What some clueful instructors carry as their defensive firearm

[AZretired]

I notice a lot of negative comments on instructors that lack real world, been there, done that credentials. Yet all all happy that Jerry Miculek carries a 340.ay I remind you all that Jerry is Professional shooter sponsored by S&W. He has never been in LE nor AFAIK been in the combat services. Great shooter but why do we care what he carries? He has to carry some sort of Smith.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Rastoff]

I notice a lot of negative comments on instructors that lack real world, been there, done that credentials.

Yes, I wonder about that as well. Trigger control is important. Does it matter if the instructor who says that is a Navy SEAL or not?

 

[Mister X]

Rob Leatham has never been involved in an actual shooting, was never in the military or an LEO AFAIK yet numerous Spec Ops and Police agencies have sought out his guidance and instruction. Are they wrong in doing that since he hasn't "been there and done that?"

 

[iPac]

It's interesting how many in this thread feel the need to justify or defend Glocks.

I am sure they are great guns.

I was going to say the same thing, and the whole reason I am commenting.

I'm a little amazed at how many Glock owners/users actively defend the guns like they are the best plastic fantastic made.

I know they are great guns and very reliable, but why defend them like they are the best?

There are plenty of plastic guns out there just as reliable or more reliable than a Glock, many of which are cheaper, and some more attractive.

One of those is a Beretta PX4 Storm. I think what everyone should take away from this thread is there are MANY fine firearms out there that will do the job successfully. Find one that works for YOU, and just use other's suggestions to help make your own choice.

I don't consider any gun better than another, unless I can actually prove it.

 

[AZretired]

Rob Leatham has never been involved in an actual shooting, was never in the military or an LEO AFAIK yet numerous Spec Ops and Police agencies have sought out his guidance and instruction. Are they wrong in doing that since he hasn't "been there and done that?"

As long as they seek out his experience for the right reason. Pure shooting instruction. How to shoot and handle firearms, NOT TACTICS. Tactical instruction should be left to those who have actual experience in LE or Military tactics. The runnin' & gunnin' of IPSC and other games don't always relate to the real world.

As far as guns go, if you have the choice, use what you feel works for you.

 

[Mister X]

As long as they seek out his experience for the right reason. Pure shooting instruction. How to shoot and handle firearms, NOT TACTICS. Tactical instruction should be left to those who have actual experience in LE or Military tactics. The runnin' & gunnin' of IPSC and other games don't always relate to the real world.

As far as guns go, if you have the choice, use what you feel works for you.

I'm no fan of gun games nor do I see military or LE experience as a prerequisite for being a civilian defensive shooting instructor. My EDC is most often a snub revolver and I carry it concealed. As a civilian, my primary objective is to avoid confrontation. I envision the most likely encounters where I would have to resort to using lethal force would be a reactive scenario at very close range, perhaps even contact/ECQ distances otherwise I would simply just avoid engaging. Plus I'll be on my own. That's in pretty stark contrast to police work and military operations.

It's the same with unarmed defensive skills. While it sounds really cool to learn H2H from a Navy SEAL, the truth is that it really isn't their primary focus. Police have to do things civilians do not, so police defensive tactics(DT) isn't really the best approach either for learning unarmed defense skills. I taught self-defense/martial arts to civilians and DT to cops for many years, but the curriculum I taught to each group was very different from one other.

There are many excellent defensive shooing instructors with an LE/Military background, but there are just as many who are out of touch with the needs and realities of civilian self-defense.

 

[Rastoff]

Tactical instruction should be left to those who have actual experience in LE or Military tactics.

So, if I learn tactics from a PJ, but have never been in a gunfight, I can't teach what I've learned to someone else?

 

[WR Moore]

Yes, I wonder about that as well. Trigger control is important. Does it matter if the instructor who says that is a Navy SEAL or not?

You forgot former Ranger, Force Recon, Green Beret, Delta, SAS or dated Ziva David.

 

[Wise_A]

I envision the most likely encounters where I would have to resort to using lethal force would be a reactive scenario at very close range, perhaps even contact/ECQ distances otherwise I would simply just avoid engaging. Plus I'll be on my own. That's in pretty stark contrast to police work and military operations.

I think you're somewhat mistaken about what most police work is like. Most police officers are alone, and confrontations can happen at any distance. I actually think that the "likely" scenario for the CCWer depends a lot on environment and education.

Of course, this is sort of dumb. Telling anybody what the "statistically most-likely scenario" they're going to be in makes no sense. Statistics improve your odds over blind guessing. Take card counting--great use of statistics and math, but it's only reliable when you do it for a long time, with many individuals.

We're not playing 3,000 hands of blackjack with 15 players. We're playing just one hand, and we've got the house, the car, and the kids' college fund on it.

What I will agree with is that whether the trainer is LE, military, or whatever else, they need to be able to successfully transition to teaching CCWers. No background is a guarantee of competence.

Also, it's been my experience that most people just lie.

 

[Mister X]

Proactive vs Reactive- Engage vs Avoid

I think you're somewhat mistaken about what most police work is like. Most police officers are alone, and confrontations can happen at any distance.

Maybe. I've never been a cop and the majority of my interaction with them revolves around DT and H2H. I imagine nearly all of the shootings cops are involved in are either when responding to a call where they are well aware they are headed into a situation where gunplay is likely or even certain or having to respond to an attack when carrying out a traffic/street stop or what not. I would label those proactive scenarios, even the latter ones since they are still treating the situation as a potential threat. The possibility of being involved in a longer range gunfight is much greater since it's their job to pursue and engage. That's very different from what a civilian's objective and what they will likely face. While I'm sure it has happened, cops are not often the target of armed robberies, muggings, car-jackings, rape, random physical assaults and the like AFAIK.

 

[Rastoff]

Also, it's been my experience that most people just lie.

About what? Their qualifications?

 

[AZretired]

So, if I learn tactics from a PJ, but have never been in a gunfight, I can't teach what I've learned to someone else?

What I'm saying is teaching the mechanics for shooting or unarmed self defense is not the same as teaching Tactics.

 

[Wise_A]

Maybe. I've never been a cop and the majority of my interaction with them revolves around DT and H2H. I imagine nearly all of the shootings cops are involved in are either when responding to a call where they are well aware they are headed into a situation where gunplay is likely or even certain or having to respond to an attack when carrying out a traffic/street stop or what not.

Just glancing back at the ol' anecdotals...I don't think that there has been a common thread, except that the guy didn't see it coming. If they do, they usually get help or take some other action with the goal of not having to use lethal force.

Really, when it comes to the "average" shooting, be it police or anybody else, there's no such thing.

The possibility of being involved in a longer range gunfight is much greater since it's their job to pursue and engage.

I don't think so. A great many start at conversation range. There's all sorts of documentation about high-profile gunfights, because most documentation reaches the public via for-profit media of some kind, and people want to read about that sort of stuff. So we have sort of a distorted view.

That's very different from what a civilian's objective and what they will likely face. While I'm sure it has happened, cops are not often the target of armed robberies, muggings, car-jackings, rape, random physical assaults and the like AFAIK.

I think that what constitutes the "average" citizen encounter is dependent on geography. We avoid the mentality that no community is "safe", but that's sort of a mis-saying. Bad stuff goes down everywhere, but what exactly that bad stuff is, isn't the same everywhere.

Hence, I think that someone that lives in a city should focus a bit more on the stereotypical "close encounter", for instance. In a more rural community, identifying and dealing with covert threats before they become overt becomes a more viable strategy, for the simple fact that there are far fewer people to watch.

About what? Their qualifications?

Yeah. I mean, I get it, it's a very competitive business and the clients are sort of...dupes, a lot of the time. I know a lot of guys who just wouldn't pay for training from somebody that doesn't claim some sort of LEO or military background--but wouldn't dare question a potential trainer as to what their experience actually is.

But that's the state of the business these days. The customer base is eager to spend, not willing to travel, and has no idea how to buy. Pretty much the ideal market for imposters. The NRA's instructor certification program really isn't helping any, either.

 

[Ziggy2525]

So, if I learn tactics from a PJ, but have never been in a gunfight, I can't teach what I've learned to someone else?

If I was looking to up my IDPA game would I be better off with an instructor that's a current IDPA Master or an instructor that's never shot an IDPA match, but learned about IDPA from an IDPA master?

 

[Protected One]

If I was looking to up my IDPA game would I be better off with an instructor that's a current IDPA Master or an instructor that's never shot an IDPA match, but learned about IDPA from an IDPA master?

While that *sounds* like a comparable analogy, I don't see it as such.

What I'm saying is teaching the mechanics for shooting or unarmed self defense is not the same as teaching Tactics.

I agree.

 

[Rastoff]

Yeah. I mean, I get it, it's a very competitive business and the clients are sort of...dupes, a lot of the time. I know a lot of guys who just wouldn't pay for training from somebody that doesn't claim some sort of LEO or military background--but wouldn't dare question a potential trainer as to what their experience actually is.

Yes, I see what you're getting at. However, someone who doesn't really have those qualifications will show his hand very quickly. Once found out, their credentials are done.

 

[Rastoff]

So, if I learn tactics from a PJ, but have never been in a gunfight, I can't teach what I've learned to someone else?

What I'm saying is teaching the mechanics for shooting or unarmed self defense is not the same as teaching Tactics.

Besides the obvious semantics, you're going to have to explain what you mean by "Tactics".

But, let's put that aside and look at the root of the issue. Many here are saying that someone who is an actual Army Ranger is a better instructor than someone who was never in the Army. The problem with that statement is basic. What if that Ranger was never in combat? Then how is he different than the one who received the same training, but wasn't in the Army?

 

[Rastoff]

If I was looking to up my IDPA game would I be better off with an instructor that's a current IDPA Master or an instructor that's never shot an IDPA match, but learned about IDPA from an IDPA master?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're implying that the current master is going to be better. What if he doesn't know anything about teaching? How will he impart his talent to you?

 

[BAM-BAM]

Have been following this thread....... and yesterday did a 6 hour Continuing Legal Ed. course on Pa Gun Laws.......including Castle Doctrine and Stand your Ground..... Concealed Carry laws...... one guy did a session on incidents / response with videos .. 21ft rule... All the lecturers were attorneys... one was also a former Asst. DA , two were NRA Certified Pistol Instructors... and one former military. Great sessions....................I've probably done about 30 hours of CLE involving Gun laws and use of deadly force over the past 5 years.

IMHO................................

IDPA Masters ..... can teach you how to play their game.... but I doubt I'll ever face a IDPA stage in real life...... it's become like USPSA run and gun

Navy Seal/Marine/ Special Forces...... would be great teaching small unit tactics.....squad level and up with light machine guns and air support.

Great stuff to know but practical and permissible under the Legal Rules of Engagement in Pa??????

Police officers.....my Dad was one and gave me my first basic training in the 60/70s...... but as someone mention while they are trained in the use of deadly force..... they have a different job description....... and carrying concealed does not make you a cop!

I was a NRA Rifle and Pistol Instructor for about a decade and shot on both High School and College Rifle Teams.........

My Dad taught me how to shoot starting at about 10

20+ years of PPC,USPSA and IDPA.... made me a better & more practical shooter....................

I oversaw, trained and qualified with a 30 man armed Hospital Security Dept. for 8 years..... Pa. Act 235......



I'm currently looking at joining a new shooting range that is also holding itself out as a provider of 'Defensive Tactics Training" ...... they've had a couple of open houses ....... talking to a couple of the "younger" staff; they are former students of the owner (former Marine and Close protection specialist /Bodyguard) and are NRA instructors.

Kind of makes me go hummmmmmm!

I think I will join as it's a new indoor facility, 5miles from the house.... and by getting a pre opening membership it's not too expensive, no hourly range fees,unlimited access to the "Tactics/training classes" for the first year.


So to me after 40 years of Concealed Carry it's still an open question ........Who can train me to best survive on the mean streets of my "Burb of the Burgh"?

 

[Triggernosis]

Bam-Bam, you make very valid points there ^^^. And I'm asking myself that same question - "Who can best train me for everyday survival in the neighborhood as I go about my daily affairs?"