How much training is the minimum? When is it too much?

[Outlaw Man]

In theory:

Amateurs train until they get it right. Professionals train until they can't get it wrong. Training doesn't necessarily have to be in a formal class or even with an instructor, but there should be no end to it. You should always seek to improve. I don't know anyone who truly wants to be an amateur at defending their life.

In the real world:

Most of is can't afford or are otherwise limited in devoting our life to defense training. Even if we could, there's no guarantee. Being able to quickly and accurately stop an attacker without shooting yourself or anyone else is, I think, a reasonable benchmark.

 

[Plan2Live]

When does my ADD get in the way?

Maybe I'm reading something into the original question that isn't there but when I read the question I start thinking in terms of how long can I "train" meaning under an Instructor's supervision before my attention wanes, my motivation dips and any further expenditure of time that day is simply wasted? I have assesed my learning process and I can only "train" for a limited amount of time before I lose focus. I prefer to train for a few hours then practice that skill or those skills a few times on my own then move up to the next skill or performance expectation. So for me, anything beyond about 4 hours and three skills in one session results in diminishing returns.

As for the level of expertise I am trying to achieve, I don't believe I will ever have an opportunity to clear a room from a stack nor do I think I will ever apply for a postion as an overseas "contractor". So I will be content to stop advancing once I consider myself to be as proficient as I can be in a zero to 15 yard encounter with whatever I carry concealed or have at home for home defense.

 

[Ankeny]

So I will be content to stop advancing once I consider myself to be as proficient as I can be...

That could be a life long endeavor. Once you peak out (getting older and in physical decline) just maintaining proficiency can take a lot of effort.

 

[strambo]

Maybe I'm reading something into the original question that isn't there but when I read the question I start thinking in terms of how long can I "train" meaning under an Instructor's supervision before my attention wanes, my motivation dips and any further expenditure of time that day is simply wasted? I have assesed my learning process and I can only "train" for a limited amount of time before I lose focus. I prefer to train for a few hours then practice that skill or those skills a few times on my own then move up to the next skill or performance expectation. So for me, anything beyond about 4 hours and three skills in one session results in diminishing returns.

As for the level of expertise I am trying to achieve, I don't believe I will ever have an opportunity to clear a room from a stack nor do I think I will ever apply for a postion as an overseas "contractor". So I will be content to stop advancing once I consider myself to be as proficient as I can be in a zero to 15 yard encounter with whatever I carry concealed or have at home for home defense.

That's a good answer and good insight into your own learning style.

I can train all week with someone else instructing, but I couldn't practice full time and maintain discipline. My practice sessions are pretty short, like an hour to an 90 mins max. Dryfire at home-15 mins is good if done often.

And don't sell yourself short on the whole "I'm not a contractor thing," the truth is most military, LE, and contractors don't get enough training on individual marksmanship and weapons manipulation. Tactical training, admin, and other things compete for their time.

It isn't too hard (IMO) for a dedicated civilian to pass a LE Swat or special operations (not talking "Tier 1 units") soldier in individual weapons skill. 3-4 carbine shooting schools with dedicated practice in between would be equivalent or better than say what a typical soldier the the 75th Rgr Rgt has. Of course, they can do a lot of other stuff as well that the civilian never has to worry about or train for.

 

[Plan2Live]

Ankeny said:

That could be a life long endeavor. Once you peak out (getting older and in physical decline) just maintaining proficiency can take a lot of effort.

Correct, that is my thinking as well. So I might be more proficeint now but still effective in 10, 15 or even 20 years from now. Regarldess of that time frame, I think it is important to train often enough and realistically enough to know your limitations. Knowing your limitations and chosing options that match your limitations seems like the best approach in any fight or any endeavor.

Also, not all training or all techniques work for everyone. Keep trying new things and keep trying to get better but if you find yourself experiencing diminishing returns fall back and regroup. Figure out what works for you then hone those skills to perfection. And hopefully, all that training will never have to be used.

 

[JohnKSa]

The minimum is what allows you to be adequately safe and competent under the circumstances which you intend to operate.

For example, home defense is simpler than self-defense in public which is, in turn, much simpler than being an air marshall or secret service agent.

It is too much when it begins to significantly interfere with important life goals.

 

[TRX]

Frank Ettin said:
> You will want to know and understand the legal issues

I'm sure my marksmanship could stand improvement, and tactics are always worth careful thought, but I'm far more concerned about the legal aftermath than I am the actual shooting part. After the police arrive, I'd be pretty much down the justice rabbit hole.

The kind of training I'd be most interested in is, "now the cuffs are on, here's what you do next."

 

[Tirod]

You can acquire a wide range of physical skills to offset any number of attack methods.

Training needs to include the awareness of when that can happen. Once that starts, be careful how far you take it. If you arrive at that legendary level where you automatically consider the best method to kill someone you have just met, is that far enough?

Serial killers seem to think the next step is always necessary.

 

[Deaf Smith]

How much training is the minimum? When is it too much?

Ain't no such thing as too much Kemosabe.

Minimum? Bit of experience shooting and some reading of Massad Ayoob would be mine.

Deaf

 

[Blue Thunder]

As Deaf Smith said there ain't no such thing as too much! I have done mine over time in the last 4 years and now that I am retired I can devote more time and energy to Dry Firing and draw and point. Yes, I have had savings programs for training courses and after some of them I have Alumni rights to go to 1 day refresher courses at a really great reduced rate. I also reload so my bullitt costs are very low. I have splurged on a couple of courses and the rewards were very great. Tom Givens annual 3 day event in Memphis is one of the best values on return for investment in training. Training is all in a value to you and where you can believe you can get to the next level with it. If you do not have the basics down on shooting a handgun, you do not need to go spend $500 on a Gunfighting course plus travel, ammo and lodging. This is just like buying ammo in the current times, you just cannot go into a Local Gun Store and buy it out of what you need. Training and other things take time and Planning.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Absolutely right Blue.

I've taken classes from Ayoob, Givens, Chapman, South Narc, Moses, and others.

Shot IDPA/IPSC for over 20 years.

Reload most of my ammo and have a good stock thanks to IDPA and IPSC I HAD to have lots of ammo for practice.

Been in the martial arts since collage way back in the last century (yea bit of a joke there.)

I do it cause I LIKE doing it. It interest me. Taught CHL here in Texas for ten years. Taught Hunter Safety for about 10 also.

Owned my own martial arts school for five and only sold it cause I got married and I had a 40hr a work week job AND the school.

No there is no limit 'to much'.

But I can promise you this....

No amount of training will prepare you for combat.

Deaf

 

[Pyzon]

I interpret the Constitution and Bill of Rights literally, and think the requirement to show proficiency was not a priority to the founders. But back in that day, most everybody was probably pretty proficient by comparison.

However, I wish more folks, especially those acquiring a permit to carry with a limited amount of general gun experience would feel the need to become skilled with their choice of gun and how it will function with whatever ammo they choose to stuff into it. If they visited the ranges and shooting clubs i do, they would discover how easy it is to get opne on one advice and hands on help at no expense whatsoever.

The standards to achieve a license to carry are minimal, but are insufficient to provide the other things that go along with firearm safety and proficiency for most folks. And despite that lack of skill, the horror stories are still pretty scarce about accidents and malfunctioning firearms in an emergency.