counter man tells him he should get a Glock or micro 9mm and always carry with a round in the chamber....... and sign up for a tactical class... Ive seen that a good bit. Kind of a dumb way to bring people into the world of firearms and CCW.

Some of these trainers are pushing military style training...OK. Part of that style is training the mind for battlefield type mindsets etc. Civilian daily life CCW practices is NOT a battlefield environment. Bad things can happen of course but turning everyone into instinctive shooters with easily triggered behavior is kind of irresponsible and reckless. We dont need road rage type behavior with CCW and we sure dont want people walking around waiting/wanting for a confrontation to happen because they "train" for it all the time just because they run into a rude jerkoff who is having a bad day.

People just need to think about things a bit. Example... if you CCW... dont drive around town with a Punisher stickers plastered on your vehicle. Thats kinda dumb. Dont post hotdog videos on social media with lousy behavior around firearms. Dont say stupid stuff about how you would deal with this or that. For some of these "tactical" minded people being so serious they sure were never taught about the concept of OPSEC.

Get comfortable, proficient, and safe with firearms. Know your own head and trigger points. Use Manners and be nice to others (even if they are jerkoffs). And keep your views and abilities to yourself. The less people know the better it is for you IMO. If you are stressed out and edgy for whatever reason...block that when out in public and go for a jog or walk to exercise that out of your system.

 

[ClicheBro]

What does? How?
That would work to your extreme detriment...That's why training records are important.

Shooting is a hobby.

 

[Kleanbore]

Shooting is a hobby.

Maintaining one's clean record, personal fortune, and freedom is an important objective for hobbyists.

 

[luzyfuerza]

The video's conclusion that "getting self-defense training is not necessarily a good thing" is too superficial.

The real point is that since a defender's training history will almost certainly be used by the prosecutor in its most unfavorable light, the defender's legal team must prepare to counteract this tactic. They do this by introducing testimony and evidence that actually trains a jury and judge, in court, up to the level that the defender had when the incident occurred.

@westernrover 's two excellent posts above illustrate points that a defender's legal team should understand and use. See posts
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...imes-plays-out-in-court.911384/#post-12433335

and

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...imes-plays-out-in-court.911384/#post-12433575.

The absolute best training I've received in this regard was Mas Ayoob's MAG40. Not only was I trained, but the whole course was structured to be replicated in a courtroom, to bring triers of fact up to the same level. So that they can then evaluate a defender's actions reasonably.

 

[Metal God]

(How would they know unless you tell them or you are wearing a shirt that says "bla bla bla certified trainer", have pictures of your self on social media at some training place and you should already have a lawyer on retainer.)

They ask you if you have any training . This seems like one of those gotcha questions like in the Rittonhouse trial . The prosecution asked several time if Kyle meant to kill his attackers . It is my understanding answering yes to that question would obviously be bad for you but I was surprised to learn answering no is also not good for your self defense claim .

My guess is if asked in court if you had any training , either yes or no answers could result in you looking bad .

Do you have training in firearms use ? Yes , so you train on how to shoot people ?

Do you have training in the use of a firearm ? No , so you carry a deadly weapon with you every day and you have little to no training on how to use it ?

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Didn't watch the video, I can smell grift when it's being easily seen.

Speaking for the POV of someone who WAS on a grand jury, the only thing that made it to court were the obvious ones that were not self defense yet were claimed to be. Of the ones we no billed, training wasn't even a blip on the radar.

Executing a person who was already on his knees and forced under gunpoint to be that way by another rival drug dealer who wasn't threatened and then shot point blank, was obviously not self defense.

Surrounding a car of the person you were telling to leave an area, preventing him from doing just that and blowing out his car windows forcing his hand to shoot into the crowd, is here nor there. Shooting back until the shooter was no longer a threat, was self defense. However, seeing the shooter while incapacitated and running to the other side to anchor shoot just to finish the job, turned a former good shoot into a very bad shoot and no longer was it self defense.

Evading the cops and hopping a fence into a home and putting the home owner at gunpoint to take hostage, but having the tables turned when the would be hostage had a pocket gun and dropped him just as soon as the thug was being distracted by the incoming sirens, was indeed a no billed good shoot.

No handloads gonna get ya fallacy. No it was a caliber designed to do the most damage fallacy either. No trained and wanted to kill someone fallacy for this topic's sake either. Just the facts, and only the facts and nothing else.

 

[Kleanbore]

Speaking for the POV of someone who WAS on a grand jury, the only thing that made it to court were the obvious ones that were not self defense yet were claimed to be.

Unfortunately, that does not describe a lot of the high profile cases we have seen.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Unfortunately, that does not describe a lot of the high profile cases we have seen.

That is area dependent IMO. People freely talk about not getting their guns back, yet I have personally seen them being returned. Big difference here where one area has contempt for gun owners and another where gun owners are not the bad guy.

 

[Jeff White]

That is area dependent IMO. People freely talk about not getting their guns back, yet I have personally seen them being returned. Big difference here where one area has contempt for gun owners and another where gun owners are not the bad guy.

Criminal procedure varies from state to state. In some states the only time a case goes to the grand jury is if the states attorney/prosecutor/DA wants to be let off the hook with the public for charging or not charging someone. I’ve been told that in Texas all shooting cases go to the grand jury.

The thing to keep in mind is that you can’t count on public sentiment or the personal beliefs of the prosecutor when a charging decision is made. There is a lot of factors that go into that decision and there are many shooting cases that can go either way depending on how the prosecutor presents it to the grand jury.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

Criminal procedure varies from state to state. In some states the only time a case goes to the grand jury is if the states attorney/prosecutor/DA wants to be let off the hook with the public for charging or not charging someone. I’ve been told that in Texas all shooting cases go to the grand jury.

The thing to keep in mind is that you can’t count on public sentiment or the personal beliefs of the prosecutor when a charging decision is made. There is a lot of factors that go into that decision and there are many shooting cases that can go either way depending on how the prosecutor presents it to the grand jury.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with you. Too many people that I know of or personally have been let off the hook and my state made major changes to how it now prosecutes because of how badly the Harold Fish trial went. He was exonerated by the way. It was the public that pushed and lobbied for it, so yes, I can count on it, YMMV.

 

[Jeff White]

I'm going to respectfully disagree with you. Too many people that I know of or personally have been let off the hook and my state made major changes to how it now prosecutes because of how badly the Harold Fish trial went. He was exonerated by the way. It was the public that pushed and lobbied for it, so yes, I can count on it, YMMV.

I spent over 20 years as a city police officer, a sheriffs deputy and finished my career running the county jail. I’ve seen a lot of prosecutorial decisions made. In that time I worked with several different states attorneys and everyone of them had a slightly different take on how decisions to prosecute or not were made. I can cite an case where a local businessman shot three people who were fleeing after steal anhydrous ammonia and no charges were filed. It didn’t go to the grand jury. We had a huge problem with thefts of anhydrous and the states attorney used that case to send a message to the meth cooks. “ Steal anhydrous and you might be shot”.

There was another case where a man shot an intruder in his recently deceased mother’s house. The man lived in the next house over, saw light in the house and when he investigated he found the intruder and shot him.

It boiled down to if the intruder was a burglar or a trespasser. Under Illinois law, burglary is a forcible felony and the use of deadly force is lawful. Trespass on the other hand is a misdemeanor. The intruder survived and said he was walking and entered the house to get out of a thunderstorm. That case went to the grand jury. Tell the grand jury the intruder was a burglar, no true bill. Tell the grand jury he was a trespasser and you get an indictment.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

I spent over 20 years as a city police officer, a sheriffs deputy and finished my career running the county jail. I’ve seen a lot of prosecutorial decisions made. In that time I worked with several different states attorneys and everyone of them had a slightly different take on how decisions to prosecute or not were made. I can cite an case where a local businessman shot three people who were fleeing after steal anhydrous ammonia and no charges were filed. It didn’t go to the grand jury. We had a huge problem with thefts of anhydrous and the states attorney used that case to send a message to the meth cooks. “ Steal anhydrous and you might be shot”.

There was another case where a man shot an intruder in his recently deceased mother’s house. The man lived in the next house over, saw light in the house and when he investigated he found the intruder and shot him.

It boiled down to if the intruder was a burglar or a trespasser. Under Illinois law, burglary is a forcible felony and the use of deadly force is lawful. Trespass on the other hand is a misdemeanor. The intruder survived and said he was walking and entered the house to get out of a thunderstorm. That case went to the grand jury. Tell the grand jury the intruder was a burglar, no true bill. Tell the grand jury he was a trespasser and you get an indictment.

That's how laws become made to protect the citizens from a slimy prosecutor. Ours isn't Soros funded and isn't a fan of him or them either. And she made sure we knew the laws and got the full story. Different area, different mindset.

I once helped a traveling New Yorker friend who needed the help. He was a bit taken back at what he thought was a lack of officers on the roads and asked if there was an employment problem. I said no sir, here they serve and protect, not serve and be served by. Then he went on to say how he spotted 11 things that were all illegal in NY, and when I took him to a sporting store so he could buy camping rations he was again taken back that we didn't need a permit to even be able to ask and check out any handgun.

So again, YMMV but I respectfully disagree and that it is area dependent and so long as we don't have a Soros funded DA making us all unsafe. And we don't.

 

[shafter]

It's not that it's unimportant, it's that is a completely different subject then the mechanical aspects of shooting and defensive tactics. These are two separate subjects. I doubt there are any trainers out there competent to teach both subjects simultaneously. I wouldn't want to learn defensive shooting or open hand defensive tactics from the guy who taught verbal judo and I wouldn't want to learn deescalation techniques from the a firearms instructor. I absolutely agree that both are important, but expecting that in a shooting class is like going to a podiatrist for a toothache.

There is no one stop shopping when it comes to these things. The best person to teach you to shoot and handle an armed encounter probably isn't going to be the best person to teach open hand combatives or verbal judo.

That's often true but there are some superb trainers out there who excel across the spectrum. You just need to know where to find them. Bill Rapier from Amtac Shooting is one such instructor who teaches armed and unarmed combatives as well as mindset and is arguably one of the most capable men on the planet.

 

[Kleanbore]

Too many people that I know of or personally have been let off the hook and my state made major changes to how it now prosecutes because of how badly the Harold Fish trial went.

That was not "area dpendent". It was reasonable pushback to the improper actions of a bad prosecutor.

and so long as we don't have a Soros funded DA making us all unsafe.

True. We now have one, but we didn't before. It did not cost him much to put one in.

yes, I can count on it,

That's unrealistic. Even with a level headed prosecutor, what happens will be case-specific and will depend on what witnesses think they saw and heard.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

I can see that we're not going to see eye to eye or agree to disagree no matter what, so with that I am out of this thread and status quo remains still unchanged.

Happy Sunday Gun day.

 

[citizenconn]

Nobody knows what training I have. I don't even know

I am in exactly the same situation. I don't think we are the only ones, either, though my memory seems to be unreliable. For reference see The Bourne Identity and The Long Kiss Goodnight.

 

[Wichaka]

I do not believe it's a new trend, discussions of training have come up in many a OIS and civilian shootings for the last 35 years that I'm aware of.

Does it come up in every case...no.

I know that Rittenhouse took some training from a prominent nationally know instructor, whom is a friend of mine, and that along with other training never came up in court.

There are many instructors and training groups continually putting stuff on the net, and discussions on forums about training for many years...yet I haven't heard of any being called into court...not that I would hear of everything, but we'd hear of some being called into court.

Am I concerned...I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

On the flip side...those that put on the punisher stuff, or other in your face type stuff on your guns etc., shouldn't.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

I do not believe it's a new trend, discussions of training have come up in many a OIS and civilian shootings for the last 35 years that I'm aware of.

Does it come up in every case...no.

I know that Rittenhouse took some training from a prominent nationally know instructor, whom is a friend of mine, and that along with other training never came up in court.

There are many instructors and training groups continually putting stuff on the net, and discussions on forums about training for many years...yet I haven't heard of any being called into court...not that I would hear of everything, but we'd hear of some being called into court.

Am I concerned...I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

On the flip side...those that put on the punisher stuff, or other in your face type stuff on your guns etc., shouldn't.

You nailed it.

This isn't the only board or site that has had folks, provocateur's playing as alarmists (gaslighters) and ayoobists (more gaslighters pretending that they are one of us), that play with and try to prey on the community about self defense that would lead to interactions with the LEO's and our courts.

The following is not a derail but an example of the gaslighters giving their fear mongering appeals to the unknown and appeals to ignorance.

Find me a "Do you use reloads or load your own self defense rounds" topic, and we are off to the races yet no one I had ever questioned was ever able to use any citations that was backed up with actual court cases, to defend their statements designed to scare folks from defending themselves no matter how much of a good shoot it was or could be.

But I get it, some folks really do want to mitigate all potential risks, by carrying what they've been told to carry, use only what they are told to use, and not use certain types of guns or in calibers because again, this is what they were told not to use. And here we have this thread, where being trained to not miss and follow some of the rules of gun safety while trying to be better than the scum of the earth and staying alive, is disgusting to even listen to.

Can any instructor here or students even recall ever being taught outside of the mil or police on how to slice the pie, clear by fire or explosion, bounding and bounding over-watch, to move and find, fix, flank, and finish them off to include anchor shots if necessary just in case we suspected a suicide grenade or explosive vest? Because that's offensive training. While some of it can also be used to defend ourselves it, not much of it actually is great to apply to self defense here in the real world, such as mag dumping on everyone while being illegally detained by BLM or antifa.

No. We are being taught to be one step ahead of the game of wolf verse sheep or sheep's by becoming wolf dogs instead. We have a very strict ROE here, VERY strict. If I'm going to carry, then I want to be trained, maintaining that training, and seeking even more training. I tune every scare monger out where they belong, back to being the noise they go because that ain't the signal here.