On-Line Training Classes

[GunClasses.Net]

It really depends how it's done. After earning my MBA from the University of Iowa, I worked for a Fortune 500 for three years, training a staff of about 1,000 throughout North America. While many of my learners were in Minneapolis, most were not; for those students, a WebEx or online course (developed with Adobe software) was the only cost-effective means to deliver the knowledge. Having developed and delivered more than 100 trainings during that time, and concurrently taken several from vendors, myself, I can attest that there is substantial variation in quality of online trainings. Many online trainings are not interactive, allow the student to daydream his way through it, or even worse, skip through it. Some are not even narrated.

An online course MUST be engaging. It takes a lot of work to do it. If it's done RIGHT, it can actually be more interactive, more personal, and more engaging for a student who can otherwise tune out a classroom instructor for half the presentation. Of course, a good classroom instructor knows how to see that and bring the wandering-minded student back "into the present".

There is no way a classroom instructor is going to know whether the student will perform legally or ethically under stress during the 4, 5, or 7 years of his permit, or how accurately the student will perform in a life or death moment. That said, students must, for me, demonstrate good safety habits at the range. My purpose for having classroom classes at all, aside from needing to see their safety habits, is also that I just love people and I enjoy seeing them connect with the content and with me.

Using several cutting edge best practices from design and development of online content (which I will share, below), I have in fact created an online course. And, while it replaces several hours of lecture, allowing students to schedule in-person time in manageable blocks of less than 30 minutes (instead of 6 hours), it does NOT replace the need for someone to observe the student shooting a few magazines' worth of ammunition on the firing range. This is Minnesota's requirement as well as my own. My online course features over a dozen videos, more than 70 user-interactions, has no fast forward or skip option, and is broken down into six separate, narrated modules. With all the interactivity, a student will not proceed through the training without paying attention - actually at a level that would be very difficult to achieve individually in a class of 10+ students. So far, I manage all the range testing but I wouldn't hesitate to allow someone else to certify the safe handling of a firearm, if that person is any NRA instructor or person responsible for safety at an official range.

Here are some random thoughts about some best practices for delivery of ANY online content...:
If you're going to create an online course, I recommend strongly that you pilot it with non-gun people so they can give you the most rigorous feedback (make sure you involve them as "Subject Matter Experts" early in the process, or you may find yourself starting all over from scratch). Make the objective of the training clear and make the objective of every section of it just as clear. Be sure no more than 5 minutes passes in the recorded training without any interactivity on the part of the student. Use recent news articles and statistics to bolster your points, and when you discuss the law, cite your sources clearly. Never put more than one main idea on a slide if you use PowerPoint, and never put your entire script on the screen for students to read with you... that's what Closed Captioning in, for example, Adobe is for. Keep screens to fewer than 15 words and narrate clearly (know how to use sophisticated software for the narration and any Flash embedded). Use appropriately sized fonts. Be consistent with fonts and color schemes, and be very careful with color choices. Don't use more than a couple fonts/font styles per screen. Mix up multiple choice, true-false, fill in the blank, matching, and screen-click questions/interactions throughout the training. Meticulously proofread. Make sure everything is crystal clear or you will inundate yourself with questions from confused students (and thus, lose all the benefits of efficiency both you and your students wanted from the online experience). Organize your thoughts logically; if you didn't start creating your training with a clear outline you stick to, you will lose your students. Use imagery carefully; purchase all of your images and use them artfully to support your point. Apply screen tips for clarity when needed. Avoid clip art completely; it's trite and cheap. Make yourself available for questions from students and always answer within 24 hours. If you can use video, use video of people other than yourself. If you cannot use video, find someone else to co-narrate sections of the training so that it's not all just your same voice for hours.

If you can do all that, and do it all very well, you will have a good online course. Don't forget to pilot it, and be ready to do major revisions if needed. The issue is then also that you must invest the time into creating it well. A 5-hour class if done right will take at least 100 hours of development time, in total. That's just to get it 'good enough'. Trust me, after that, you'll be tinkering with it now and then, but the idea here is to get good content up, not perfect content (or you'll NEVER roll it out).

Once you build it, be ready for lots of skeptical potential students to not commit to taking the course, because of all the bad content they've been exposed to. Their belief that online trainings are boring, disengaged wastes of time will prevent many from experiencing what you've done differently... However, how you market the course will make the difference, there. Also, the process of creating the online content may help you refine, focus, and even deepen your live-training content, so it's never a waste of time.

In preparation for the adventure of creating a quality online course, you'll need to invest in a good headset, but most of all, invest in your skills to lay out and organize the flow of the content, to create a visually appealing presentation, and to use quality software such as Adobe.

 

[mojoman]

It really depends how it's done. After earning my MBA from the University of Iowa, I worked for a Fortune 500 for three years, training a staff of about 1,000 throughout North America. While many of my learners were in Minneapolis, most were not; for those students, a WebEx or online course (developed with Adobe software) was the only cost-effective means to deliver the knowledge. Having developed and delivered more than 100 trainings during that time, and concurrently taken several from vendors, myself, I can attest that there is substantial variation in quality of online trainings. Many online trainings are not interactive, allow the student to daydream his way through it, or even worse, skip through it. Some are not even narrated.

An online course MUST be engaging. It takes a lot of work to do it. If it's done RIGHT, it can actually be more interactive, more personal, and more engaging for a student who can otherwise tune out a classroom instructor for half the presentation. Of course, a good classroom instructor knows how to see that and bring the wandering-minded student back "into the present".

There is no way a classroom instructor is going to know whether the student will perform legally or ethically under stress during the 4, 5, or 7 years of his permit, or how accurately the student will perform in a life or death moment. That said, students must, for me, demonstrate good safety habits at the range. My purpose for having classroom classes at all, aside from needing to see their safety habits, is also that I just love people and I enjoy seeing them connect with the content and with me.

Using several cutting edge best practices from design and development of online content (which I will share, below), I have in fact created an online course. And, while it replaces several hours of lecture, allowing students to schedule in-person time in manageable blocks of less than 30 minutes (instead of 6 hours), it does NOT replace the need for someone to observe the student shooting a few magazines' worth of ammunition on the firing range. This is Minnesota's requirement as well as my own. My online course features over a dozen videos, more than 70 user-interactions, has no fast forward or skip option, and is broken down into six separate, narrated modules. With all the interactivity, a student will not proceed through the training without paying attention - actually at a level that would be very difficult to achieve individually in a class of 10+ students. So far, I manage all the range testing but I wouldn't hesitate to allow someone else to certify the safe handling of a firearm, if that person is any NRA instructor or person responsible for safety at an official range.

Here are some random thoughts about some best practices for delivery of ANY online content...:
If you're going to create an online course, I recommend strongly that you pilot it with non-gun people so they can give you the most rigorous feedback (make sure you involve them as "Subject Matter Experts" early in the process, or you may find yourself starting all over from scratch). Make the objective of the training clear and make the objective of every section of it just as clear. Be sure no more than 5 minutes passes in the recorded training without any interactivity on the part of the student. Use recent news articles and statistics to bolster your points, and when you discuss the law, cite your sources clearly. Never put more than one main idea on a slide if you use PowerPoint, and never put your entire script on the screen for students to read with you... that's what Closed Captioning in, for example, Adobe is for. Keep screens to fewer than 15 words and narrate clearly (know how to use sophisticated software for the narration and any Flash embedded). Use appropriately sized fonts. Be consistent with fonts and color schemes, and be very careful with color choices. Don't use more than a couple fonts/font styles per screen. Mix up multiple choice, true-false, fill in the blank, matching, and screen-click questions/interactions throughout the training. Meticulously proofread. Make sure everything is crystal clear or you will inundate yourself with questions from confused students (and thus, lose all the benefits of efficiency both you and your students wanted from the online experience). Organize your thoughts logically; if you didn't start creating your training with a clear outline you stick to, you will lose your students. Use imagery carefully; purchase all of your images and use them artfully to support your point. Apply screen tips for clarity when needed. Avoid clip art completely; it's trite and cheap. Make yourself available for questions from students and always answer within 24 hours. If you can use video, use video of people other than yourself. If you cannot use video, find someone else to co-narrate sections of the training so that it's not all just your same voice for hours.

If you can do all that, and do it all very well, you will have a good online course. Don't forget to pilot it, and be ready to do major revisions if needed. The issue is then also that you must invest the time into creating it well. A 5-hour class if done right will take at least 100 hours of development time, in total. That's just to get it 'good enough'. Trust me, after that, you'll be tinkering with it now and then, but the idea here is to get good content up, not perfect content (or you'll NEVER roll it out).

Once you build it, be ready for lots of skeptical potential students to not commit to taking the course, because of all the bad content they've been exposed to. Their belief that online trainings are boring, disengaged wastes of time will prevent many from experiencing what you've done differently... However, how you market the course will make the difference, there. Also, the process of creating the online content may help you refine, focus, and even deepen your live-training content, so it's never a waste of time.

In preparation for the adventure of creating a quality online course, you'll need to invest in a good headset, but most of all, invest in your skills to lay out and organize the flow of the content, to create a visually appealing presentation, and to use quality software such as Adobe.

I took the online class for AZ which I thought was excellent, they did the powerpoint also. It was a very well done put together class, I didn't just stop there I have taking other online class for OR and Maryland. I go to the range and try to apply want I learn there and practice my skill. I would love thouogh to get into a course that I can farther my skill with a skill instructor which at the first chance I get I will. We also was using the go to meeting software that let you interact with about one or two other student which I had a webcam to see them. Awesome that this is done this way but I know that you can't replace a live instructor to student hands on class I think that this is the next best thing.

I will continue my training always because I am eager to learn in every area I can just to better myself. I am a retired Army military vet. with twenty-eight years of service and when do you stop learning (NEVER). So I'm glad for the online class and if you don't just stop there you can add what you learn online. Thank you for letting me get this out and peace and safety to all.I also wanted to add which was kind of funny one gentlement which was online his wife was in the camera dashcam were in her pj's going back and forth.

 

[adatiowa]

*** AZDSFT I'm a bit confused here. You think a 5 minute tutorial on a specific firearm would be enough to get a Concealed Carry Permit, but not an hour long Hunter Safety course that actually covers the 4 basic safety rules of firearms along with other aspects of firearm use like Sight picture, sight alignment, breathing, trigger control, follow through? Even though this is a "No Permit" State I wish there was a tighter control on training for those that DO want a CCW permit. ***

You apparently missed my point in what I had mentioned.

I said that SOME are doing this and if that is the case why then have such strict regulation for ONLINE carry courses...it would not make sense as I have heard of FFL gun sellers who are also NRA certified doing this.

In no way do I agree with it being done that way however we AGAIN have to realize that based on the 2nd Amendment NO ONE should actually have to take a course unless they want to...which they should want to.

There is nothing in the constitution that states the right to bare arms is limited to OPEN carry only and that concealed requires a permit/license. Furthermore it does state in the same documents that it is ILLEGAL to require a permit/license in order to exercise a fundamental right...so why is there a requirement to being with? No reason...just politics.

For online training there are several ways be it power point or strictly video but of course EVERY instructor I know including myself advocates added live fire training to be proficient.

However with my company we are specific in providing great detail on the flight/fight response (B.A.R.) to students and why traditional platforms often fail because they were designed for range/competition application not self defense and thus important to not only train but train with correct reasoning.

Being a good driver on the road has very limited similarity to being a good driver on a race track...same premise of "driving a car" but different intent of its use!

Same goes for self defense...there are 3 Types:

Traditional Martial Arts: Belts, Kata's, Philosophy and special uniforms (gi) are worn however in most cases there is far to much to learn that in order for it to be useful in some way (least practical) it will take many years of mastery to be at a level where it does more than impress an audience during a demo.

Competitive Martial Arts: Closest resemblance to a street fight is MMA but even then you have belt systems, weight classes, rules, referees, rounds and of course the proverbial option to "submit" your opponent where they tap out. When in a REAL LIFE/DEATH situation would it make sense to train under ideal conditions when its no where to be found on the street?

How does it make sense to be SUPER responsive to someone tapping out that you may actually do it in a real fight because NO ONE rises to the occasion as we simply resort to default training...thus you will likely release the hold that you should not or decide to not hit the groin, eyes, throat with intent to damage and stop a threat far from sporting.

Combative Martial Arts: AKA Self Defense. The real deal. Where you train mostly on various practice dummies because you will work on full force hits to the throat, extreme chin jabs, kicks to groin along with practicing grab and twist and of course eye gouging, biting and tearing off an ear if needed.

That is the REALITY of what the stakes will be when your life is on the line. I have no issue biting my way out of a hold if needed because if I got into that position it is no time to be thinking about "sportsman like conduct" or fairness...I never asked to be attacked and thus its my job to stop the threat if my ability to escape or reason is not available.

I teach basic techniques that are intended to stop an attack from continuing so as to escape/disengage if possible or if necessary incapacitate the threat using lethal forth be it with hands, weapons or other.

Be it a pen, a gun, knife or my bare hands when my life is in jeopardy the only thing that matters is to stop the threat anyway I can when all other options are lost.

That is why it is almost a moot point to have someone learning "breath control, trigger control, sight alignment" which in theory and under ideal conditions at a range are fine...reality based life/death scenario that are common when attacked it makes little sense.

How do you maintain breathe control under the flight/fight response?

You can't. Your not going to control your breathing when your brain dumps various types of chemicals like adrenaline into the body to induce the F/F response which causes rapid breathing and heart rate bmp of over 200+ putting you damn near a heart attack.

In all likely hood breathing stops or is so rapid that hyperventilation occurs and although some degree of breathe control needs to be learned it is not in the same way 99% will teach because your not under the same physiological conditions of a true F/F response.

Sight alignment...how?

When the human body is under the "oh **** response" both eyes will REMAIN OPEN as it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to close an eye during this natural and instinctive response to an attack. Thus the corneas of the eyes flatten out make depth perception skewed and with BOTH eyes open (while in the kill zone) your eyes are NOT ABLE to focus on the front sight or target without seeing blurred or double vision.

Training to overcome that physiological aspect can take weeks-years to master and unless you know when "your oh **** moment" will occur your likely not going to override this and furthermore UNDER the actual F/F response which is not often simulated correctly under ideal training conditions that 99% will be teaching under.

I could go on but simply put one must use a firearm shooting technique that works in harmony with the bodies natural instinctive defense response of the FLIGHT/FIGHT mechanism and train often under controlled but stressful conditions both physically and mentally.

Most instructors do not have the adequate training to do this safely without simunitions much less even offer to tell their students in a conceal carry class the actual conditions they will experience and how to train specifically to compensate.

If the Instructor doesn't know the info themselves they can't pass that knowledge on and thus we have the term "practice makes perfect" which is incorrect.

Perfect practice makes perfect which includes learning the appropriate techniques that should be easy to deploy (much like combative/self defense format of martial arts) where we train in a manner that enhances the bodies f/f response system rather than work completely against it.

My company will actually be implementing/transitioning to combination Online and Live options so that the student learns the bulk of the course online through our videos. 24/7 access allowing learning at their own pace/schedule.

Then, the option of a class where the student will have a chance to LIVE Q&A and overview of video learned curriculum which is identical to live classroom instruction. This way the student spends less time in person to learn what they can easily online and still have the opportunity to get LIVE Instructor led instruction and Q&A

Those wanting additional live fire training (which we always recommend) then purchase that course separately however for those operating states where its required they would have to offer that at some point as well.

That is where instruction is headed and l believe it offers far better results than current training. The ease, convenience of learning mostly online for the theory aspects needed make sense.

It works for so many top universities and corporation so it is proven that it does work. Live fire application if desired/if necessary in some states can then be offered but at least it reduces the time of having to learn it all at once enhancing comprehension over time rather than forced and forget.

Everyone will use what works for them and I agree...Online instructing is not for everyone as it is a different medium and some are just not suited for using it.

The old adage however still remains...people will only remember the first part and last part of what is taught as that is how the human mind retains information in general.

It is also limited to how much it can retain at once and thus long classroom courses do not allow for full comprehension but does work for basic knowledge to spew out on a test immediately afterward. That is not LEARNING...that is simply transference of data to pass a test.

Anyway, great thread and everyone is going to do what works best for them and their STUDENTS...many students respond far better to at your own pace Audio/Video Instruction regardless of it being live or recorded.

The opportunity for them to go over segments to review is key as the LEARNING curve is different for everyone and then offering a LIVE interactive way to get questions and answers would be the finishing touch.

J.

 

[AZSDFT]

NOW I got your point!! lol!! Great response J. and I wish I was a lot closer, and could go through a class or two of yours! I do my absolute best to give the students a clear idea of things they will feel/experience if ever faced with a situation, and try to equate it to things they might have already experienced in their life. Not easy to do all the time, but I do what I can.

As for the statement:
"I said that SOME are doing this and if that is the case why then have such strict regulation for ONLINE carry courses...it would not make sense as I have heard of FFL gun sellers who are also NRA certified doing this.

In no way do I agree with it being done that way however we AGAIN have to realize that based on the 2nd Amendment NO ONE should actually have to take a course unless they want to...which they should want to"

Never thought of it that way, but you are right. Just wish more people WANTED to! Almost everyone that buys a firearm thinks they "know how to shoot" when in actuallity they only know how to "pull the trigger".

 

[GunClasses.Net]

based on the 2nd Amendment NO ONE should actually have to take a course unless they want to...which they should want to"

Right! Well regulated meant "well disciplined/ well trained", not legislated.
Militia was "the whole people" according to George Mason at the VA Constitutional Convention.
People is the same people in the other amendments; no different in the 2nd.
Keep = own, Bear = possess/carry, so the 2nd A would read, in today's verbiage:

Because people are to be well trained and well practiced in the use of firearms, which is necessary for the security of our freedoms, no law shall be made restricting the right of people to own and carry firearms.

Seems like maybe every gun law is struck down by the 2nd A?

 

[GunClasses.Net]

I know that you can't replace a live instructor to student hands on class I think that this is the next best thing.

I would find it a struggle, maybe an impossible one, to create a permit to carry class that can be done over a webex/GoTo meeting/etc. Trainers, in my experience, struggle to engage learners individually in those.

The least engaging medium is a teleconference. We really have no idea if anyone's listening, unless we call them out, individually, and that is very complicated when you have more than a handful of participants; especially participants who do not know one another. I've never tried to deliver a permit course over a teleconference; I don't think I ever will attempt it.

While the classroom is much more engaging, an instructor standing in front of a room of 20 people cannot be sure each student is following along, mentally. The student may make eye contact, but may for large parts of the experience, only be thinking of what to pick up from the store on the way home, the fight with the spouse that morning, or text messages that (s)he's sneaking peeks at. It is largely up to the student whether (s)he engages mentally.

The most individually-engaging training possible is one that solicits the individual student's input and makes them interact or answer questions. A recorded, online training can completely fail if it lacks that... or it can actually succeed in ways that a classroom event cannot, if it's done well. Forcing the student to regularly click, type, etc... and answer questions about content just covered ensures this.

That said, with the right student, it is possible a classroom course is able to give a better experience - assuming that student asks questions and engages personally with the instructor. But a classroom course becomes inefficient to guarantee that when you have more than, say, about a dozen learners. And, as community faculty for a local college, I can attest that even in smaller classes, the quiet ones are sometimes just impossible to read ("anyone home?"). So, for classroom courses, good instructors try to build in activities as much as possible; in particular, small group breakout activities (everyone seems to love those). MN requires, for its permit to carry course, students actually shoot on the range, which is the most ensured interaction. The lecture can be done in person or online.

 

[stingray2100]

I'm going to be a bit generic on the answer because taking an online CCW course is going to be the same thing.

Your taking a class that will show you how to pass the minimum requierments on the test...to put it in other words you get the answers for the questions and learn ZERO real world experience that you may or maynot need in an encounter.

Just think about it..if you ever need to engage a threat to save your life or the life of someone you love...what is going to be your defense? I took the online course and I ACE the test...I should be fine. Right?

It is like that commercial..I'm really smart because I slept at a Holiday Inn!

good luck with that defense, oh I almost forgot...the prosecution will use that agaist you also.

no online training will replace a good human instructor that will provide feeback so you really learn what will save your life.

But we are all adults. You get what you pay for. I guess thousands of people

 

[snatale42]

They go over all the basic info that any state without a live fire requirement would require. The downside is that it's not interactive. I prefer a real class myself, but after taking an online one to see what it was all about it really did go over everything my NRA class went over. The trainer in the one I did WAS an NRA trainer, you just don't get the NRA cert obviously since it was online. My state (VA) does honor them. I have a feeling that more and more states will start excepting them. It's hard to deny them when people are given the ok from state education depts to give college degrees online, just the direction everything is going with technology.

 

[gunscribe]

There is no such thing as an approved on-line course for the NM CHL.

 

[grizzerr]

In Colorado there are several counties not accepting the online classes.

 

[JimTh]

You can become a engineer online also.. Would you want him to build you a bridge?

In order to build a bridge one must become licensed in the stat they want to build the bridge.
The exam in Virginia to become a professional engineer, which gives you the authority to build a bridge, is 16 hours long. 8 hours is taken just before you receive you bachelors degree in engineering from an accredited 4 year college like penn state. If you are proficient enough to pass that exam which covers all of the engineering sciences and takes 8 hours to complete, you become what is known as an engineer in training, EIT. After a minimum of 2 years working under the direct supervision of a licensed engineer and after completing and having approved a 10 page application you may sit for another 8 hour exam to become a licensed engineer. Then and only then can you certify a bridge as being sound enough to build. Anyone getting an online engineering certificate is probably not qualified to design and build my outhouse. There may be some things they can do, certifying construction documents is not one of them. Anyone wanna go through an engineering certification process to carry a gun?

 

[snatale42]

You can become a engineer online also.. Would you want him to build you a bridge?

Your comparing the construction of a bridge and all the highly technical things that are behind it, to load, unload, and don't aim at your face? c'mon now.

 

[adatiowa]

Good thing you don't require a Degree or several years of study to get your DRIVERS LICENSE...just sayin'.

The fact that we have the 2nd Amendment Right means the Constitution allows us to carry without prejudice as it does not stipulate what type of "arms" we are allowed bare much less whether it be OPEN or CONCEALED carry.

There is also supporting documentation that makes it ILLEGAL to require a permit/license to EXERCISE a RIGHT and thus making it a moot point to even make a malicious request to do so.

Obviously law abiding citizens comply with this malicious request so NO...I don't agree at all that it should be treated like an Engineering Degree to GET PAID to build structures.

Just as the Drivers License requirements are pretty low in comparison are you then suggesting that only PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS that take several years of education can then be licensed to drive?

It would be absurd to even consider it just as comparing it as described above.

J

 

[adatiowa]

FYI there are MANY COUNTIES in Colorado that DO accept Online Training same goes for IOWA and many other States.

As instructors we do need to ensure students are asking their County Sheriff prior to taking an Online Course if they will accept it as there are some that don't and depending on the State (IOWA) very inexpensive appeals with a Judge can be done to overturn the Sheriff's decision.

If the STATE has no issue with ONLINE TRAINING and thus accepting it I am not fond of the idea that a County Sheriff can request MORE than what the State sets as requirements.

Some States like Colorado have massive loopholes that give sheriffs these abilities to even revoke a permit easily after its been issued however again in Iowa students choosing Online Training if ever declined do have options (and a case study) to appeal and have the decision overturned in their favor to get the permit.

The fact remains that it is technically ILLEGAL to request someone to get a permit/license to EXERCISE a RIGHT...I'm actually more in awe that more focus on that isn't the concern versus whether someone who is obliging to this ILLEGAL request is doing so in person or online.

Everyone has different learning preference and technology is there for a reason.

Another fact is that just because an Instructor is able to teach RANGE STYLE loading/shooting techniques using Isosceles and Weaver does not mean those are remotely useful for SELF DEFENSE.

My students are taught first hand about the Fight/Flight response in both online/classroom options and why "traditional" shooting platforms FAIL to meet the performance requirements to even allow PROFESSIONAL LE to have a better than 18% Nation Hit Rate in Active Shooter Scenarios within 20ft.

I'm OK with students learning range style shooting if they only plan to shoot at the range or in competition but if the techniques/platforms are failing miserably "in the field" for PROFESSIONALS I don't even need to suggest what the %'s are for Civilians...not worth carrying the gun!

My point...give them the education that meets the needs to REGAIN their 2nd Amendment Right back in their State and if it does not require Live Fire Training and accepts Online Training so be it.

They should still seek additional courses SPECIFIC to self defense shooting anyway as learning range shooting fundamentals is teaching them how to be the PERFECT TARGET and pretending "breath control, trigger control and sight alignment" exist in a Flight/Fight Response when your LIFE is on the line!

I go over some of the basic principles of the Center Axis Relock System in other posts that further dive into why traditional shooting platforms fail far to often and its being proven in blood by professionals far to often.

J.

 

[adatiowa]

When it comes to PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE and TRAINING you need to keep it real...failure to do so will only provide a false sense of security to a student.

There is a REASON why many LE responses when engaging active shooters inside of even 15ft are often leaving MANY innocent bystanders wounded or dead.

Empire State Building is the most recent incident I can think of...16rnds discharged by officers, 7 hit the intended threat and 9 directly/indirectly hit INNOCENT bystanders.

Not acceptable but again...they are getting remarkably HIGH QUALIFICATION SCORES because they are training under ideal conditions and using shooting platforms that EXCEL at the RANGE. Not in the field.

If your not adding adequate movement shooting drills (not the BS competition style move/stop/shoot...literally moving briskly while shooting at your target), increasing mental confusion during training (to add realistic stress) and using shooting techniques that WORK WITH the human physiological response while under "flight/fight stress" or Body Alarm Response your NOT really training for real world or field application.

Its simply a day at the range.