Why Don't more People Go To Gun School?

[guyfromohio]

For many, guns are a new phenomena. Exciting, tactical (cool), consuming..... For others, it's a part of life and has always been. Why doesn't everyone do a NASCAR driving school, or why don't all motorcyclists do a track day training? Obviously, for us to spend time in a gun forum, we are the enthusiasts. For the rest of the gun owners out there, many fall into the "it's just another tool in the house" category.

 

[BowerR64]

Check into your local conservation i was shocked when i found out all the classes they do and they are FREE! I shot at my local conservation range for like 4-5 months before i looked into the classes they have.

Once i was told all the classes i took all of them. Usually they are 4 hour classes 2 hours in a class room and then 2 out on the range hands on, their guns and their ammo.

I took a .22 plinking class, a basic to firearms, intro to hand guns, intro to rifles, a reloading class and even a black powder class.

The plinking class was fun because i was really wanting to shoot some .22 and i couldnt find any they had a huge pallet full of .22 ammo.

There was an AR class i took and we got to shoot bowling pins.

 

[torqem]

90% of gunowners do not CARE if they are skilled at any aspect of shooting,, and 99% don't care if they fast and accurate for defensive type skills. Most know very well that becoming truly skilled takes a lot of time and money. They might have one or the other, but not both, and even if they do have both, that does not mean that they wish to spend either or both (at shooting skill improvement of any sort, much less defensive stuff). Real speed from CCW is dangerous to acquire, if you don't start first with Airsoft, or dry practice, and lots of it. I mean many scores of hours.

 

[GBExpat]

One thing that everyone here should keep in mind is that those who frequent places like THR are firearms enthusiasts, but not clones.

We each have our unique assortment of firearm-related interests ... which for most, I suspect (if you are like me), change a bit with time.

 

[Deaf Smith]

HR,

Well I do know Cooper was in ground combat in order for him to have fired on Japanese troops (but I was guessing Guadalcanal, not as part the the Pennsylvania though.)

But as for Askins (I have his book to “The Unrepentant Sinner”) he was a cold killer and he admitted it.

But you don't have to be skillful with guns to be a killer. He was both.

Deaf

 

[Tirod]

Sam, I get your points. I presented a contrary view because it hadn't been brought up yet in the discussion, It was mostly the money and time issue, which I understand completely.

Considering that I did show up and jumped thru all the hoops of the day in armed forces training, yes, I do show up with a student's frame of mind. It doesn't mean that I've turned off my analytical thinking, tho. When the instructor noted I was heeling the gun too much, I saw it was correct, and adjusted. I didn't mind, I was running on two hours sleep and it was 2:00 in the afternoon.

Is liability on a range a legal issue? Sure. Skydivers and race track drivers all sign the waivers, it doesn't stop the lawsuits. Just trims them down. Do I chafe at a Land Speed Record car that is street legal be required to have door bars that are difficult to use? Yeah, too bad. The organization has it's reasons. If I don't like it, I can go elsewhere.

But like a lot have said, too few instructors on the circuits are in it to teach students a wide variety of technique. They are all about their specialty, with it's arcane rules. It's like choosing which martial art to pursue, and if you are Krav Magna, open to any move and any responsible discipline with no Masters or Sensei, you aren't appreciated.

Males always tend to set up an hierarchy of authority and then require conformity to the peer structure. I don't blame an instructor for keeping a lid on the monkey dancing and sharpshooting that could happen, it would divert the class and be a waste of forward momentum getting the agenda accomplished. What's missing is that many who would attend bring that with them - they are there to improve their sociological ranking and don't care to take a place where they actually stand.

Major league shooters are supposed to conform to sociological stereotypes - Todd Jarrett or Col. Askins. If they wear glasses and aren't the average physique, they get dissed. Goes to why Mas Ayoob has his detractors - they simply can't respect his skills, it gets involved in other "demographic" issues.

Who's the qualified expert on sight: the buffed out martial arts instructor of Cobra Kai, or some old dude who's a handyman and gardener?

Who markets better on film or in photos?

Let me throw this into the discussion: Frankly, I'd rather be taught by an accomplished female shooter in a class of women. The stupid ego game is usually off the table, real instruction has a place to happen, and the cooperative point is to learn from each other if there's something to say.

That's nearly impossible to achieve with a group of male students, as soon as one attempts to jockey into a lead role, he gets challenged and the learning atmosphere of the class drifts away in the wind. It becomes an 8 hour monkey dance.

I've had all I want of that the last 40 years. It's counterproductive and a waste of time. So, if it IS necessary to wear polka dot shorts and a diamond tiara to attend a class I know will be conducted in a positive attitude, so be it.

I've tried it the rote, stereotypical way, and it's really just a grating experience where no respect is given or even attempted, regardless of past accomplishment.

Just saying, that's another reason why some don't go. It's not that we can't check our ego at the door, it's that 15 or 50 or 200 others simply won't.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

Time and money have to be the biggest.

Unless you live by Gunsite or Thunder Ranch or something, you've got to come up with a week or two to take off of work (lost income), and then you've got airfare expenses, tuition expenses, lodging expenses, and ammo expenses.

And if you've got family obligations, now it's even worse.

I would love to go to Gunsite for a month, but I can't afford the thousands and thousands of dollars it would cost me.

I will say though that the money I shelled out for law enforcement skills training was well worth it- a significant amount of time was spent on shooting skills, and we were on a live-fire range at least nine out of ten class days. I learned a LOT.

So the value in professional training is there, but you get what you pay for, and a lot of us can't afford it.

 

[conw]

HR,

Well I do know Cooper was in ground combat in order for him to have fired on Japanese troops (but I was guessing Guadalcanal, not as part the the Pennsylvania though.)

But as for Askins (I have his book to “The Unrepentant Sinner”) he was a cold killer and he admitted it.

But you don't have to be skillful with guns to be a killer. He was both.

Deaf

Very well said.

If the question someone asked about "who trained JC and CA" was meant to imply others don't need training I'd ask what background the people in question have. I bet it doesn't resemble Cooper's or Askin's.

 

[Hangingrock]

Deaf Smith:Well I do know Cooper was in ground combat in order for him to have fired on Japanese troops (but I was guessing Guadalcanal, not as part the Pennsylvania though.)

One of his responsibilities was to assess the effectiveness of the naval bombardment particularly the effectiveness of the Pennsylvania's fire. This was done usually after the initial landing. The interval of time after the landing was not specified.

As for Askins yes he was what he was a man of his time. He was brutally effective. He could not have been or done so with out the approval of his superiors or they the superiors simply looked the other way.

 

[Hangingrock]

conw: If the question someone asked about "who trained JC and CA" was meant to imply others don't need training I'd ask what background the people in question have.

Read post #35 then you may understand the commentary!

 

[Bix]

I know at least a couple people who've held off on formal training because they didn't have a venue available to subsequently practice what they'd learned in class. While you can certainly do a lot of what you see in classes dry at home, I understand this line of thinking. I held off on carbine classes for a while when I didn't have a range where I could run carbine drills - classes would have been wasted money, IMO.

Spending training dollars wisely requires a lot of work and planning before, during, and after training. If you haven't got the ability to support that, sometimes it makes sense to hold off until you can.

 

[Mike1234567]

Money

Time

Health

 

[Kleanbore]

I think that Post #40 addresses the question of who trained Akins and Cooper rather well.

Money and time are certainly among the main reasons why many people have not availed themselves of training, but I think there is another: ignorance. Perhaps that would be more nicely expressed as lack of knowledge.

I had absolutely no idea of how training would benefit me until I took a one day course that covered the draw, grip, hold, moving from one target to another, very rapid firing at COM, and reloading.

Now, this was not as comprehensive as something involving motorized targets, FoF exercises with simunitions, shoot-noshoot exercises, tactics, and so on. But it was a lot more beneficial than containing to drive to the range and standing in front of a paper target and trying to reduce group size without any coaching about what to do differently.

I was fortunate in having someone who had taken the high performance defensive pistol shooting course tell me about it, describe his experience, and recommend it, and in deciding to accept that recommendation and sign up.

There was a second session offered that included shooting while running in different directions and things like that, but the heat and humidity and my physical condition at the time precluded that for me.

Just as most men believe that are excellent drivers and cannot easily be convinced otherwise, many shooters believe that they can perform adequately with a handgun and, should they experience problems in shooting well, will likely rationalize that their skill level is nonetheless sufficient for purposes self defense. But denial doesn't help anyone when the chips are down. I strongly recommend getting some quality training from professionals, before reinforcing bad habits though practice.

Regarding cost and time, you don't have to go somewhere for a three day session.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by tepin: I would rather spend time and money on legal training.

I really do recommend that everyone who can attend MAG-20, a premier classroom course in use of force law. In my opinion, if you ever need it, you will consider the time and money invested to have been inconsequential.

Knowing when to shoot someone and how to stay out of prison is better than being a better shot at zero to 12 inches from the target.

Two things:

• The answer to "when to shoot someone" is simple; it is "when it is immediately necessary to defend yourself or your lived ones". "Immediately necessary" means that you have no other choice.
• One who believes that defensive handgun training addresses how to be "a better shot at zero to 12 inches from the target" likely really does need some professional training.

Depends on a person's priorities I guess.

As David E put it, if you do not survive the encounter, you will have little need for having been advised about how to conduct yourself afterward.

 

[CopperFouling]

There are some real jewels of instructor out there. They charge anywhere from $130 to $500 per day with $250 being a fairly common figure. Much more important than an instructors experience is their ability to teach what they know and to improve their student's skills

Here's what I am wondering: how does one vet a potential instructor / institution? The brand-name classes, which are impractical (in terms of time, travel, and money) for some, might not require that, but what about local instructors / institutions? I would not spend hundreds of dollars on anything else that I had not thoroughly researched beforehand.

Mods: If this is too off-topic for this thread, please feel free to delete it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

The cost of Training as an example using Gunsite handgun courses 250 – 350 & 499. Basic tuition for the three courses combined total is $5445.00.

I wasn't going to mention this as I got into the discussion late yesterday, but since it has been brought back up today, I have to agree that this really is a false dichotomy.

I've known several people who have gone to Gunsite...for one class (250) and this is very common. The 250 class will give you an idea of a minimal level of skill one would hope to have in a defensive situation. It give you an idea of what you need to work on, what is possible, and the goals to advance your shooting. This is about 1200 rounds and $1500 for 5 days. It is a bit more, per day, than you can get top tier training for, but it is Gunsite

For top tier training, Travis Haley or Chris Costa, you're looking at <$300 per day...but they come to your local range and they don't bring a Shoot House. Many top flight instructors are in the $250 per day range

One of the best local values is a top tier shooter who charges $135 per day

 

[9mmepiphany]

I know at least a couple people who've held off on formal training because they didn't have a venue available to subsequently practice what they'd learned in class. While you can certainly do a lot of what you see in classes dry at home, I understand this line of thinking. I held off on carbine classes for a while when I didn't have a range where I could run carbine drills - classes would have been wasted money, IMO.

Spending training dollars wisely requires a lot of work and planning before, during, and after training. If you haven't got the ability to support that, sometimes it makes sense to hold off until you can.

This is a valid point.

Not knowing where you are located makes recommendations a bit difficult.

I've been to ranges across the country while teaching that allowed running any drill I've ever learned in a class and would be surprised that these didn't exist in most non-metropolitan areas...but I've been wrong before, maybe I'm just spoiled in CA.

At my local range, members have access to private Action Bays where we can set up targets that allow us movement and transitional fire between targets to practice defensive skills

 

[9mmepiphany]

Here's what I am wondering: how does one vet a potential instructor / institution? The brand-name classes, which are impractical (in terms of time, travel, and money) for some, might not require that, but what about local instructors / institutions? I would not spend hundreds of dollars on anything else that I had not thoroughly researched beforehand.

Mods: If this is too off-topic for this thread, please feel free to delete it.

Not off topic at all; and I'm not sure there is a pat answer.

I've found my best instructors through personal references. The trick is to vet your references between those that have the experience to make a valid judgement and those who were in awe of ability of the instructor.

When I traveled, I was riding on the coattails of a Nationally Ranked USPSA/IDPA Grandmaster shooter. We taught fundamental shooting skills that the students could take onto the path to defensive shooting or competition...there isn't a difference in the required fundamental skills.

As an individual instructor, I depend solely on referrals and presence on a local forum. My tag line is, If you don't improve, You don't pay...Why would I charge you if you didn't learn anything ?

A well known name of a school isn't always assurance either. There is a regional school with a huge name which markets as a budget value for new shooters. Their classes are always full and they run huge numbers through every year. But the adage that you get what you pay for holds true

 

[Bix]

Not knowing where you are located makes recommendations a bit difficult.

Thanks 9mm. I currently live in the heart of a very metropolitan area . We now have access to a range that allows us to practice properly, but in the decade or so that I've been doing this, we've bounced around a lot of ranges and that's not always been the case.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Let me throw this into the discussion: Frankly, I'd rather be taught by an accomplished female shooter in a class of women. The stupid ego game is usually off the table, real instruction has a place to happen, and the cooperative point is to learn from each other if there's something to say.

That's nearly impossible to achieve with a group of male students, as soon as one attempts to jockey into a lead role, he gets challenged and the learning atmosphere of the class drifts away in the wind. It becomes an 8 hour monkey dance.

You've been attending the wrong classes.

It is about creating a positive learning environment. My mentor and I used to set the tone by asking that egos be put aside for the duration of the class. Plus neither of us look anything like Alpa males...he looks like a school history teacher and sings Broadway show tunes. I look like an Anime perverted monk who got a haircut by Vida Sasson.

A student who wanted to challenge either of us would just look silly. They'd be lucky if the class didn't just point and laugh at him.

So, if it IS necessary to wear polka dot shorts and a diamond tiara to attend a class I know will be conducted in a positive attitude, so be it.

That might be a bit extreme, but we have had Silly Shirt Day during classes.

I often wear a Domo hat when instructing

 

[taliv]

That's nearly impossible to achieve with a group of male students, as soon as one attempts to jockey into a lead role, he gets challenged and the learning atmosphere of the class drifts away in the wind. It becomes an 8 hour monkey dance.

I've had all I want of that the last 40 years. It's counterproductive and a waste of time. So, if it IS necessary to wear polka dot shorts and a diamond tiara to attend a class I know will be conducted in a positive attitude, so be it.

I've tried it the rote, stereotypical way, and it's really just a grating experience where no respect is given or even attempted, regardless of past accomplishment.

Just saying, that's another reason why some don't go. It's not that we can't check our ego at the door, it's that 15 or 50 or 200 others simply won't.

honestly, in all the classes i've taken, i really can't remember a single one that fit that stereotype. i see that behavior at the range and in the gun store every day, but i just don't see it at classes. of course there are some internet horror stories that are usually kicked off after the fact by the problem child offering his "AAR". it would not surprise me to find it is very common in the military.

but in classes, mostly i see guys who want to learn (and who usually do think they already know something becaues it's not their first class) trying their best to be professional and not be 'that guy'

 

[torqem]

Man, it takes so many hours of personal work to "lock in" something new that you've learned. Few people have any idea what all is involved. 40 hours just scratches the surface on ccw carry, the actual mechanics, much less the legal aspects. You can learn a lot in fairly large class lectures, but the physical skills require no more than a 1 to 4 ratio of instructor to student, or mostly what you learn is bad habits.

 

[conw]

Read post #35 then you may understand the commentary!

I was responding to post 35 without quoting it.

To rephrase my point more clearly:

Providing Cooper and Askins as examples of what can be achieved without training classes has ZERO bearing on 99.99% of people who are not Cooper or Askins.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I fully intend to attend a few gun courses, and a brother of mine has recommended some. However, synching up opportunities hasn't quite happened yet. I don't mind paying a bit of money, knowing what I'll get in exchange, but having to travel a few states to attend is an issue, especially not knowing what may come up in the months between now and whenever something comes into range.

Given the fact that I've not attended any formal courses on self-defense tactics, or legal training like the MAG-20 mentioned above, I don't intend to start out big and shell out a ton of money for a level of expertise I'm not currently up to par for. But there seem to be plenty of other courses geared for just what I need to start out with. There are a LOT of things I can learn on just the basics, regardless of how many years I've owned firearms or carried concealed.

I have done some google searches on gun classes/courses, in addition to many that people have recommended (both here and elsewhere). Being able to "vet out" the stupid/useless ones doesn't seem to be TOO difficult a task. Most of those seem to push the same buttons that most bull-deficators seem to push.

- Bragging on the website/course material automatically turns me off to the program.

- When it's obvious that the ONLY option is THEIR option, that's another turn off to the program. The "best" option based on training and experience is well worthwhile and to be valued accordingly. But life isn't about the "best option" all the time and I want to learn about MANY options and their strengths and weaknesses.

- Programs predispositioned towards certain factors are a turn off, too. For example, if it's obvious that the course is geared towards Glocks and other handguns that I do not have, with a bias against what I do carry in real life, then it's not going to work for me. Teach me how to more effectively use the tools I have, not the ones I do not have. Recommendations are great, but that's for a potential future investment.


Essentially, I think choosing a gun course shouldn't be all that different than shopping for a lot of other things. Have an idea what it is you want to take, do some research to figure out some things you wish to learn, look for some courses that offer what you need to meet these requirements, and do a little research to help narrow the selection down.

As for personality issues...once the class starts, park it. I've worked for a lot of different personality types while in the Navy (and out) and I've long since come to the conclusion that even if the guy over you is a complete donkey's rearend, if you walk away having learned nothing then the problem is YOU. Pay attention, take notes, learn what you can, and deal with the irritating stuff later...even the irriating stuff can provide valuable insights.


And as for the cost...squirrel away a few bucks here and there just like you would for anything else you want. Odds are that by the time you've finally found one in your area that meets your criteria, you'll either have enough to pay for it or you'll have enough to make the additional out-of-pocket expense much less traumatic. I've got a gallon jug full of silver pocket change that would go a long way.

 

[Ankeny]

I know how to shoot, and I know gun safety. I never really understood the need people feel for all this combat or gunfighting training.

It's all about how you apply your shooting skills. If you are comfortable with where you are at in your learning curve, and with your skill set, that's great.

I too know how to shoot, better than most I would imagine. My frustration is I can't find training on how to fight with a gun (especially as an older guy) that doesn't have a bunch of prerequsites that would consume a ton of time and money.