View Full Version : Finding a weapons instructor
Team Sergeant
01-01-2006, 11:52
Finding a good weapons trainer. Funny you ask this as I've recently been inundated with requests for the same, how do I find a good weapons trainer.
In order to understand my reply one should make a few individual assessments:
What is my current level of weapons training.
What sort of training do you desire? (Basic-Pistol, rifle, defensive pistol, rifle, offensive pistol rifle?)
What is my budget or time constraints.
Am I willing to travel?
I could go on with the self assessment but I’m sure you get the idea…. Along that same thought process one should identify a trainer with similar capabilities: i.e.; safe weapons handling (basic weapons training) does not require instruction from a former member of a classified counter-terrorist unit, SWAT training should not be conducted by a IPSC or “competitive shooter”, the use of lethal force should not be taught by anyone that has never been in harms way. Match your training with the proper level trainer.
Picking an instructor is very difficult these days as there is a veritable plethora of weapons trainers and masters of fluff. Many have the proper “credentials” and sadly to say, many do not.
I've seen bio after bio of weapons trainers/instructors with no formal weapons training, listed on the internet and in some large scale training facilities. They are easy to spot, if you know what you’re looking for….
John Doe, firearms instructor, advanced pistol, assault rifle, sniper etc etc etc. John has been a firearms instructor with “insert weapons training facility here” for over twenty years. He is an avid hunter and has over 40 years in and around weapons. He has written articles (in major airsoft magazines) dealing with weapons training, tactics and procedures.
As you read John’s bio a few things that are missing, credentials. Some of the leading names in the firearm training world have had little to no formal firearms instruction. Yes you heard that right, little to zero training. In fact I know of civilians that have run from gun fights in Iraq, now teaching weapons training and flaunting their “trigger time” as a PSD contractor overseas. I've had police call and ask me if Special Forces soldiers use gunpowder for breaching because his “civilian tactical breaching instructor said he had taught Special Forces soldiers/SEALS etc” in the use of gunpowder to breach. To which I replied, “Why of course officer Fred, most time we just throw away that state of the art plastic explosive, especially designed for breaching, disregard our classified breaching classes and go with Billy-Bob’s special gunpowder breaching charge.” True story.
They are out there teaching. Why, because no-one has yet to hold them accountable for their lackadaisical weapons training. They are nothing more than snake oil salesmen using today’s headlines and preying on the ignorant masses.
Lest I digress.
Be specific in your intent, basic weapons training should be taught by a NRA certified firearms trainer or better. There are thousands of individuals out there with these credentials, find them and get the proper training. If your instructor does not have any NRA training, “certified” LEO training or “certified” military training find another instructor. Vetting an NRA weapons instructor is as simple as visiting the NRA website.
Just being an LEO or former military does NOT make one a weapons trainer. Ask to see their certificates of training. Then use due diligence and verify their claims. If their bio reads like John Doe’s above and only has “former LEO, or former military” take note, as they might have been riding a desk for 20 years or a military truck driver. Don’t be fooled.
Most first-class LEO instructors will list their firearms training as will most former military instructors, no formal training means substandard instruction. Look for the credentials. Credentials from “insert weapons training facility, academy, institute, etc here” should be dimly viewed. These weapons training facilities, academies and institutes usually have but one graduation standard, did the individual pay his tuition. Again, sad but very true. Most schools only graduation standard is ensuring that the individual demonstrated safe weapons handling techniques, is not a menace to society and paid in full. If these conditions are met these weapons training facilities, academies and institutes will confer a weapons training diploma upon that individual. These schools are also “self perpetuating” as in “John Doe is a graduate of “insert weapons training facility, academy, institute, etc here” etc etc etc, big deal, now we have fluff masters replicating themselves.
The NRA on the other hand has a very good training standard and an ever increasing difficulty level of instruction for students to obtain. I would highly recommend NRA training to everyone that can attend.
Here’s a big request I’m now currently addressing: My son is in the infantry and I’d like to send him a shooting school any suggestions?
Answer:
Do NOT, under any circumstances, send a new member of the US military to a civilian shooting school. Civilian shooting schools, institutes, academy’s etc are designed for DEFENSIVE weapons techniques, tactics and procedures. The US military “combatant” forces are taught, primarily, OFFENSIVE techniques tactics and procedures. If you ask any LEO in the US how many offensive shooting schools they have attended, 99.9% will answer, none. Now there are a few schools, very few, that I would recommend but we’re not going to list them on this board.
That's all for now.
I'm sure some will have more question regarding this topic.
TS
off for more coffee
Civilian shooting schools, institutes, academy’s etc are designed for DEFENSIVE weapons techniques, tactics and procedures. The US military “combatant” forces are taught, primarily, OFFENSIVE techniques tactics and procedures. If you ask any LEO in the US how many offensive shooting schools they have attended, 99.9% will answer, none. Now there are a few schools, very few, that I would recommend but we’re not going to list them on this board.
Forgive my civilian ignorance, but why do 99.9% answer no? I guess I always thought they had a balance of offense and defense training.
John
Team Sergeant
01-01-2006, 12:26
Forgive my civilian ignorance, but why don't we train LEO's in offensive techniques and tactics? I guess I always thought they had a balance of offense and defense training.
John
Because their ROE is written by civilian lawyers.
TS
(That's for another thread, ask a cop or better yet, a crimminal defense lawyer.)
STR8SHTR
01-01-2006, 13:45
EXCELLANT post TS!!! Thanks alot for taking the time to post this information.
rubberneck
01-01-2006, 14:48
Yet another informative thread. I do have one question. As you stated here you guys are trained to employ your weapons in an offensive manner so how does that impact training with a former SOF especially if they don't have a LEO background as well? After all you guys are trained to fight in ways that no civilian can employ and expect a jury to later accquit your actions.
If you chose an instructor that has been trained with one set of ROE's in mind, to the point where his actions are second nature, is it likely that they can modify their training in a manner inconsistant with their training? I hope this makes sense.
Good thread, what you mentioned has always been a sore spot with me. After practising my trade-craft for many years I only realized how little I knew until I was sent to be an instructor. I concure there are to many people out there that claim to be qualified instructors. Ever since I entered the civilian sector I have seen countless proclaimed instructors unable to even set up a range let alone instruct students on one. I wish there was a way to know if somone is qaulified besides word of mouth. The NRA has a good program to do this. Right now the only thing anyone has to go on is their own reputation which isn't all a bad thing to go bye if you been in the bussiness for awhile
Peregrino
01-01-2006, 15:50
Yet another informative thread. I do have one question. As you stated here you guys are trained to employ your weapons in an offensive manner so how does that impact training with a former SOF especially if they don't have a LEO background as well? After all you guys are trained to fight in ways that no civilian can employ and expect a jury to later accquit your actions.
If you chose an instructor that has been trained with one set of ROE's in mind, to the point where his actions are second nature, is it likely that they can modify their training in a manner inconsistant with their training? I hope this makes sense.
Valid point. First there is a difference between SOF and Special Forces. SF is a more restrictive subset of SOF. We are selected and employed differently than regular SOF, e.g. everybody from Rangers to CA/PSYOP. One of the primary issues is mental flexibility. That means ability to adapt to the environment - not just a set of programmed reflexes. We live with ROE (rules of engagement) as a matter of course. The "defensive" scenarios you refer to are just a more restrictive ROE. Any instructor that can't shift gears to the environment he's teaching in might not (probably does not) have the breadth of experience required to provide a well rounded course of instruction. And as TS stated earlier what does the instructor's formal training CV look like. If you are seeking formal "I paid good money for this stuff" instruction then your instructor should have the NRA certs and whatever the local gov't requires for CCW permits. In NC I know for a fact that certification requires a comprehensive grounding in the "Use of Force" options/requirements (and my instructor was quite happy to cover the costs of getting it wrong - course he's a lawyer and his instructor was Masaad Ayoob so he was a little heavy handed about it - for good reason BTW). Don't get confused about tactics and techniques, offense and defense. Once you've mastered fundamentals, the rest is application. The "warrior mindset" that governs how you apply those skills applies equally to offensive and defensive situations. Besides - what any instructor teaches you is just another tool/skill set. How you integrate and apply that information is ultimately your responsibility. My .02 - Peregrino
rubberneck
01-01-2006, 15:55
Good thread, what you mentioned has always been a sore spot with me. After practising my trade-craft for many years I only realized how little I knew until I was sent to be an instructor. I concure there are to many people out there that claim to be qualified instructors. Ever since I entered the civilian sector I have seen countless proclaimed instructors unable to even set up a range let alone instruct students on one. I wish there was a way to know if somone is qaulified besides word of mouth. The NRA has a good program to do this. Right now the only thing anyone has to go on is their own reputation which isn't all a bad thing to go bye if you been in the bussiness for awhile
There is. During the late 70's and 80's the buisness of pistolsmithing accquired a bad reputation due to a handful of sleazey and sloppy smiths. The good smiths knowing that their repuatation would take a hit established the American pistolsmith guild. In order to join you had to have a good reputation and you had to submit your work to several other members of the guild for judgement. Sort of like the good house keeping seal of approval. Go to one of those smiths and your reasonably assured that you won't get screwed. I seen no reason why those who teach defensive tactics couldn't do the same. In fact I am sure the shooting public would welcome it.
Team Sergeant
01-01-2006, 16:25
Yet another informative thread. I do have one question. As you stated here you guys are trained to employ your weapons in an offensive manner so how does that impact training with a former SOF especially if they don't have a LEO background as well? After all you guys are trained to fight in ways that no civilian can employ and expect a jury to later accquit your actions.
If you chose an instructor that has been trained with one set of ROE's in mind, to the point where his actions are second nature, is it likely that they can modify their training in a manner inconsistant with their training? I hope this makes sense.
I can not make sense of your question, just what are you asking?
Gene Econ
01-01-2006, 18:16
I wish there was a way to know if somone is qaulified besides word of mouth. The NRA has a good program to do this. Right now the only thing anyone has to go on is their own reputation which isn't all a bad thing to go bye if you been in the bussiness for awhile
K:
There is a technique I am using to find someone who will give me the coaching I need for some specific marksmanship concepts I want to pursue. There are no set courses that will meet my needs. This one will be individual coaching.
I am researching these guys on the web and if any of them interest me, I will buy one of their training videos to assess their ability to meet my needs.
If the video is professional in its construction, content, and direction -- that indicates to me that the fellow is someone that is desirable as he is showing he will do his very best at anything.
If the instructor can communicate concepts and then show them using the technology available in terms of video recordings, that indicates to me he can at least communicate a concept, state why it is important, and then show how it is done.
I will then see if the instructor has the physical mannerisms and methods of communicating that indicate he is professionally focused without arrogance or a dominating attitude.
Videos let me see if his facilities and resources will allow me to achieve my goals.
If anyone gets that far, I will talk with the guy. If he listens and then responds with his own ideas on how to coach me to achieve my goals, it shows he is oriented on my needs and is probably the guy I want to go with.
Not foolproof but when dealing with these things, proven competence, excellent communications ability, and great interpersonal skills tend to indicate someone who will do real good job of training someone else.
Gene
rubberneck
01-01-2006, 18:27
I can not make sense of your question, just what are you asking?
Sorry about that, Peregrino answered my poorly worded question.
NousDefionsDoc
01-01-2006, 18:54
Excellent thread and great post TS.
kgoerz, thinking about me again?:)
I would say there is only one sure way to know, and that is trigger time with the individual in question. Although the research and tips will definitely help narrow the search.
The instructor-stud relationship is a funny thing. One man's "God's Gift" is another's ass hat.
Word of warning - a badge or diploma, even if real, does not necessarily guarantee expertise.
Team Sergeant
01-01-2006, 19:01
K:
There is a technique I am using to find someone who will give me the coaching I need for some specific marksmanship concepts I want to pursue. There are no set courses that will meet my needs. This one will be individual coaching.
I am researching these guys on the web and if any of them interest me, I will buy one of their training videos to assess their ability to meet my needs.
If the video is professional in its construction, content, and direction -- that indicates to me that the fellow is someone that is desirable as he is showing he will do his very best at anything.
If the instructor can communicate concepts and then show them using the technology available in terms of video recordings, that indicates to me he can at least communicate a concept, state why it is important, and then show how it is done.
I will then see if the instructor has the physical mannerisms and methods of communicating that indicate he is professionally focused without arrogance or a dominating attitude.
Videos let me see if his facilities and resources will allow me to achieve my goals.
If anyone gets that far, I will talk with the guy. If he listens and then responds with his own ideas on how to coach me to achieve my goals, it shows he is oriented on my needs and is probably the guy I want to go with.
Not foolproof but when dealing with these things, proven competence, excellent communications ability, and great interpersonal skills tend to indicate someone who will do real good job of training someone else.
Gene
To those (not SF) reading this remember, this is one SF soldier talking to another. This may not work for those that require training.
Thanks Gene
Peregrino
01-01-2006, 20:23
Word of warning - a badge or diploma or tab, even if real, does not necessarily guarantee expertise. Even a SF tab.
That's worth quoting just to reinforce it. Wouldn't want anybody to have missed it the first time through. Peregrino
Delta Recon
01-01-2006, 22:41
Hey guys:
Gene gave me a heads up on this discussion, so I headed over here. I have read with interest the various perspectives on the selection of a weapons training program and/or instructor. Team Sergeant was correct in his assessment about the number of flakes out there teaching.
I have owned and operated the American Shooting Academy since 1984. I began in Phoenix and taught there until 1997 when I purchased my own place and build ranges here in west central New Mexico. I have dealt with every wannabe imaginable as well as with some very fine instructors.
Cops are the hardest to teach because most of them have the idea that if they don't know it, it is unknowable and about half of your training time is spent convincing them that you know what you are talking about and have something to offer. As a former LAPD and federal agent, I had some advantage, but I still find them to be a general pain in the ass. The good ones are great, but the rest are well....
Many instructors are too busy telling people what they know rather than teaching. I had an instructor training program at the Academy and it took 2 full years to prepare an instructor to teach at the basic level to my standards. Abotu 1/3 of those that started finished.
One of the things I would tell my citizen and LEO students was that my background as an SF trooper, a weapons instructor for RECONDO and at Special Forces Schools and my combat experience had little or nothing to add to the skill set required of citizens and LEOs in a democratic society. It just meant that I had been in harm's way and knew what to expect. The offensive nature of military tactical shooting is way different than the defensive nature of LEO and citizen use of lethal force.
As most of the quiet professionals on this forum can tell you, there is so much bullshit out there being sold by wannabes that are putting out nonsense. Weapons instructors are, in many cases, the most egotisitcal jerks walking around. this stuff is not rocket science. I could teach a chimpanzee to shoot, I just could not teach him judgement.
Fundamentals are the key. We do all the razzle dazzle stuff here with runnin' and gunnin' for very advanced students, but we constantly reinforce fundamentals.
If you put two weapons instructors in a room, you will get three opinions. There are some instructors with a wide background, others very narrow. I used to be of the opinion that if you had not been in harm's way, you really could not teach how to shoot in such an environment. The fundamentals remain the same and some of the finest instructors I know have never heard a shot fired in anger. You cannot get better weapons instruction than you will recieve from Gene Econ and, correct me if I am wrong, I don't believe Gene ever had the opportunity to engage in combat ops. I have been teaching for 40 years and have been in engagements as an LEO and certainly as a Delta Project team leader and I would be privileged to be under Gene's instruction and would follow him into combat any day.
Gunsite provides good instruction. I don't agree with some of their techniques and some of their instructors are arrogant and believe their own press clippings. Thunder Ranch with Clint Smith is probably the best available in the citizen market. No offense, gentlemen, but I find Masaad Ayoob to be particularly objectionable, but that is just my opinion based upon my experience with him and some things I know about his credibility.
Mark Fricke is in Prescott and I am sure there are others. It is truly caveat emptor. Front Site is not who I would recommend and I run across ads all the time from weapons instructors that upon my research really do not have the necesary background.
Best thing to do is to ask around and somebody with some credentials will be able to validate your choice or steer you in a better direction.
Sinister
01-02-2006, 07:00
I have to agree with Team Sergeant and his observation in the difference in mind set berween cops and Soldiers. I have seen diametrically opposed gunfighting philosophies even between major federal agencies in their use-of-force policies.
I went through one course partnered with the Chief Jailer of the (Australian) Northern Territoriy (an ex-Para). On entries the civilian instructors would scream for us to "Slow down!", announce ourselves as "Police", and give the bad guys an opportunity to surrender. We rolled our eyes up into our heads and continued with "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast", Speed-Surprise-Violence of Action, and "Hey, they wouldn't have sent us in if you guys on foot patrol weren't hard up for the final option."
The DEA has different ROE from the Secret Service and the Sky Marshals, and Treasury from Justice and Homeland Defense. Almost all the Feds had to "Knock and Announce" with "POLICE! SEARCH WARRANT!" while a military option was flexible linear shape charge blowing in the door or window.
While great guys, most cops still have to keep an arrest mentality vice military close with and destroy focus.
Thank you TS and QP's for your advice and information. Terrific thread!
I think our society is inundated with quick hatched professionals. One can learn by video, correspondent courses, etc and can be a "professional ...Gunsmith, instructor, repairman, or___________. Journeyman programs or a education programs like it are disappearing. They are considered too slow.
The information presented in this thread is the best I have ever read on the topic. The NRA will probably be the only magazine that would post this. Why? Magazines sell advertisements. Would one of these wannabes gunsmiths advertise in a magazine that would tell their clients that the gunsmith was a hack? So the cyle of breeding hacks continues.
Team Sergeant
01-02-2006, 13:25
The information presented in this thread is the best I have ever read on the topic. The NRA will probably be the only magazine that would post this. Why? Magazines sell advertisements. Would one of these wannabes gunsmiths advertise in a magazine that would tell their clients that the gunsmith was a hack? So the cyle of breeding hacks continues.
Ahhhh, you are way ahead of your peers. Now start checking the background of some of those idiots that write for the gun magazines. You’d be surprised that many have no training in weapons but instead their training is in advertising weapons related products.
Besides the American Rifleman there is not one gun industry magazine I’d take time to read. Ninety-nine percent of them have too much bullshit for my tastes. Not one writes with “journalistic integrity” and it seems they all have but one common bond, the almighty dollar. I find them closely resembling today’s evangelical leaders, fill your followers with sooo much bullshit that they have no chance of ever discovering you’re a total phoney……
Delta Recon is being kind to those in the industry. I would like to add a caveat to his post, that the schools he writes of are for civilians, period.
TS
NDD
But you do know how to set up a range and Shoot-House. I don't remember you calling down from the Range last year demanding equipment.....LOL
Besides the American Rifleman there is not one gun industry magazine I’d take time to read. Ninety-nine percent of them have too much bullshit for my tastes. Not one writes with “journalistic integrity” and it seems they all have but one common bond, the almighty dollar. I find them closely resembling today’s evangelical leaders, fill your followers with sooo much bullshit that they have no chance of ever discovering you’re a total phoney……
Delta Recon is being kind to those in the industry. I would like to add a caveat to his post, that the schools he writes of are for civilians, period.
TS
LOLOL, truth be known, I don't the NRA mag either, I may look through it. The industry seems to be the blind leading the blind and partial seeing. They follow the Mantra of "Successful Marketing", BS, FANCIER BS follow by even more glitzier BS.
Roguish Lawyer
01-02-2006, 17:15
NDD
But you do know how to set up a range and Shoot-House.
Like this one? :lifter
Some how I can not edit my mistakes.
"I don't the NRA mag either" should have read, "I don't read the NRA mag either"
The Reaper
01-02-2006, 17:32
Like this one? :lifter
Looks right to me.
That red line looks pretty high though.:eek:
TR
NousDefionsDoc
01-02-2006, 19:00
Looks right to me.
That red line looks pretty high though.:eek:
TR
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.;)
Delta Recon
01-02-2006, 22:18
Delta Recon is being kind to those in the industry. I would like to add a caveat to his post, that the schools he writes of are for civilians, period.
TS[/QUOTE]
guys:
TS is absolutely right as I do not know who all is reading these posts and I am relatively new so I keep a bit of a rein on my normal "let the rough end drag" approach.
the training organizations I mentioned are indeed for citizens. Here at the ASA, we teach very sensitive techniques that I would not even discuss on the internet, but we vett the students very carefully.
One "gun magazine" that I do read is "Handloader" because there are not tactical issues presented but purely reloading data. I mention this because TS is certainly correct in his assessment of many gun writers. They really have no real background, and certainly do not have a genuine tactical background.
One thing about tactical shooting is that it is a finite subject. There is only so much you can do with a given technology and human capabilities. If a person has normal eye hand coordination, the techniques of tactical shooting are not a big deal. With the more advanced, offensive maneuvers, athleticism is an important component. Which is why this stuff is a young man's game, but the best instructors I have seen are about 50 years old or better. They know how to train others to maximize their potential in this endeavor.
For those of you citizens that are looking around for instruction, be very suspicious of anybody that claims they are SF or SEAL or whatever. Most of the QPs here will probably agree that if every guy that claims to have been SF or SEAL was for real, the rest of the military was nonexistent. There are ways to verify such claims, and guys that have that background are pretty low key. It is about good fundamentals and discipline. IPSC is not a suitable training venue, but IDPA has some things to offer. Remember though that these functions are games. If you recognize them as excellent places for gun handling and speed development and not as places that mirror tactical reality you may benefit from them.
Team Sergeant
01-04-2006, 09:05
The more famous instructor gave high-level vague statements and operated in simplex-mode only.
FrontSight
We've already discussed your "famous" instructor; he is a fluff master with no formal training, a legend in his own mind. I've also told you that: if you can outshoot your instructor you should not be taking instruction from him in the first place.
Any 18B (I know) could out teach/out instruct the guy that taught you.
There’s more to a gunfight than shooting straight and that mindset cannot be taught by a “civilian” instructor that has never been in harms way.
TS
And BTW, please refrain from picking apart posts, read them in their entirety and glean from them their meaning as they were written.
Bill Harsey
01-04-2006, 09:41
Too bad someone who knows what he's doing doesn't step forward and help make the writing on this topic in the firearms publications better.
Until then it's going to all stay the same.
Michelle
01-04-2006, 10:15
Too bad someone who knows what he's doing doesn't step forward and help make the writing on this topic in the firearms publications better.
Until then it's going to all stay the same.
Agree! ;)
m1
rubberneck
01-04-2006, 10:49
Too bad someone who knows what he's doing doesn't step forward and help make the writing on this topic in the firearms publications better.
Until then it's going to all stay the same.
Sadly, honesty and advertising dollars don't mix. I do like reading Clint Smith's pieces though.
The Reaper
01-04-2006, 10:53
Sadly, honesty and advertising dollars don't mix. I do like reading Clint Smith's pieces though.
I wish that Clint wrote as well as he teaches.
He also tends to endorse certain products for financial reward.
He is one of the best instructors in the country though.
TR
Team Sergeant
01-04-2006, 11:28
I wish that Clint wrote as well as he teaches.
He also tends to endorse certain products for financial reward.
He is one of the best instructors in the country though.
TR
One on One with Clint $1700...
One on one with the Team Sergeant = free (only if you're a cop or military...)
Teaching a little female police officer (in two hours) to outshoot her husband, who is also a veteran police officer, priceless......
TS
I learned more from a Range Officer / Assistant in one of my classes than from the more 'famous' instructor. The Range Officer was an analytical sensing engine who could observe, process, and give specific feedback on what changes to make. Full duplex.
I need to nitpick a little here. Are you sure you were interacting with the Range Officer, or was he an Assistant Instructor? A Range Officer's job is to run the range and ensure the overall safety and operation of the same, not to be interacting with students and providing instruction while the firing line is hot. The NRA would be very unhappy if it was as you described it.
If he wasn't doing both jobs at once (alternating with someone else between jobs), life is good. If his duty was to be overseeing range operations and he was instead focusing on instructing students, he was in the wrong as far as the NRA training system is concerned, and risking the safety of those firing on his range.
Gene Econ
01-05-2006, 08:57
You’d be surprised that many have no training in weapons but instead their training is in advertising weapons related products. TS
TS:
I got to remember that one. About sums it up perfectly. Great and accurate comment.
Gene
You’d be surprised that many have no training in weapons but instead their training is in advertising weapons related products. TS
TS:
I got to remember that one. About sums it up perfectly. Great and accurate comment.
Gene
Example of bad marketing (God I hate this, I love the weapons....I really do)
Advertising people just don't get it.
See attached
mumbleypeg
01-05-2006, 23:50
Team Sargent, having cleaned out my ears and focused my attention on the frontsight (no fuzzy edges), this evening I went from 12 plus inches to 6.5 at 20 yards. My journey begins.
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
Squeeze
breathe
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight.........
I am in repeat mode.
Thank you Sir, I am weeding out the fluf meisters and their ideas.
Team Sergeant
01-06-2006, 08:41
Team Sargent, having cleaned out my ears and focused my attention on the frontsight (no fuzzy edges), this evening I went from 12 plus inches to 6.5 at 20 yards. My journey begins.
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
press
breathe
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight
Frontsight.........
I am in repeat mode.
Thank you Sir, I am weeding out the fluf meisters and their ideas.
That's:
"frontsight, frontsight, frontsight, squeeze........."
A 50% increase in accuracy with only a few minutes on the phone…..
You should see what I can do in person….
Wait till you get my bill….
TS
mumbleypeg
01-06-2006, 08:49
Correction noted!
swatsurgeon
01-06-2006, 09:41
oh great zen master TS....don't forget to teach that shooting is a perishable skill......one must practice again and again. You had me dry firing for days and days which turn into weeks and months, and now this grasshopper can (fairly routinely) put holes through holes. Bad for terninal wound ballistics, good for precision education....I thank you for your in-person education...worth every penny!!
At $250/hr, you should be letting Doc T retire soon....LOL. This almost compares to RL's hourly fee??????
Team Sergeant
01-06-2006, 10:30
One .45 round through the left or right eye will end 99.999% of all gunfights, we don’t call it surgical shooting for nothing.
Once an individual has a firm grasp on marksmanship everything else is gravy. Fact is over 95% of shooters/instructors I've seen have a very weak grasp of marksmanship. Most will blame everything except their “firearms instructors”. and these "firearms instructors" will blame everything except their lack of marksmanship knowledge.
I'll bet you guys can tell me a few "reasons" you shot a larger than normal shot group and what your "firearms instructors" said to fix the problem…..
I could probably think of at least a dozen or more…
TS
Gonna resurrect this thread with a question.
Anyone have experience with this Training facility or courses?
http://www.warriorschool.com/
I work with one of the key men that owns and runs this facility, just wonder if I should save my money and take some of his courses. I know his background is solid and he is a legit SOF vet, I'm just wondering is this of value? Money is not an object when it comes to good training. Especially when Uncle Sugar is footing the bill. :D
Team Sergeant
02-02-2006, 11:03
Gonna resurrect this thread with a question.
Anyone have experience with this Training facility or courses?
http://www.warriorschool.com/
I work with one of the key men that owns and runs this facility, just wonder if I should save my money and take some of his courses. I know his background is solid and he is a legit SOF vet, I'm just wondering is this of value? Money is not an object when it comes to good training. Especially when Uncle Sugar is footing the bill. :D
Jeffrey Prather
Warriorschool Founder
Warrior School founder Jeffrey Prather is a son, father, husband, warrior, artist, author, actor, soldier, special agent, student, and teacher. A US Martial Arts Hall of Fame member, he holds 13th-degree black belt, master rankings in Budo Taijutsu (Body Skills), and Shinken Gata (Real Combat), from Grandmaster Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi. He also apprenticed under the late N'dee (Apache) holy man Phillip Cassadore Besh Koon singing in the Naiies (Sunrise) ceremony.
Prather served on active duty with the 7th Special Forces as well as domestically and abroad as a federal Special Agent and national government Intelligence Officer. He is rescue team qualified, a Federal Firearms Instructor, Distinguished Pistol Expert, and a member of the International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors IALEF.
http://familydefense.warriorschool.com/fd_contacts.asp
Never heard of him, until now.
I've no comment until I have seen him instruct.
Team Sergeant
Hatsumi is the Sensei of "American Ninja" Stephen Hayes. I think "Budo Taijutsu" is what they call the empty hand techniques taught in that particular Ninjitsu school.
NO, I have not studied or trained with any Ninja. Not that I could tell you if I did...
The Reaper
02-02-2006, 12:28
Jeff Prather is a friend of mine, but he served WITH SF, he is not an SF soldier himself.
He is/was an accomplished martial artist, for what that is worth and does military classes as well.
What is your specific question?
TR
Jeff Prather is a friend of mine, but he served WITH SF, he is not an SF soldier himself.
He is/was an accomplished martial artist, for what that is worth and does military classes as well.
What is your specific question?
TR
TR,
Not specific, but here's the history.
We got to talking this morning about my last deployment and shortfalls in training. I explained that I was impressed with the driving portion of the course I attended because I've never had the opportunity, but, I expected a little more immersion into weapons instruction. Especially since we pretty much knew we'd be going into indian country. Mind you I'm active duty, but the majority of deployees I went with were civilian and other branches (mostly AF). It didn't prepare people enough know their assigned weapons. Once in country I took on the role of trainer to show the un-initiated on maintenence, clearing stoppages, and how to fire the weapon from different positions, etc. I regurgitated what info I've gleaned over the last 8 years of service and most of that was second hand info from 11B's.
Being active duty and having spent my last duty assignment in an INF BN I was more than adequately prepared for the shooting phase. It basically was a course on load and shoot. Not enough time to explain sight picture, breathing and trigger squeeze. The pistol portion was good, but rifle was lacking.
The offer was given to me for instruction in Tuscon and recommeded by Jeff prior to my next trip to the sandbox. He also offered some advice while here in the local area.
I'm looking for anyone that has taken instruction from him and what they thought.
I don't get the impression of him being a fluff master. I do get the impression that he's really solid and I know he's definately got alot to offer a novice such as myself.
Jeff had the same impressions of some of the other courses we are supposed to attend prior to a deployment. If my org is going to pay and send me, no problem. I'm looking to spend my own money on quality.
Thanks for the help!
one-zero
02-02-2006, 14:53
JBOUR,
You're down the road from me...In following up with some of the Glock business we had discussed I plan on stopping by your location in WB. There are much better options than the one you mention in our local area I can steer you towards...
1-0
NousDefionsDoc
02-02-2006, 16:45
I know Jeff Prather as well and ocnversed with him via email a year or so ago. As TR said, he is an accomplished martial artist and a good guy.
one-zero
02-02-2006, 18:31
I guess before I state "better" option I should figure out what exactly you intend to get out of the training....and you can bounce it off cost to travel out there or doing it in NVA but perhaps at higher course cost because of instructor premiums...
Funny How this thread popped up, I was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on these guys, It came highly recommended from an LEO SWAT friend of mine.
http://www.rogers-shooting-school.com/
Tin-man
TitratetoEffect
02-04-2006, 08:23
Have a few guys on the team that have been to Roger's school they say it is one of the best in the country.
Phil
Team Sergeant
02-04-2006, 09:27
Have a few guys on the team that have been to Roger's school they say it is one of the best in the country.
Phil
I think it's a mistake to have combat soldiers taught by LEO's, unless those soldiers are MP’s.
The difference in ROE and mindset are the foremost problem I have with LEO tactics, techniques and procedures, while they are great for LEO's they are not suited to combat soldiers or combat operations. Also, LEO's teach defensive shooting techniques, not offensive.
LEO's also stress one possibly two "criminals" or "crazies" in their training scenarios... not 10 to 20 "crusaders". While you might be able to negotiate with a criminal and possibly a crazy; you are not going to negotiate with a crusader. (There are no negotiation teams in US Special Operations.)
SF shooting schools are the best in the world for what we do, but not always easy to get all your guys into.
My .02
TS
Having been in both the military and LE I believe TS is 100%. My first LE combat shoot, was not a combat shoot from a 0311 (grunt) perspective. The roles are very different, though there are a few shared commonalities. I don't feel that knowing more is harmful. But in the Military the first phase of immediate action is not the same as LE and the LE response will probably get the soldier a place at Arlington. I noticed the responses to the thread on a response to hostile person refusing to obey orders. In RVN if that person was VC or NVA the response would be radically different than a LEO on the street. This is part of spin off problems that comes up when the military (standard infantry) starts taking on the role of LE in a country.
one-zero
02-05-2006, 08:33
Concur on previous 2 comments...which has born true for several folks who've mixed operational emphasis in training. many instructors out there who are great shots and help hone your "mechanical" skills have no business carrying their course-work into tactical scenario training. Some of the worlds best shots have been shut out of certain USG contracts - after coaching men on how to push the performance envelope, they were around to see us put it to practical use in scenarios...Some decided to institute some of what they saw (but didn't really understand) in to their training w/other entities. Everyone in the business has seen this to some extent, but no-where have I seen it more than in LEO venues - great Americans trying to do the right thing - but with bad poop.
Imagine a soldier who is going into an active situation w/this same poop and the inherent problem is magnified greatly...
BWIW, I'd love to see some of our tactics used by LEO, even once...
"Officer Jones, we understand the crackheads had hardened the main door, and you thought the spider-charge you heard the military uses on embassy walls might do the trick, but using helo-snipers to eliminate squirters fleeing the scene! you've gone too far this time mister...":D
TitratetoEffect
02-05-2006, 09:07
TS,
I absolutely agree with you concerning the way we do business, and I have run into LEO's assuming they understood our situational environment. However, I maybe should have clarified my position a little better concerning Mr. Roger's school.
If you attend Mr Roger's school and leave there a better shooter, applying the fundamentals better than you did before then it was worth your time. And, if you can apply those fundamentals in our environment you will be more effective when the time comes. If you go there and he is pushing LEO tactics on you then it is time to leave.
I honestly don't know the extent of his training. Other guys have gone, and from what they have said his instruction was more of learning to apply the fundamentals of shooting than an application of TTPs.
Peregrino
02-05-2006, 09:25
Couldn't agree more with the last three comments. I really wish some of them (LEOs) understood the difference between the missions and the quality/quantity of adversaries. I also wish they wouldn't spout off about applying lessons learned in (poorly) structured paintball scenarios to military tactical problems. Please don't misunderstand - I'm a big fan of Force-on-Force training with non-lethal training ammunition and that includes all flavors: simunitions, airsoft, and paintball. I also believe that LEADERSHIP is responsible for conducting supervised, focused, goal oriented training that meets realistic mission requirements. (Paintball "wars" are not training.) The problem with most people training on the civilian side is that they have never operated against peer/near peer adversaries armed and motivated to kill. The LEO success rates against criminals and crazies (their normal adversary) has skewed their tactics to the point that encounters with genuine crusader types are usually disasterous. (Thank the Gods that they're also extremely rare.) If you want civilian training for personal defense, there are good civilian schools out there. If you want LEO training, the same applies. If you want military training, be careful. You may not get what you paid for. In fact what you paid for could get you killed in combat (above and beyond the normal combat risks). If you're looking to get training, do your homework first. Find a program that you feel will meet your identified goals. Go to the training, learn what they have to teach, and don't be afraid to to apply "critical thinking skills" to everything you see. Just because you paid for something doesn't mean you have to incorporate it in your "toolbox". Ahhhh - enough rambling. I'm preaching to the choir. FWIW - Peregrino
Went to Bill Rogers Shooting School (1997, sent the entire Range 37 Committee). He will give you or change his POI in order to fit your purpose. LEO or Military. You just have to ask. It was one of the best reactive Shooting Schools I ever went to. Back then the cost was cheap if you brought your own Ammo. He had a hydraulic activated metal plate Range. Also had a lazar activated paint-Ball Gun down Range. If you exposed your body to much from the cover you activated the beam which activated the Paint-Gun. It definitely made you use your cover. He didn't have this activated all the time as to not to over do it. I know certain units built replicas of his Metal Plate Range on their own facilities.
I have attended Rogers' Shooting School twice, in '02 and '05. His training does not address ROE or tactics, except to reload behind cover.
The goal of the training is to train the student to make solid hits on head-sized, fleeting targets from contact-distance to about 20 yards. There is also a VERY strong emphasis on strong hand-only and weak hand-only shooting. The standards for the weak hand are the same as for strong hand-only and two handed shooting (i.e., you have the same, limited time to hit the targets, at the same ranges, and to reload). The "blast drill" has you engaging all seven targets as they pop up and down, where not shooting = a miss. Doing the blast drill weak hand only is stressful and exhausting.
I think the cost of Rogers Shooting School, while high, is worth it, unless your unit/agency has comparable or better facilities and instruction for which you do not have to pay out of your own pocket. When I was there in '02, one of the instructors said that FAST company had just purchased a few ranges, and on my last trip, Bill Rogers (owner/chief instructor) said that Larry Vickers inquired about getting a few of the ranges for the unit he was in at the time (now, I'm just repeating what Bill said; I have no reason to disbelieve him, but I want to make clear that this is only hearsay on my part). Chuck Pfarrer's (spelling?) book, Warrior Soul, states that he was sent to Rogers' as part of his training in SEAL Team 6.
Cannot agree enough with comments about LEO vs. military mindset and tactics. And what's more, many (most?) LEOs don't know what they don't know.
Team Sergeant
02-06-2006, 11:25
His training does not address ROE or tactics, except to reload behind cover.
"reload behind cover"....
nice as long as you're not in the middle of a room, hallway, tight space, etc etc....
It only works well if you are already behind cover to start with.....;)
TS
mumbleypeg
02-21-2006, 14:21
The Ben Avery facility looks like it might be going through some changes.
http://www.azgfd.gov/artman/publish/article_440.shtml
It would really be something if a well trained instructor took it over.
NousDefionsDoc
02-21-2006, 14:24
"reload behind cover"....
nice as long as you're not in the middle of a room, hallway, tight space, etc etc....
It only works well if you are already behind cover to start with.....;)
TS
In addition, look around your house/office. How much of the stuff that's in there is cover? Concealment yes, but not a lot of cover. And if you think that sheetrock is going to do you any good....;)
I have taken the first step in my "formal" weapons instruction.
I have signed up for a 3 day Pistol class taught by Louis Awerbuck.
The class:
Tactical Handgun - Stage I – August 18-20, 2006 Boone County Indiana
Designed to create reflexive gunhandling, good marksmanship and tactical thinking, this course encompasses shooting from a ready position, the drawstroke and shooting from the holster, shooting from various tactical body positions, loading, unloading and reloading, malfunction clearances, shooting on the move, moving targets, dim light and flashlight shooting and weapon retention.
Ammunition requirement is 500 rounds.
I took a Close Quarters Battle Course with SHD COnsulting last year (http://www.shdconsulting.net/shdhome.html) . They did not appear to have a huge issue with the ROE problem. Part of that may have to do with the staff which were comprised of 2 5th Group QPs and SWAT Officer, and part with the students they had in the class. Most in the class were preparing for deployment overseas and had Ranger tabs, some were also Police Officers as well as Soldiers. I was the only one with no prior military experience. They broke it down into how each would do it and have us execute according to our ROE. As pointed out before they focused on the fundamentals and prior to entering the shoot house we all had to meet very specific/ stringent target groups. Wondering if anyone else had taken a course with SHD and what the QP's thoughts were on the mix SHD incorporates.
Thanks for the time