Instructors Bias

[94045]

I remember when most instructors had a bias against anything but a 1911 in .45 ACP.

Now they say carry the pistol you own that you shoot the best even if it's a .380 ACP. Then you tell them that's a 1911 in .45 ACP and they start back pedalling.

Funny how the wheel turns.

 

[Slamfire]

Jeff Cooper's influence on the shooting community was immense. His regard of the 45 ACP as the best overall combat round was well publicized. Also, back in the 1960's and 1970's, there were not many alternatives to a Colt 1911. Of course, at the time you had to send your Colt to a gunsmith to add features that today are considered standard. Typically if you wanted a real combat gun, you carried a 357 Revolver or a customized 1911. I remember what an impact Kimber made when they introduced the Custom Classic that had all the bell and whistles. I have one of those, it is a great 1911.



(I am ignoring the Glock which was a tsunami to the old established gun manufacturers)

But you know, design software packages have immensely shortened product design periods, and computer manufacturing allows a flexibility that allows quick introduction of totally different product lines. We live in a great time, and more and different pistols are on the market, and the old 1911 uber allis doctrine is rather wearing thin.

If you like your 1911 and shoot it best, good for you. I consider the thing heavy and also consider carrying cocked and locked dangerous. There is nothing wrong with carrying what you are familiar and prefer best. It is better to have the tool you need, when you need it, then not have it.

 

[94045]

I really don't see the difference between Cocked and Locked and a Partially Cocked Striker Fired Weapon. Both have enough stored energy to ignite a primer in the case of component failure

I consider a Series 80 Colt with a Pinned Grip Safety and Thumb Safety disengaged to be roughly the same as a Glock. Both have a trigger safety and that's it. Both would be susceptible to the same AD scenarios of trigger guard intrusion.

I don't necessarily carry a 1911 and until recently had not carried one in decades. I do however shoot that platform more accurately and found it hilarious the instructors who suddenly had a "But" after I took their advice and carried what I shot best.

I see no reason to carry a 1911 if you shoot a Glock (or Wannabe Glock) faster and more accurately.

PS Loaded a G19 is 3 oz lighter than my CCO Style 1911. In 9mm the difference would be less.

 

[fastbolt]

I remember when most instructors had a bias against anything but a 1911 in .45 ACP.
...

It's not a rare thing for a firearms instructor to be the product of their own training influences, or to fall back upon confirmation bias to validate some cherished belief. It might be because of, or in spite of, their actual training, too. People are sometimes just people.

Being a LE firearms trainer doesn't immunize an instructor from this, but not having to commercially market your training to try and capture the attention and suit the whims of the general shooting public may help insulate a LE trainer against some of the effects.

I've listened to more than a couple longtime swat firearms instructors clearly dispel stupid rumors and prejudice against some particular makes/models and caliber of guns, even if it's not something they personally/professional use and carry. I remember one week-long outside shooting school for LE I attended in the early 2000's.

One of the instructors was a swat team leader & instructor for his own agency, and an up-front 1911 guy. When he heard some snickering and joking about some S&W 3rd gens in one of the range sessions he stopped the class and put a stop to the bad mouthing. He said that while he didn't care for them himself, that in all of the classes he'd taught to other cops he'd never seen a 3rd gen S&W choke in one of his classes, and sometimes cops don't have the luxury of choosing their duty weapons. His manner was pretty damned forthright, and nobody felt like making disparaging comments about the various brands of guns present in the class afterward.

Of course, just because it's the way things work in the real world ... later that same day a couple guys from an agency who issued Glock G35's experienced multiple stoppages with their Glocks, shooting good quality factory duty ammo. The rest of the shooters graciously didn't tease them or make disparaging comments ... but neither did any of the other guns, including the 3rd gen S&W's, exhibit any functioning issues, either.

As a LE instructor you have to satisfy your admin and stay within policy, and you always have keep in mind the growing body of case law regarding LE firearms training.

Of course, sometimes the decision-making folks above you may not always see the same priorities the same way as you. "Have we ever been sued for anything like this yet? Has any other agency around us ever been sued because they didn't do it? No? Then it's not a problem for us right now. We'll talk about it some other time. For now, let's just keep doing what we've always done. Oh yeah, the training budget's got to be reduced another 5%, too."

Another concern for LE instructors is the ever-present possibility of having to testify about your training methods in a deposition or a court case. Training files of the people you've helped train, the training unit's methods, policies and procedures, and even your own training files (including as an instructor) are going to be combed through by people looking for anything they can use against you and your agency.

Then, there's the ever-present knowledge that the people you're helping train might be forced to use that training, staking their lives on it, maybe even as soon as when they're walking back to their cars in the parking lot to leave the training facility.

You have to remain cognizant of the things you say to your people, too. You don't want to say things that can come back to haunt you. Or hurt your agency (who suddenly decide it's to their benefit to look to take away your chair before the music winds down). If someone can look to cover or blame their own poor judgment by trying to make it look like you contributed to their bad decisions with things you said, human nature will win out.

One benefit to being a LE instructor, however, is that as long as you stay within the confines of existing law (obviously), AND teach within your agency's GO's, policies and procedures, etc, you can enjoy some degree of protection under the umbrella of your agency.

As a LE instructor you train the people using whatever guns are being issued, without deliberately undermining their confidence in what they're required to use (or have chosen to use, perhaps), whether it's by students of your agency in a class, or brought by cops from other agencies when they're students in a class you're teaching. You're teaching, not proselytizing or shilling brands of guns. Gear is gear. Training is training. You're not a cheerleader. You're trying to help train people become able to use their gear - whatever it may be - to save lives.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Ignition Override]

One of my two Israeli instructors who asked not to be photographed (had been on unique 'work' in parts of Africa) quietly told me that my .380 Makarov was "s***". He didn't specify whether the round, or the capacity or both.
Didn't bother me, but my only handguns were Makarovs.

Before the second day began a week later, the other instructor (who had grown up in Memphis) sold me his CZ PO1, which was preferable to them, mostly due to its capacity.
Being less awkward while moving, identifying the cardboard, hidden 'bad guys' during this first actual handgun Training was the real difference to them.

 

[94045]

I just thought "Carry what you shoot best," followed by " but not that" was funny. Just like I thought the prejudice against the 9mm was funny in it's time.

I didn't to start this an argument for or against the 1911. Was more about how attitudes get ingrained within instructors sometimes without any real basis.

If you carry it safely, shoot it well and it has adequate penetration then caliber and bullet performance is far down the list of things that might matter. We tend to worry to much about minutia and not enough about the big things.

With a CCO-Style 1911 platform I can put 5 rounds in 2" inside a 2.75" bull at 15 yards rapid fire. I simply can't do that with any other compact handgun. I wish I could shoot a Glock that well, but I can't. I can shoot a M&P .40 M2.0 Compact about that well at 10 yd, a P365 (Newbie of the bunch) at 7 yd and a LCP at 5 yd. I feel confident with those pistols and carry them mostly. However the CCO 1911 does get carried on occasion lately and the fact that I shoot it better does give me additional confidence over and above the others.

PS Yes I know I am mixing platforms but I have been swiping off safeties (Non-existent on most of my new pistols) as they come onto target for 40 years and I doubt I will fail to if it's needed. The only difference is on a 1911 my thumb ends up on the safety instead of where it should be.

 

[jeepnik]

Something I've noticed. Quite a few "expert instructors" have never fired a shot in anger. Yet they will tell you in great detail what to carry, how to carry, and so on. Then if you ask them about their experience they get their back up.

I learned more about shooting a handgun at things other than targets from a 25 year old Staff Sergeant than from a number of "old hands".

 

[AlexanderA]

Instructors' main "bias" is in favor of instruction itself -- recruiting students, and thereby increasing their own income. That's why they will always lobby in favor of mandatory training requirements for carry permits, for example. In this respect, the interests of firearms instructors may run contrary to the interests of the RKBA community generally. Likewise, FFL holders have a vested interest in maintaining the quasi-monopoly conferred upon them by their FFL status. This dealer monopoly runs counter to the RKBA.

 

[MedWheeler]

I don't see in the OP the "back pedalling." All I see is a guy being told to carry what he shoots best, even if it's a .380, and replying back that what he shoots back is a 1911 in .45.

 

[.308 Norma]

and replying back that what he shoots back is a 1911 in .45.

What he shoots "back" is a 1911 in .45???

 

[FL-NC]

I have instructed shooters all over the world, almost entirely military personnel. This means virtually all of my students were issued a specific weapon from their agency, so we worked with whatever they had. For me, the worst type of handgun to deal with as an instructor (especially with entry level users) is transitional DA pistols, such as the M9. This is due to the extra effort involved in mastering 2 different trigger on one pistol, as it applies to the presentation shot, along with the necessity of decocking before reholstering.

 

[jmr40]

We are all biased. Cooper was the most biased gun writer of all time and he had a huge influence on firearms choices, unfortunately much of his writings are fictional. And FWIW I own several 1911's and like them. But I like them for what they are, I don't buy into the Cooper mythology.

There are a lot of good choices today. Like everyone I have my personal preferences if I'm paying. But if issued almost any of the commonly used handguns and 200 rounds of practice ammo I could become confident in using any of them.

 

[dogtown tom]

...Now they say carry the pistol you own that you shoot the best even if it's a .380 ACP. Then you tell them that's a 1911 in .45 ACP and they start back pedaling..

Huh?
Who is backpedaling?

 

[TxRoadDog]

Considering the 1911 to be the best pistol ever designed would be like considering a 1970's Ford to be the better designed vehicle over a 2019 F150. The 1911 is a great firearm, and did it's job well over the years but we have much better designs for self defense, just like we have much more reliable vehicles in the modern age.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

I dont believe ANYONE shoots a micro pistol "best". They may shoot it well enough to carry but unless it's the only gun they own they more than likely have a pistol they shoot better.

On the 1911 issue I personally think it's one of the safest guns out there to carry, and I'm referring to condition 1 carry. I carry a Glock and use one for HD but I own a couple of 1911s and like them. I dont use them for SD because I dont want to deal with a thumb safety but they are certainly safe guns, moreso than most.

 

[TxRoadDog]

I dont believe ANYONE shoots a micro pistol "best". They may shoot it well enough to carry but unless it's the only gun they own they more than likely have a pistol they shoot better.

On the 1911 issue I personally think it's one of the safest guns out there to carry, and I'm referring to condition 1 carry. I carry a Glock and use one for HD but I own a couple of 1911s and like them. I dont use them for SD because I dont want to deal with a thumb safety but they are certainly safe guns, moreso than most.

I am inclined to agree with your assessment for the most part. There are some studies out there now that show that a carry gun with a safety is actually more dangerous, but I feel it's all in how you train.

 

[psyopspec]

I am inclined to agree with your assessment for the most part. There are some studies out there now that show that a carry gun with a safety is actually more dangerous, but I feel it's all in how you train.

Interesting. Can you link to some of those studies?

 

[GE-Mini-Gun]

Instructors' main "bias" is in favor of instruction itself -- recruiting students, and thereby increasing their own income. That's why they will always lobby in favor of mandatory training requirements for carry permits, for example. In this respect, the interests of firearms instructors may run contrary to the interests of the RKBA community generally. Likewise, FFL holders have a vested interest in maintaining the quasi-monopoly conferred upon them by their FFL status. This dealer monopoly runs counter to the RKBA.

I’ve read some dumb **** on here but this takes the cake. Explain to me like I’m a 5 year old how mandatory training for carry permits is a bad idea and how have instructor lobbied for it…same thing for FFL holders wanting a monopoly?

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

I’ve read some dumb **** on here but this takes the cake. Explain to me like I’m a 5 year old how mandatory training for carry permits is a bad idea and how have instructor lobbied for it…same thing for FFL holders wanting a monopoly?

1. Chill, dude.
2. Start a new thread.

I disagree with him on instructors being in it for the money only and I disagree with you on mandatory training (I am an instructor).

To the OP:
I see lots of things that have changed over the years due to technology, opinions of highly regarded instructors, records of violent encounters, THE INTERNET, etc.

I remember revolvers in 357 or 1911's being recommended for Combat/CCW.

Heck, until recently everybody (apparently) was recommending 38 j frames for women.
38 J frames are the last gun I would recommend for women and that seems to have taken hold a little bit.

Most instructors I see recommend 9mm minimum (or only lol) and usually in a the Glock platform.

As an instructor, I want my students to understand the platform types and choose one they feel comfortable with.
Then we start scaling down the size of the gun (cause we start with service sized) until we can accomplish the task in mind.

I want them to feel and consider Striker, DA/SA/ SAO.

If they are interested in the revolver (usually because of loading the mags) I want them to hit that DA exclusively. Most gravitate to a mag reloading device from there.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Like anything, popularity and opinions swing with quality improvements and new offerings of all kinds.

Bias is inescapable, just not consistent.

Seems to me the assertion that a carrier should carry what they shoot best is good advice.

 

[MikeInOr]

Instructors' main "bias" is in favor of instruction itself -- recruiting students, and thereby increasing their own income. That's why they will always lobby in favor of mandatory training requirements for carry permits, for example. In this respect, the interests of firearms instructors may run contrary to the interests of the RKBA community generally. Likewise, FFL holders have a vested interest in maintaining the quasi-monopoly conferred upon them by their FFL status. This dealer monopoly runs counter to the RKBA.

I might agree with you if I knew what RKBA was?

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

I might agree with you if I knew what RKBA was?

Right to Keep and Bear Arms

 

[AlexanderA]

I’ve read some dumb **** on here but this takes the cake. Explain to me like I’m a 5 year old how mandatory training for carry permits is a bad idea and how have instructor lobbied for it…same thing for FFL holders wanting a monopoly?

Training is a good thing. Mandatory training as a requirement for carry permits is a bad thing, because it creates yet another roadblock that has to be overcome before a permit is issued. Not to mention that it adds to the expense.

Naturally instructors like mandatory training requirements because they send a lot more customers their way.

Here in Virginia the training requirement can be satisfied by an online course, which is cheap, convenient, and easy. The antigunners, led by Gov. Northam, want to abolish that and substitute in-person training with live fire and a minimum number of hours of instruction. They want this because, to them, the more roadblocks the better. They would love to abolish concealed carry altogether.

 

[MikeInOr]

Instructors' main "bias" is in favor of instruction itself -- recruiting students, and thereby increasing their own income. That's why they will always lobby in favor of mandatory training requirements for carry permits, for example. In this respect, the interests of firearms instructors may run contrary to the interests of the RKBA community generally. Likewise, FFL holders have a vested interest in maintaining the quasi-monopoly conferred upon them by their FFL status. This dealer monopoly runs counter to the RKBA.

Right to Keep and Bear Arms

One of the things I have always tried to teach my 14 year old daughter is that when processing a piece of information you need to take into account the vested interests of the party presenting the information. Firearms instructor, FFL, scientist, teacher, historian, reporter, etc... very few "Facts" in the world come from disinterested third parties. When she says I am jaded (I encourage open discussion) I ask her what she thinks my motivation is for being this way?


P.S. It cost me $50 to transfer a private party gun in my local area of Oregon. $10 background check and $40 paperwork fee pocketed by the FFL.

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

One of the things I have always tried to teach my 14 year old daughter is that when processing a piece of information you need to take into account the vested interests of the party presenting the information. Firearms instructor, FFL, scientist, teacher, historian, reporter, etc... very few "Facts" in the world come from disinterested third parties. When she says I am jaded (I encourage open discussion) I ask her what she thinks my motivation is for being this way?


P.S. It cost me $50 to transfer a private party gun in my local area of Oregon. $10 background check and $40 paperwork fee pocketed by the FFL.

Good on you. Great that you are encouraging critical thinking.

There are some instructors out there, however, that do it solely for the joy of teaching.
When I get that "ah ha!" moment with shooters, it is a really awesome feeling.

Here in CA, I try to keep my classes as low cost as the range will let me because I believe that the more shooters we have the better. and the more they know what they are doing the better.

So I teach part time.

I explain, in my CCW courses that I don't feel a mandatory course should exist. Especially since open carry is illegal.
I want more people in class training, of course! But I don't want to see them forced to do it.