Anyway the guy asked me what I was looking to get out of it and I mentioned that I am a firearms instructor and wanted to bridge the gap in my hands on skills for self defense and general fitness purposes.
He tells me, "well, without fighting skills, you are just a walking holster, right? You need to learn how to retain that gun."
I let the comment go, but it rubbed me the wrong way. I don't think this guy knows much about the kind of shooting people interested in self defense are engaged in.
Well, honestly...personal feelings aside and objectively speaking, is he wrong?
What is a "martial art" in the first place? By it's most basic definition, they are forms of combat, what with "martial" meaning war-like or appropriate to war.
If you train with a firearm for self-defense, are you not training in martial arts?
In doing so, isn't training to retain your weapon also a form of martial arts?
Martial arts aren't just forms of combat that come from places like China or Japan like many people may think.
I should think that the instructor was demonstrating a single practical application of what you could learn related to the information that you gave him...which was, by your own words, that you are "a firearms instructor and wanted to bridge the gap in my hands on skills for self defense and general fitness purposes".
He could just as easily phrased another example, such as "well, without fighting skills what recourse do you have when your weapon is not available?" Or perhaps "well, a better understanding of the body as a machine could help your ability to perform better under stress and with greater accuracy."
Both of these examples would be true, as well.
Often times I am rubbed the wrong way by some people's methods of approach. However, the fact of the matter is that this does not mean they are not highly intelligent and capable in their own field, nor that I cannot learn from them.