LEO/Military "only" classes

[BullfrogKen]

Perhaps some of these classes are just geared toward people with more experiance on a small arms range?

Generally no, that's not the driving concern. Some classes do require prerequisites. If you enroll in one you'll know it. The conditions will be set forth in the class announcement, and the student will need to produce some evidence of taking the prerequisite.


Again, the most important factor in classes that legitimately discriminate between Police or the Military and restrict someone without those credentials from taking the class revolve around the duty requirement.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Agree with BullfrogKen. A lot of times, civilians actually have more experience shooting than police or military. People who do something because they want to vs be it's part of their job tend to be somewhat better at it.

 

[Erik]

In my experience the limitation boils down to two things:

1. It helps LEOs and military personnel in justifying their training requests. Many outfits allow their on-duty personnel to attend LEO/military only training, but not open classes. Or pay (partially or in full) for their personnel to attend LEO/military only training, but not open classes. The trainers responded. They want the business.

2. Where the first is not a concern, it encourages LEO and military participation in training by ensuring the training slots are not being taken by civilian shooters. Its about marketing to a niche. The trainers responded. Again, they want the business. And the business is there.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

I sincerely appreciate this discussion. While reading the replies I've discovered a range of issues that separate the training needs of LEO/Military vs. "civilian" or perhaps more accurately 'non LEO/Military."
What I want more than anything is quality training from instructors that don't particularly care what a student's background is, as long as they are safe, attentive and willing to learn.

 

[rocky branch]

While I am openly contemptuous of those who failed to serve their country, I don't completely understand the "[ass" given to former military in some classes.
I had an Infantry MOS and lot of advanced training in SF and a bit of live fire exercise on the Cambodian border.
The majority of folks in the military have very litle hands on firearm experience past basic qualification shooting.
Certainly nothing involving civilian rules and regs, myself included.
I don't feel an automatic pass is in order.
There is no excuse not to train or at least demonstrate proficiency.

 

[Averageman]

I'm not saying by any means that an automatic pass be given to anyone.
Lots of people out there need more training, myself included. What is missing from the General Population is a basic ability to listen and obey very basic instruction.
Perhaps the instructor I was speaking of was commenting on that rather than a "skill level"?
Some of the worst moments I have had on any small arms range were in the Military. There is nothing worse than someone sticking a M4 muzzle in your face during Night Fire as they clear a failure to fire stoppage.

What I want more than anything is quality training from instructors that don't particularly care what a student's background is, as long as they are safe, attentive and willing to learn.
I couldn't agree more.