NRA Carry Guard Training - No 1911s or revolvers as primary


bofh

Banned
I got the pointer to this story from Link Removed. There is certainly more to this than the TTAG headline. The NRA Carry Guard seems to branch out into professional firearms training that is way beyond the original basic NRA training classes. The 3-day $850 Link Removed class features:

This multi-day course is designed to prepare gun owners to carry a firearm with confidence and competence.

Includes: Safety and Weapons Awareness; Pistol Ready Positions; Fundamentals (stance, grip, holster draw, sight alignment, trigger press, recoil management, follow through, economy of motion, self-critique); Treating a Malfunction; Live Fire Progression Drills; Combat and Tactical Reloads; Drawing from a Holster; Low Light/No Light Shooting; Combat Reload while holding a Light; Key Components to Carrying a Concealed Weapon; Carry Location Options (i.e. waste, ankle, purse, etc.); Real World Scenario Based Training (Airsoft scenarios)

- Range appropriate clothing (closed-toe shoes, pants, t-shirt)
- Weather appropriate layering (time of year, location dependent)
- Eye protection (both dark and clear with shatterproof lenses)
- Hearing protection (double ear protection is optimal)
- Hat
- Gloves
- Sturdy belt
- Pistol for use in classroom and range demonstrations
- Full size or compact*
- Magazines (4 minimum)
- Holster and magazine pouches (2-3)
- Hand-held light
- Head lamp
- Ammunition: approx. 1,500 rounds
- Range bag
- Note pad and pen
- Snacks, water for range
- Energy bars
- Sun screen
- Personal medications if any (Please notify instructor of any medical conditions)

*NOTE: NRA Carry Guard Level One is designed for training with a semi-automatic handgun (Glock 19/17, Sig P226/P228 or equivalent). We will not allow revolvers or 1911s as your primary firearm in this class.

You should bring a secondary firearm that you carry concealed, as well as a holster for such. We will run the course with a primary carry weapon and then run a course of fire with a secondary or back-up gun to evaluate the differences. Please bring at least 40 rounds of ammo appropriate for your carry firearm for this portion of the class. Revolvers, 1911s and/or subcompacts can be used for this portion of the class.

The amount of time (3 days), topics covered, round count, equipment requirement and price are pretty much what professional firearms schools have. I am not sure if there is a market for this, given the general apathy of average gun owners to get training to begin with. There is also the issue of lack of reputation and the NRA's historical model of franchising training out to less/ill-qualified trainers. Does this really have the potential to become a training for the masses? Only time will tell!

Meanwhile, the USCCA has teamed up with Rob Pincus' Personal Defense Network:

 

I got the pointer to this story from Link Removed. There is certainly more to this than the TTAG headline. The NRA Carry Guard seems to branch out into professional firearms training that is way beyond the original basic NRA training classes. The 3-day $850 Link Removed class features:



The amount of time (3 days), topics covered, round count, equipment requirement and price are pretty much what professional firearms schools have. I am not sure if there is a market for this, given the general apathy of average gun owners to get training to begin with. There is also the issue of lack of reputation and the NRA's historical model of franchising training out to less/ill-qualified trainers. Does this really have the potential to become a training for the masses? Only time will tell!

Meanwhile, the USCCA has teamed up with Rob Pincus' Personal Defense Network:

So, why is the 1911 verboten? Is that insinuating that they won't cover CC folks that prefer the 1911? I don't have insurance yet and doubt I am buying a new compact striker for CC just to fit the wickets. I have an older one and don't like it for a few reasons as it is.

The Place To Be
 
So, why is the 1911 verboten? Is that insinuating that they won't cover CC folks that prefer the 1911? I don't have insurance yet and doubt I am buying a new compact striker for CC just to fit the wickets. I have an older one and don't like it for a few reasons as it is.

The Place To Be

They did not say why no 1911s or revolvers as a primary, but it is likely that the training was developed for modern hammer- and striker-fired handguns. It is quite common to request students not to use compact 1911s chambered in .45 ACP and revolvers in training classes to make their life easier, but it is usually up to the student to bring what they have. A good firearms school teaches train as you fight, i.e., don't use any equipment that you wouldn't use on the street (except for eye and ear protection).

I personally have nothing against students bringing whatever gun they would like to train with, as long it is drop safe. It certainly adds entertainment value to see students struggle with their prized handguns that simply don't work well. With 1,500 rounds and a 5-shot revolver, the close-to 300 repetitions would certainly make sure one can efficiently reload that revolver.

I don't think that training is a requirement for the insurance. Just like with the USCCA, it is optional and a separate product. I am a USCCA member and have never taken any of their training classes. The NRA Carry Guard insurance product is inferior, by the way.
 
They did not say why no 1911s or revolvers as a primary, but it is likely that the training was developed for modern hammer- and striker-fired handguns. It is quite common to request students not to use compact 1911s chambered in .45 ACP and revolvers in training classes to make their life easier, but it is usually up to the student to bring what they have. A good firearms school teaches train as you fight, i.e., don't use any equipment that you wouldn't use on the street (except for eye and ear protection).

I personally have nothing against students bringing whatever gun they would like to train with, as long it is drop safe. It certainly adds entertainment value to see students struggle with their prized handguns that simply don't work well. With 1,500 rounds and a 5-shot revolver, the close-to 300 repetitions would certainly make sure one can efficiently reload that revolver.

I don't think that training is a requirement for the insurance. Just like with the USCCA, it is optional and a separate product. I am a USCCA member and have never taken any of their training classes. The NRA Carry Guard insurance product is inferior, by the way.
I haven't really looked at the differences between USCCA and NRA. A good post on here would be to illustrate the relative pros and cons of both. I am going to look at both at some point this year.

I train with my SAS 1911 and there is no discernable difference to me in terms of draw between it and my striker fired pieces. I will only train with my EDC on a very regular basis and do. Ammo isn't cheap to feed all the hungry family members😊.

The Place To Be
 
I haven't really looked at the differences between USCCA and NRA. A good post on here would be to illustrate the relative pros and cons of both. I am going to look at both at some point this year.

I train with my SAS 1911 and there is no discernable difference to me in terms of draw between it and my striker fired pieces. I will only train with my EDC on a very regular basis and do. Ammo isn't cheap to feed all the hungry family members��.

The Place To Be

See https://www.usacarry.com/forums/politics-and-news/60416-uscca-kicked-out-nra-annual-meeting-2.html#post621145, https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/index.php/learn/307-buyers-guide and Link Removed.
 
Means nothing in my state of Texas. Has to be state approved course and even then people had a fit when it cost $140.00 to get LTC....they ain't paying the costs of this course just to carry concealed...I.will take a pass.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 
Means nothing in my state of Texas. Has to be state approved course and even then people had a fit when it cost $140.00 to get LTC....they ain't paying the costs of this course just to carry concealed...I.will take a pass.

This type of training has zero do do with getting a carry permit. As an apparent instructor, you should know that. Proper supervised training costs money. As an apparent instructor, you should know that too. No one forces you to take such training. Then there is the general apathy of average gun owners to get training to begin with, I mentioned in my OP.
 
Too Pricey

Not for the type of training that is being offered. The price is pretty much on par with comparative training classes in the market of the same quality. Those classes, however, have better name recognition and reputation. The NRA Carry Guard training program is new and an unknown entity.
 
From Rob Pincus via Facebook:

Rob Pincus This is the kind of thing that happens when you have a PR firm oversee the development of a "training program" that is really a marketing program for a poor insurance program. With the largest group of certified firearms instructors on The Earth part of the same organization, but completely left out of the process...

The only reason an instructor should ban a firearm from a class is because they don't feel it is safe. Obviously that's not their intent.

Surely, someone involved knows a 1911 is a "semi-automatic pistol". They are trying to keep it simple and appeal to the masses... they want to be able to push as many students through as they can and get as many "instructors" certified as possible... I get that.

But, the DA/SA is the most complicated option of firearm design, with the most to teach and the most to pay attention to for safe use. Particularly the type that have slide mounted de-cockers which also serve as safeties. How is it expected that students and instructors can figure that system out, but can't handle safety-on/safety-off with a 1911?

I wonder if Vickers, Hackathorn, Clint Smith, MacNamara or the others who were paid for their endorsement of this program were consulted on or even aware of this stipulation?

Follow up question: Is the Beretta 92 or the H&K USP "equivalent" to the Sig P226?

#smh #nothelping #carryguard

From the comments section:

Rob Pincus Paul I can't offer a logical reason. I believe they want to limit what the new instructors will be required to do well so that they can quickly spin up an actual program. Remember: they haven't run their first class yet and most of the leadership has Very Little private sector training experience.

Rob Pincus Matt Meagher Military service isn't a bad thing, but a complete lack of significant experience teaching personal defense shooting and/or tactics in the private sector is a huge concern.
 
From Rob Pincus via Facebook:

Not shocked at the flip-flop.

Makes one wonder how well thought out the program is? How easy it will be to make this change? How solid the program will be if a change this big is made over a few days just because people didn't like it... even though no actual explanation was offered? I saw a lot of people trying to guess as to Why such a restriction was put in place to begin with. None of it made sense to me... but the fact that they rolled over in the face of popular opinion isn't surprising.

They have a great group of guys at the top of the program, but they have very little experience actually developing programs for personal defense or teaching the masses in the private sector. This isn't an area where you should be learning on the job with a newly launched national program... and it still makes no sense that they launched and "developed" it completely outside of their existing Legion of experienced instructors under the actual Training Division.

Link Removed
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,526
Messages
610,759
Members
74,962
Latest member
troydistro
Back
Top