Instructors Bias

[psyopspec]

Like I said, look it up. It's not hard to find. The studies showed that people under stress if not adequately trained forgot to deactivate the safety upon drawing their weapon. These studies were just a few of the reasons why PD's now mostly use striker fired pistols without external safeties.

Quite the high road you took their wasn't it?

Like I said, I gave it a good faith attempt, including using variations of the phrasing from your first post. If they're so easy to find, would you consider sharing a few links? Or even sharing what terms a person should google?

RE "Quite the high road..." It's rather within the THR code of conduct (not to mention normal decency and logic) to suggest that a claim that can't be backed up may not be true. I would hope your or anyone else would regard my claims with the same skepticism if they didn't makes sense and could not be sourced.

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

There shouldn't be any restrictions, conditions or qualifications put on RKBA. This includes making it mandatory to take a class to exercise this right. No one should be obligated to pass a training class.

I agree with this.

So the "bias" of instructors wanting to make people take training isn't 100%.

Typically, I find that folks who are forced to do something, will do the absolute minimum.

 

[IWAC]

Through the years, in my attempts to obtain what I consider information and training...both fairly difficult to obtain in my locality, I have sometimes resorted to on-line experts, who seemingly have much practical knowledge in the firearms area. I once asked such a person the process he went through to arrive at his rationale for carry and ammunition recommendations...fellow officer, training sergeant, personal experience, anecdotal reasons etc. and was met with immediate and (I thought) overblown hostility. It may have been a bad day for him, but you'd have thought I had insulted his wife's good name! I have since noticed that this person's "recommendations" for carry weapons and ammunition seemingly change with the seasons. I have come to the conclusion that I have what I have, and will use it, and because training availability and cost is somewhat prohibitive, I will visit the range as often as finances permit, because health does not allow IPSC competitions as in the past, and do the best to prepare with what I have...a full size .357 Magnum loaded with .38 Spl. +P ammunition...not the most " popular" combination nowadays...hoping I may never need to use my weapon in self defense.

 

[TomJ]

Like I said, look it up. It's not hard to find. The studies showed that people under stress if not adequately trained forgot to deactivate the safety upon drawing their weapon. These studies were just a few of the reasons why PD's now mostly use striker fired pistols without external safeties.

Out of curiosity I did a search. The closest I could find is a 2017 TTAG article discussing this which referenced one such incident, and that was a gun owner who stated he didn't train with his gun so I don't think having or not having a safety is the issue.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/the-truth-about-manual-handgun-safeties/

 

[ATLDave]

The only quibble I'd have with that article is that it reports Ayoob's personal finding that there is a 1/100th second difference in draw/shot time. I don't think there is any difference whatsoever. Not one nanosecond, since the safety comes off in the draw, and long before the finger is on the trigger.

 

[labnoti]

I disagree that instructors are biased toward favoring mandatory training. I've never met such an instructor. I have found that mandatory training provides a side-job/hobby for adjunct instructors who would otherwise not teach at all. Wherever instruction is mandatory, the bar is usually very low and a typical hobbyist who goes and gets an NRA certification can qualify as an instructor. What they don't get is a career or the kind of income that would motivate them toward a bias for mandatory training.

Career instructors are unlikely to make the bulk of their income from mandatory civilian training like CCW classes. Many career professional trainers don't even do CCW classes because there is too much demand for their classes that demand more of their skill and talent and that command a better income.

Mandatory training does create a demand for more training courses, but that doesn't make trainers more business. It creates a demand for more trainers -- a demand filled by more and more adjunct hobby trainers.

I am absolutely opposed to mandates on people to obtain training prior to exercising rights.

However, I do have an attraction to the idea of a mandate on instructors to provide firearm training. This obligation would be on the teachers rather than the students. Most States in the union are obligated to provide education for minors in grades K through 12 unless parents relieve them of that obligation. A few, sick and twisted States obligate minors to acquire State-approved indoctrination. The only idea I could like is for States to be obligated to provide basic firearms instruction at the high-school level unless parents relieve them of that obligation. The Federal 4H program provides rimfire rifle and shotgun training, but neglects the more important semi-automatic pistol and AR-15 training that I think is essential (by opinion not mandate) for a citizen under our Constitution. In other words, I think every citizen _should_ be trained, but I do not think they _must_ be trained.

 

[labnoti]

I'm not so much concerned about arming teachers as arming students. I'm not talking about arming them all the time, but about putting AR-15's in the hands of every kid: the sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, waistoids, dweebies, the dickheads... Smash the stupid mystique of the damn gadget so that dumbasses stop thinking that it's the killer, badass, tactical way to exact revenge on this world. Automobiles aren't less powerful weapons than an AR-15, but few aspirants to infamy are attracted to them because every fat, nerdy chick drives one. Put an AR-15 in every Martha Dumptruck's hands for Period 3 and watch how soon it falls out of favor among the idiots and kooks. Try to ban it, keep regarding it as a scary black rifle, build fear of it by exaggerating its capabilities, and heap disdain on it for being an evil, murderous, criminal affront to civilization, and watch its popularity and regard among miscreants rocket like moonshine under Prohibition.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

This thread is a perfect example of people reinforcing their own misconceptions to the point they think they are fact.

A couple of things I have learned over the last decade of being an instructor:
1) I am absolutely terrified of people that carry guns without training
2) I am only slightly less terrified of people that carry a gun only having taken a state mandated carry class.
3) Mandatory classes don't teach squat and no instructor who has been doing the job for more than a couple months thinks they do.
4) CHL/LTC classes are break even ventures and are barely worth the time and effort to teach. No instructor that plans on staying in business counts on them for revenue.

As for instructor bias for or against the 1911 platform. I'm too much of a youngin to remember the days when the 1911 was gods greatest gift to gunfighters and the only thing a respectable Ranger would carry... But I can say that the two most common guns that I see go down in classes are Glocks and 1911s.. simply because they are the two most common platforms in class. Never felt an urge to tell anyone they chose the wrong shooting iron. But then again, I shoot a 1911 in IDPA and carry tactical Tupperware on the job. I must be one of those wierd type instructors that thinks the software is more important than the hardware.

 

[Dudedog]

but we have much better designs for self defense

So I am curious what is this much better design?
Does it draw itself? Does it auto aim and Fire?
Shoot radar controlled bullets that seek out bad guys and go around corners?

I have nothing against striker fired guns, I can see a small argument for a DA/SA in that you have second strike but if it doesn't go bang the first time I don't know if I want to waste time trying it again,
.. rack and go.
For that matter there is something to be said for a DA revolver, if it doesn't fire another trigger pull gets you a new round and a new strike,
While I won't say the 1911 is best or right for everyone I don't see anything magically superior (handgun wise)other than maybe ammo cap wise (17 is better than 10) but for me in a 10 rnd state that is really not a factor.

It is still sort of a free county so we can chose what we like, want and feel most comfortable with what's right for me may not be right for someone else,
but I don't in any way consider a 1911 inferior.
(In CA choice is very limited by the States approved handgun list....)

 

[DoubleMag]

If we all ended up back to single shot dueling style pistols, would that then be Ok or would there STILL be a problem? Whatever a person carries is their business. If a particular instructor doesn't like that particular pistol perhaps they could start a raffle to buy the person a new ''Ok'' pistol?

Read the manual, practice. Carry on!