Pistol course?

[glenwolde]

It appears that "Warrior Expert Theory" is nothing more than "you have to be trained extensively to be effective" and "situational awareness". Put it all in a wrapper, brand it, and throw around a lot of cool sounding words like "Dynamic Critical Incident" to make you sound sophisticated.

"Warrior Expert Theory, through Frequent and REALISTIC training once can learn to use the power of recognition to respond more efficiently in the context of a Dynamic Critical Incident."

In short, a "Theory" (a misuse of that word if you ask me but makes it sound all scientific) that you have to constantly train, developed by a guy that sells training.

 

[rockquarry]

Upon reading this initially, I felt that a "cover letter" wasn't included, which the OP provided later in the thread.

Honestly, while I like my revolvers, I can appreciate limiting the class to semi-autos. When I planned to attend the first Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit in '19, I planned to use a revolver until I was told that the courses of fire sometimes required more than 6 rounds and didn't allow reloading. When looking at the clientele, it would be difficult for some of the challenged participants to effect a reload (all participants had some degree of physical challenge). The course of fire was scored "time plus penalty".

Sometimes, the course of fire just isn't revolver friendly. My problem with the course is the counter ambush training and warrior expert theory. In my mind, utilizing counter ambush training negates every claim of shooting for self-defense. Perhaps warrior expert theory means mindset?

I have to agree from a cursory perspective. It seems this type of course and its instructors and adherents lean far more in the direction of gunfighting theory and exercises with self-defense being secondary. Maybe the instructors and participants already shoot in organized combat games, so perhaps this is an influencing factor.

"Warrior expert theory" ... no shortages of such theory on many Internet forums but most of it ostensibly comes from frustrated non-experts who will never pass up an opportunity to argue or preach their gospel to those with time to waste. Maybe they just need to get out and shoot more.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

I’m afraid very few members of my club are ready for “ Warrior expert theory” and “Counter ambush training”.

I work the pistol range and have taught CPL classes there. Far too many members are horrible shots and really need more basic instruction and range time.

I’ve had members show up to shoot with 9mm ammo for their .380 and .38 Super ammo for their .38 Special. I had a regular shooter show up with a police give-away trigger lock on his carry gun. Unfortunately, he lost the key! We had a case of those locks in the cabinet and I found one that opened his lock.

If we taught an advanced course, it should include:
* Tactical hearing aids
* Ammunition selection for dummies
* Your cane as an impact weapon

If the course required any running, we’d need paramedics on standby.

Here's what you need for your course --

https://caneselfdefenseuniversity.com/

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0snOr9zrI4[/ame]

 

[double-dipper]

"Warrior expert theory" What's That???

 

[AJ]

"Warrior expert theory" What's That???

I would guess that "Situational Awareness" and "Mind Set" would be a better name for the class. Like I wrote before, you are not teaching these folks to be gunfighters, just trying to help them defend themselves.

 

[Greyman50]

So, just What did Col. Cooper teach???????

 

[AJ]

So, just What did Col. Cooper teach???????

Did not go to Gunsite. The course I went to was taught by Marines at a Marine Corps school. Cooper did have a hand in designing our course and trained our instructors. So from what I have read of his writings and what we were taught, I think Situational Awareness and Mind Set would be close.

 

[Greyman50]

My point. “ New” is not really new, just rehashed in today’s language.

 

[AJ]

My point. “ New” is not really new, just rehashed in today’s language.

New is usually in technology. There are probably a few advance in the way things are done, but like you say they put it into the way things are stated nowadays.

 

[xtrtsqrt11]

I too would like to see the instructors credentials with the info that's provided, before I pass judgement.

As far as separating autos and revolvers... ...At my department we still have some revolver holdouts and it does slow down qualification significantly.

I have also been to a few professional on my own dime training courses and it does take a bit of work and a lot of single stack magazines to keep up with the double stacks.

Having some experience of LE training in revolvers as well as some competition experience with same, I can appreciate how the different systems don't really mesh together well.

There will be a lot of down time for each group while the different procedures are covered and reinforced (as people try to crawl, walk and run) that has to be accepted or decided against.

I would rather have one training course for one system and another course for the other.

 

[oldbrownhat]

"Warrior expert" and counter ambush were the two that stood out to me. Could be totally legit with odd wording, or a bit tactilol. ...

That's what stood out for me, too. My first thought was "Instructor has Mall Ninja Level 2 certification." And, as others have mentioned, the things that are not mentioned are worth noting, esp. prudently "getting out of Dodge" and gun safety, which in a self defence situation imeans keeping innocent bystanders safe.

(The latter reminds me of a quote from a story by Mark Twain about the Allen pepperbox revolver: "I should have shot that long, gangly lubber they called Hank if I could have done it without crippling six or seven other people, but of course I couldn't, the old Allen's so confounded comprehensive.")

 

[growr]

revolvers

Revolvers are not allowed because they will usually kick your behind three ways in one on target.

Randy