TexasCHLforum.com

Soccerdad1995 wrote:As mentioned upthread, it is difficult to get people to focus on what they perceive to be unlikely threats. How many people have a formal fire reaction plan for their family, other than "get out of the house"? Of those, how many have ensured that all family members understand the plan? Of those, how many have actually practiced it? It's the same issue. We all understand that these threats are out there but there are a lot of things competing for our time (and money in the case of training).

The key is to help people understand that this is a real safety need, and then to make training available and heavily publicized.

That's an excellent analogy.

Chas.

Interblog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:....

3. Only a fraction of LTC students will take even intermediate classes, much less advanced classes;

a. Most think additional training isn't necessary (See No. 7 below);
b. Many are turned off by high pressure sales pitches during LTC classes;
c. Many simply don't have the money for additional training (class fee, ammo)[/list]
....

You ask some excellent questions. I wish I had equally excellent answers.

Interblog wrote:You are the man who would know best, but this is contrary to my experience. Are there actual data to support the assertion in 3a? The people known to me who are LTC are generally all too aware of their own lack of training and they feel guilty about it because they feel like they have a great deal of responsibility and not much skill to back it up. But like me, they don't feel confident in their ability to find workable training options for themselves.

As I noted in my posts, my comments come solely from my experience as a firearms instructor. There is no comprehensive data regarding LTC students' opinions about their need for additional training. I don't know how that data could realistically be gathered.

I do have some students that comment that they need additional training, but they are the exception. Some of that subset come to my Intermediate I and II classes and some come to the Advanced I and II classes. Overall I'd estimate that less than 10% get additional training. Again, that's my experience with the largest shooting club in Texas (3,600). I'm not saying this holds true industry wide.

Interblog wrote:Also, what is the definition of an "intermediate" class? How would I know a worthwhile class if I saw one? How long should it be, time-wise? What should it cover? What should it leave me with in terms of take-aways that I can then put to use in my own practice sessions?

There is no industry-wide definition of an intermediate class. That's a term I use to refer to classes above the truly basic handgun classes. I teach a Basic Handgun Skills Course that's for people with little to no handgun experience. Sometimes I offer it combined with the LTC class. Intermediate I focuses primarily on safe use of a holster when drawing and engaging one or multiple targets. Intermediate II expands on multiple targets, malfunction drills, shooting on the move (very bad idea) and more, if the class skill level allows.

Again, this is simply my design of intermediate classes. Many instructors, perhaps most, do not break down classes the same way. My goal is to take a students from knowing nothing through advanced skills. That can't be done in one course. Another problem I learned years ago is fatigue is a major obstacle to learning, especially for the stereotypical LTC. That's why I keep my classes relatively short at 3 hrs. With the combined BHS/LTC class, the 3-hr. BHS class goes first, we go to lunch, then we do the LTC classroom portion. (Range qualification is the last drill of the BHS segment.)

Interblog wrote:I agree that the money simply must be a deterrent to many people. The prices I've seen are around $35 - $40 per hour for group training, not for individual instruction. Can anyone recommend any specific content on YouTube, for instance, that would at least instill some practice exercises consistent with "intermediate" training? I wouldn't mind reserving my cash outlays for the training parts that matter most.

Money is the single biggest issue for most folks and it's not just the cost of major schools. It's the rare person who can and will take private lessons or coaching, simply because of the cost. When you tell people how much they need to practice to hone and maintain the skills to which a class exposes them, some are unwilling to shoulder the cost of ammo and range fees. The largest and best schools cost around $3,000 to $4,000 for a class, when all expenses are considered. Depending upon one's location, local instruction may also be available. One of the best values going is my SWAT buddy's full day (300 rd) course for which he charges $150 for PSC Members ($175 non-members). He teaches because he truly wants to help people prepare to defend themselves and family if necessary. Most instructors cannot teach a full day course for that price because of range fees and other expenses. When you combine the cost of training, then regular practice, with the other factors I listed, it's not surprising that a relatively small percentage of people carrying guns opt for advance training. As I noted earlier, experience has shown us that such training isn't necessary in the vast majority of situations.

There is some excellent information available on YouTube, but there are also absolute charlatan spewing crap. Some of them are very well-known names that have people snookered. While you can pick up some good pointers on discrete aspects of shooting, you cannot train overall using YouTube videos.

Some will disagree with this statement, but start shooting IDPA matches on a regular basis. IDPA is a game, it is not training, but it helps you become a better shooter. You will draw from a concealed holster and shoot in unusual/uncomfortable positions. You will practice target identification, use of cover (well, not so much now with the absurd fault lines), accuracy, reloading, and much more. These are skills most commercial (a/k/a square ranges) will not let you practice. Plus, it's a lot of fun, but be careful. If you develop habits that help you win a match, then you will be sacrificing good defensive skills. Shoot the match like you would shoot on the street to save your life.

Some of the best training for self-defense is training the mind. Learn what physiological and psychological responses you can expect when suddenly faced with a life-threatening situation. Read books by Grossman (On Killing and On Combat) and others like The Battle for Hue, We Were Soldiers Once and Young and Black Hawk Down. Get an idea of the mindset required to survive. The goal is not to die from panic or freezing.

One last comment. There is no Zin and the Art of Gun-fighting. It's all applied basis that have been drilled and honed to a point that it comes as natural as breathing. If an instructor tells you he has a magic technique, tip your hat and walk on by.

Chas.

I could do a full podcast on this topic. Unfortunately, the only people that would listen are those who are already on our side of the training issue.

Here are some facts I've learned over decades of being an instructor.

• 1. Most LTC students are not serious shooters, thus they don't shoot matches or attend training classes;
  2. Most female LTC students attend class only because of one of the following:
  • a. The man in their life convinced them to come (father, husband, boyfriend, brother);
    b. Something happened to them or someone close that wakes them up to everyday dangers;
    c. They personally survived a violent crime;
  3. Only a fraction of LTC students will take even intermediate classes, much less advanced classes;
  • a. Most think additional training isn't necessary (See No. 7 below);
    b. Many are turned off by high pressure sales pitches during LTC classes;
    c. Many simply don't have the money for additional training (class fee, ammo)
  4. The biggest market/need is truly basic training and:
  • a. Women are the most likely to attend;
    b. (See No. 2 above)
  5. Many non-LTC firearms instruction advertising intimidates potential students;
  6. Many non-LTC classes are perceived to be overpriced;
  7. "Other guy syndrome" infects most people (only the other guy/gal will be a crime victim);
  8. Most people who train to a moderate or high level of proficiency do so because:
  • a. Their job requires it; or
    b. They enjoy guns and shooting

I have offered free training for select people in our church, yet few accept the offer. Some will attend one or two sessions, but life always gets in the way. The feeling is, once again, it won't happen to me and I really want to go shopping Saturday morning. I have more paid students than people attending classes or coaching sessions for free.

I have some ideas guys/gals, but truly reaching the untapped population will require instructors to donate time and most are not in a position to do so. I was putting togehter a consortium to promot firearms education and training in the minority community. There is a huge need in that population. At a point, the "what's in it for me" element raised it's head and the project went no further.

I don't fault any businessman for wanting to make a profit. Although I do a good bit of free training, I charge for most of my classes. However, reaching a larger segment of the gun-owning, gun-carrying population requires an altruistic approach as opposed to a commercial market-expanding approach. But even if every firearms instructor in Texas committed to teaching X students for free, perhaps even providing guns and ammo, the student needs to be willing to spend the money to practice on a regular basis. Without that commitment from the student, all the free training in the world will not make a long-term impact.

Now here's a fact that instructors and those of us who train and shoot a lot aren't going to like. Most people don't need any training beyond truly basic training. I know that statement will draw the ire of many, but look at the number of homeowners, often elderly women, are forced to shoot an attacker in their home. These women likely don't have any training beyond someone showing them how to load and fire their pistols, yet they prevail in a deadly assault. Sure, this same person would not fare as well with multiple armed attackers, or a run-and-gun street battle, or fighting from inside their car, but that's not how the majority of self-defense shooting happen.

At the end of the day, those of us who join gun clubs, participate here on the Forum, go to gun shows, shoot matches, and train extensively love what we are doing. Guns and shooting are a hobby so we don't mind investing time and money. Contrary to what anti-gun liars will claim, we pray we never have to put our skills to use in a combat setting, but if the need arises, we have the required skills to survive a deadly assault. It's not that we trained for that day, it's simply a side benefit of our hobby.

BTW, I'm not talking about sheepdog personalities as described by Col. Grossman. That's a different mindset and motivation entirely.

Chas.