POLL: Do you have Firearms Training?

[Langenator]

Well, I'm an Army infantryman, so I said "yes"

 

[Zundfolge]

Should be a fourth choice (right after the first one).

Yes. I have minimal training, and would like to have (or plan on getting) more.

Lots of folks with some traingin are not what I'd call "...well trained in the arts of gun fighting."

 

[MCgunner]

Some folks have all the time and money to do whatever sorts of firearms classes they wanna do. Me, I need the money to pay the electric bill and eat. I'm on a fixed income. I'll take my chances on 48 years of shooting, a firearms instructor's class I took (NRA, not gunfighting), the fact that I shot IDPA expert (at least I'm that proficient), and just general firearms knowledge and marksmanship ability. I don't think I'll ever have to use a gun on a man in the first place, but I carry one just in case. I did have to pull a gun on a man once, didn't have to fire it. He disappeared post haste.

If I were getting ready to go to Iraq to be a shooter, some instruction in what to look for in an IED and tactics used over there might be useful. But, if I get accosted on the mean streets, I'll take the chance that I can handle myself. I'm probably more proficient with a handgun than 90 percent of those with a permit out there, maybe higher, from what I've seen in carry classes.

Anyway, just what does make an "expert", a man that's killed 100 BGs? Is it a guy who's been in combat? How does that relate to personal defense on the street? I read a lot of Ayoob's stuff, does that count?

Hey, if you wanna get "training", whatever that might be, I have nothing against it. It's your money, spend it as you like if you have plenty of it, don't mind credit card debt, or don't care about retirement or it's just your thing to do (I've wasted a ton of money racing motorcycles, no saint in the Dave Ramsey tradition, LOL). I'm sure these classes are fun and good entertainment even if not relevant or poorly taught. Putting rounds down range is always fun. I know I enjoyed that NRA Pistol and Rifle Instructor's certification class I took, a lot of fun, and we didn't even shoot! The Texas recertifications for the permit are becoming redundant, but it's the law, ya know.

 

[possum]

I dont have any formal training but the barkeep I regularily go out shooting with is former SAS. Does that count at all?

if he has taught you then you are more than sufficient in the marksmanship trainning department.

 

[SoCalShooter]

We have spent many hours at the range and several matches. We started timed shooting last week.

 

[Stauffenberg]

I'd call myself competent with a handgun, but not "well-trained." I tend to think of specops guys or something there. My training consists of an afternoon defensive pistol course (thanks to our own Firebreather) and some range time since then. I'd love to take some more formal training, but money, alas, doesn't grow on trees.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

I spent alot of your tax dollars putting steel on target. Trained and trained some more and trained some more again. Qualified "expert" with everything I got my hands on. Just remember the Army term of expert really doesn't mean expert in your way of thinking. I always wanted better training.

 

[VWTim]

I checked yes for training. Although I'm not looking for "gun fighting" I'm looking for self defense training. The handgun is just one of the aspects I train with. I average 4-5 courses a year between handgun, hand to hand, and shotgun. Hopefully going to do some carbine training this coming year.

 

[Stretchman]

Trained in firearms? Absolutely. But actual aquisition and disposition of a moving target? Not. And that is the problem. No matter how much you punch paper, or plates, pins, or anything else, it is not going to be like that in a defensive shoot, and that is what is going to count.

Hunters, soldiers, skeet and trap, acquire moving targets and dispose of them. That is where you really need to practice, because most of the time, that is what is going to happen, if you have to use your handgun defensively.

Of course, if defensive handgunning isn't your reason for carry, or ownership, then you can safely disregard this. But I will tell you something. From the revolutionary war all the way until Vietnam, people who could pick a squirrel out of a tree at 200 yds with a musket couldn't seem to hit the enemy who was 20 yds away. It was mindset, and the difference between a squirrel or rabbit who was coming for dinner, and an enemy human being, particularly one who we shared so much in common with, like the British, or the Confederates, and most people wouldn't engage, no matter how proficient they were with weapons.

In Vietnam, training principles changed, and so did the kill ratios, and the percentage of troops that would actually point their weapons at the enemy and shoot. Nowadays, with computer games, simulators, and violence in Hollywood, America, and several other coutries in the world, have produced some very efficient killers, who will engage and do their best to draw blood.

So, unless you understand the principles behind defensive handgunning, and are conditioned to engage, you will probably have a problem if you encounter a situation where you have to commit. It doesn't mean you're any less than the next guy. On the contrary, you are human, and may have some kind of ethical code you believe in, which, IMO, is good. But it also means that the training that you have in firearms is more along the lines of competition, and less along the lines of defensive.

So, the type of training that you have in firearms will determine the type of shooting you will be proficient in. Some people can shoot like nothing, though they may never pull down on another human being, and get through life just fine.

Others have pointed weapons at people, or animals, and dispatched them without a second thought. It's not simply firearms training that determines what type of shooter you are, but conditioning as well. And that conditioning comes from training for defensive shooting.

Most people fall somewhere in between the 2. Could they do it? Sure, anyone who is trained with weapons could, but would they? For most, it is a commitment that goes well above and beyond the norm. Just some food for thought.

Stretch
Quit cigs 1M 14h 38m ago. So far saved $189.65, 1,264 cigs not smoked and counting ...

 

[tbtrout]

Definately better trained than your average Police Officer. The Marine Corps provided me quailty training with not only the M16, but extensive CQB training with a 12ga and the .45. I am confident in my abillity to protect myself and my family.

 

[ctdonath]

LFI-1
LFI-2
LFI-3
LFI-4
Handgun Retention
Handgun Retention Instructor
Cooper General Rifle
Storm Mountain Long Range Rifle 1 & 2

 

[RyanM]

Go shoot an IDPA or IPSC match, then get some training, go back and compare your times.

Or better yet, in the back of Mr. Farnam's book The Farnam Method of Defensive Handgunning he has some test with some time standards. Get the book take the test and let us know how your times stack up.

Not being a smart a**, but how can you tell if you get good results? IPSC or IDPA shooting?

IDPA and IPSC are just sports that happen to use a gun. Trying to compare "times" in whatever courses is meaningless. Being able to run around in an obstacle course and hit stationary (or predictably moving) targets has very little to do with real life for a private citizen. It's like saying that the only way to be a good unarmed fighter is to excell at Oxford regulation boxing, and if you're bad at that, you're bad at hand to hand combat period.

Most of the time, I hit what I aim for, and hit quickly. That's what counts.

 

[Sharps-shooter]

The vast majority of my training has been informal, either from family or from friends. Among my "instructors" I count numerous veterans, people who hunted for their subsistence, and a career mercenary. I don't necessarily know a lot of "techniques", but I can put a bullet where I want it to go with every firearm I own, and many that I don't.

The only gun "training" as in, a paid course, that I ever took, was in how to take a firearm from someone. It was an expensive course (I'm thinking it was a couple hundred dollars for about six hours), mostly about mindset stuff that I already had, from a guy with absolutely no personality. I learned exactly one actual "move" that was anything non-obvious.

Then, a few months later, I was in a situation, and took a gun from someone. I consider it money well spent.

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

ive had extensive training in the military on a large number of weapons systems. before you get offended and tell me its a firearm, the military actually has weapons. Its hard to say training has alot to do with safety or how well you shoot. Common sense has alot to do with it and simply cannot be taught. After hours of repetitive safety courses in the military, on the firing line at the range there always seems to be some goofball who has an accidental discharge. Shooting well, it seemed like in basic training, the people who shot the most beforehand acted like they already knew it all and many times shot worse than the people who were shooting for the first time.listening to training instructors always helps

 

[10-Ring]

I wouldn't say well trained, but I have taken a basics handling class & a basic tactics class. I plan to take more this year....my new year's resolution is to finally acquire my CCW

 

[Snarlingiron]

Texas CHL
Tom Givens Combative Pistol
Tac Pro Shooting Center Primary Devensive Shotgun

My plan is to take Tac Pro Shooting Center's Primary Defensive Pistol course this year.

 

[bogie]

I suppose I'm somewhere in the middle...

I was in the army.

I've been through a CCW course (during which the instructor handed me a full-auto glock and told me that I had the chance to qualify inside a second and a half - heh, heh, heh... Loved John's course... FWIW, he also worked a bit harder with the beginners...).

I'm into competition - that's training in itself.

Been shooting since I was 8.

Had a day of Tony Schoool - got better.

Will shoot with you for money, as long as it isn't clay birds.

 

[Gocart]

Training is crucial to learn the difference in knowing how to shoot a pistol and knowing how to fight with a pistol.

Shacklemenot hit it on the head - You won't believe how much you'll learn in your first Fighting Pistol class.

 

[JCF]

I went for "well-trained" because there is no "competent" category. Never had a situation where that competency has been pragmatically tested mind you... hope it doesn't happen.

 

[carnaby]

You didn't have a category that suited me. I've had a smidge of coached training, but I do train and take advice from folks, especially on this forum. I plan to do some more formal training down the road when time/funds permit.

 

[bogie]

Fighting pistol course?

I don't fight. Fighting is for teenagers.

 

[JP1954]

I didn't answer because I didn't identify with any of the choices.

The question was "Do you have firearms training." This could mean a lot of things......Safe handling training, competition training, self defense training, etc.

Based on the answers offerred, It appears you meant combat training. I would guess that could be further broken down as defensive training or warfare training.

Either way, for me the answer is no, I have never had training in defensive use of firearms or warfare use of firearms. I do watch 24 though, does that count?

Seriously, like a previous poster alluded to, I imagine combat shooting is more a state of mind than anything else. Granted there are tactical considerations like concealment, cover, element of surprise, etc., etc., etc. but I imagine the single biggest factor is the willingness of the shooter to deliberately take a human life. That is a big deal for any decent human being to deal with. I don't know how defensive combat training addresses that factor, however, it must address it rather well as evidenced by police shootings of armed criminals when defending their own lives or the lives of others.

I imagine warfare combat shooting for the most part would be different as the shooter is not primarily killing on his or her own accord out of self defense, but rather as the duty of a soldier to kill enemy combatants in the defense of his or her country.

I have mixed feelings on the value of training. While I believe that proper training in anything almost always makes that particular individual more skilled in the trained area, I do not believe the amount of completed training necessarily is a good gauge as to the level of expertise attained.
While there is no substitute for experience, there is also no substitute for talent. When I was in my late teens, I spent a lot of time shooting in a small canyon next to an Interstate Hwy. One day when I was there plinking empty shotgun shell casings with my .22 Ruger revolver, an off duty Sheriff deputy detective/sargeant showed up for some shooting. I had my SS casing targets setup about 45-50 ft away. He set up a soda can about 15 ft away. I was missing maybe 1 out of 5 shots average. He unloaded a .38 sunbnose and didn't have one hit. Granted a .38 snubnose is not a target match firearm but 0 for 6 on a soda can at 15 ft is not good for a detective sargeant who must have had a lot of training during his career.

 

[tinygnat219]

I think the poll didn't adequately address the training categories. I have had the NRA basic pistol class, and do some speed drills every once in a while, but that is really it. So I don't think I have lots and lots of training.

However, I have had firearms safety training.

 

[pax]

ShackleMeNot's post #20 bears repeating.

pax

 

[MCgunner]

But I will tell you something. From the revolutionary war all the way until Vietnam, people who could pick a squirrel out of a tree at 200 yds with a musket couldn't seem to hit the enemy who was 20 yds away.

Well, okay, but who do you think has the best chance of hitting a BG with a shotgun in a defensive situation, the guy that takes 3 shotgun courses a year and shoots paper once a month with it, or the guy that shoots ducks, geese, doves, rabbits on the run, and for whom the shotgun has become an extension of his body over time? Similarly, the rifleman squirrel hunter has mastered the art of marksmanship. Who's going to make the best shot, the kid who grows up with a .22 in his hands in the squirrel woods or the city kid who's never seen a gun until he was drafted? From what I understand, Sargent York was a squirrel hunter.

I have lived with firearms and used them in the field for over 40 years. I can generally outshoot the guy that picks up a gun for a class three times a year and has never drawn blood on anything. whether I have the mindset is another question, but I'll take my chances on that I reckon. I handled myself once in the face of aggression without losing it. Ain't been in wars, missed out on the rice patty thing by a few years not that I wanted to go or anything. By the time I was draft eligible, we were pulling out and giving up. But, I'd think a kid that's mastered marksmanship would be the easiest to train for war and I'd think the guy that has hunted all his life would be the better shot in a defensive scenario than the guy that relies on shooting paper. But, maybe I'm wrong. But, I have hit deer and rabbit on a dead run with a rifle and I have shot doves out of the sky with a shotgun. the motor skills are there, at least, if the mind set might not be, not sure on that one. As a former NRA rifle instructor, I do know that a lot of folks "learn" bad habits from shooting on their own without instruction that have to be untaught and that's sometimes hard to do. I was fortunate as a kid to have a rifle/shotgun/pistol instructor NRA certified, my Uncle, as a mentor I guess.

I can tell ya this, I'm not interested on clearing houses, arresting dopers, or other such activities. If someone's in my house, I barricade myself in the safe room and call 911 and prepare to blast anyone breaking the door down. I let the cops do the chores that require intensive training. I just care about last ditch defense. Marksmanship is a major part of that so at least I have that part down. That's more than a lot of people accomplish who have successfully defended themselves with a firearm. I see shooting a lot like riding a motorcycle, if you have to concentrate on the hardware, you ain't gonna get it done. That firearm, like the motorcycle, has to be part of your body. You ain't got time to think about it when the SHTF. If you grew up hunting, that gun is part of your body.