Professional Soldiers ®

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Weapons Discussion Area (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Finding a weapons instructor (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9451)

Team Sergeant 01-01-2006 11:52

Finding a weapons instructor
 
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

Sten 01-01-2006 12:15

Thank you.

JMH85 01-01-2006 12:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMH85
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.

kgoerz 01-01-2006 15:33

Instructor
 
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgoerz
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgoerz
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Econ
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc
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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:51.


Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®