A Very Good Read on Training by Claude Werner

[Kleanbore]

I came across this article today. It is, in my opinion, very much worth reading.

I have taken two very different defensive pistol courses. They were worth every penny and all the time I put into them.

The title of the article is What is the Value of Training.

I do not think myself an expert, or highly trained, for that matter. But I now realize that I didn't know what I didn't know, and that much of what I "knew" was wrong.

 

[Malamute]

Claude is very good. I read this a while back, its a good piece. His points about "much of what you know is wrong" and Dunning-Kruger is very on the point.

If you arent familar with him, his bio is a bit modest. The 10 years in special operations is a clue, as is former Chief Instructor at Rogers Shooting School..

I shake my head when I think of some "instructors" and what they teach. Claude is the real deal, and is involved with others in the training and LE field.

 

[Fred Fuller]

Another thing (among many) that was pointed out in Mas Ayoob's new book Deadly Force is that your training is discoverable in court. Thus it might well stand you in good stead in the event the local prosecutor/DA takes exception to your actions should you be involved in a defensive shooting.

 

[1911 guy]

Articles like this emphasize, with good cause, the addage "mindset, skill set, tool set". Without the mind engaged, bad things will happen. The only variable is exactly how bad.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

I really need to get my butt to some good live training events.

 

[Bobson]

Another thing (among many) that was pointed out in Mas Ayoob's new book Deadly Force is that your training is discoverable in court. Thus it might well stand you in good stead in the event the local prosecutor/DA takes exception to your actions should you be involved in a defensive shooting.

Is there any chance a record of involvement in training courses could work against someone?

Ive heard of people who are very active in the martial arts who, when involved in a physical confrontation of a defensive type, are expected to show restraint, rather than utilizing their full skillset. What are the odds that a guy could go to court for what appears to be justified use of deadly force, and have an attorney twist his past training as some sort of sadistic interest in playing hero with a gun?

It must have been tried at some point before?

 

[Al Thompson]

have an attorney twist his past training as some sort of sadistic interest in playing hero with a gun?

There are trainers who I really do not want on my training resume. This can be due to their past actions or inflammatory remarks. Remember Zimmerman's trial? His CWP instructor testified - so your training past can certainly be accessed. I prefer to spend my training dollars on folks who I would be happy to see in court.

(Moderator hat on) - do not mention names of trainers who you feel may have issues. I'd also note that good trainers like Ayoob, Givens, Werner and Pincus are members here.

 

[GEM]

Claude is a great trainer, having taken a course from him.

Training can be a double edged sword depending on circumstance.

First, I opine that folks should get serious training.

However, a prosecutor can try to turn such against you and antigun jurors may be influenced by the presentation that training made you into a nutso.

Such can be countered by an attorney and expert who is in the know about the issue. Mas' book and Marty and Gila Hayes' analyses are a good read on the risks.

One should avoid also trainers who seemed to present a blood lust set of cliches as compared to understanding the law, mindset and restraint.

You don't need their lesson plan being used against you.

Another thing, I see folks here often say they don't worry about such BECAUSE they are sure that if they shoot, it will be clear and unambiguous. If I had such predictive powers, I would be rich now. That statement is pure horse waste product.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by GEM:

Another thing, I see folks here often say they don't worry about such BECAUSE they are sure that if they shoot, it will be clear and unambiguous.

Ah, the ol' "a good shoot is a good shoot" mantra....

Many of the people who say that seem to believe that because they "know" they are the good guy, they will be so seen by everyone else. Then there's the idea that the CCW license, which indicates a clean record as of the time of the records check, makes one a "good guy".

And maybe there's a subconscious belief that having a lawfully armed firearm confers at least some of the authority of the deputy with the white hat.

In screen fiction, which is scripted for the audience, we know who the good guy is; we see everything, as it unfolds slowly; the good guy never makes a mistake; the good guy is regarded as such by the authorities; and there is never any need for reliance on the faulty observations and recollections of eyewitnesses.

Mas makes the real truths of real life crystal clear in MAG-20.

It's worth the time, it's worth the money, and it's worth the travel and the lodging.

 

[Bobson]

There are trainers who I really do not want on my training resume. This can be due to their past actions or inflammatory remarks. Remember Zimmerman's trial? His CWP instructor testified - so your training past can certainly be accessed. I prefer to spend my training dollars on folks who I would be happy to see in court.

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

 

[earlthegoat2]

One major problem I have run into is the inability to train 5^5 (or similar) at most gun ranges I have been to as it is against their rules.

You can shoot in competition this way and you can pay out to take a training class but you cannot, on your own time, train what you have learned during those other activities.

 

[harrygunner]

Question on "five shots into a 12 inch circle at seven yards in 15 seconds four times in a row".

Is that a total of 60 seconds or 15 seconds for the four repetitions?

 

[conw]

Question on "five shots into a 12 inch circle at seven yards in 15 seconds four times in a row".

Is that a total of 60 seconds or 15 seconds for the four repetitions?

15 seconds per string of 5 shots (3 seconds max between shots)
4 total strings
60 seconds total live fire time not counting down time between strings of fire

 

[harrygunner]

That's what it seemed like. I was dismayed the trainer only experienced a 10% success rate with shooters.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Bobson:

Ive heard of people who are very active in the martial arts who, when involved in a physical confrontation of a defensive type, are expected to show restraint, rather than utilizing their full skillset.

Well, that really has nothing directly to do with training.

The point is that one who becomes involved in a defensive situation (unprovoked and unavoidable, of course) may lawfully use only the amount of force that is necessary for defense.

That means that the defender cannot willfully cause harm to an attacker who no longer poses an imminent danger of serous bodily harm.

That is true whether the defender uses hands, feet, a deadly weapon, or a so called less than lethal weapon.

It is true whether the defender has received training or not.

 

[Warp]

Kleanbore, I'm reading that, so I just have to ask...Do you wear safety glasses when you’re cleaning your firearms?

That might actually make an interesting and informative title to a new thread/poll