Why is it students are left on their own after the basic courses?

[farsidefan1]

How is this an indictment against instructors? We live in AMERICA. People work for a living and get paid to do so (with some pretty obvious exceptions). Instructors get paid and instruct. If a student wants more training he/she pays for it and gets it. If the student chooses not to do so they certainly have that right.

We call it being responsible for ourselves. New concept? Not really. The framers of our country got it. We don't need no stinkin Government rules defining what we can and can't do any more than they already control. If someone wants more training they can get it, if they don't and it bugs you, well get a life. You don't own/ control them. Shockingly even our President doesn't own us and control our every moment, much as he would like to.

Those who CHOOSE to get more training may do so. They are responsible for themselves.

 

[wolf_fire]

Because training is a lifelong affair. It should be done as long as you carry a gun. Shooting and Defensive tactics are a deteriorating skill. Otherwise the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force and Navy could just do one year of training and say ummmmmmOK I know it all now, I don't need to do this anymore.

But does that mean your skills have to be supervised by some instructor?

If you have learned a skill set you are comfortable with and are practicing to keep your skill set honed, why pay for a course. Go to the range, shoot. At home, dry fire, practice drawing, practice mag changes, etc.

I've never understood how people relied on firearms to keep themselves alive without instructors and with firearms that were horribly inaccurate compared to today's standards, yet today, we must have instructors. This makes no sense to me.

Unless I'm looking for a specific skill set that I want to learn, I see no need for extra instruction. I practice perfectly because perfect practice makes perfect.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Why is it that some of the companies and Instructors feel it is ok to just let their students fend for themselves? How do you just rteach a basic course adn let the students have to make all the decisions after that by themselves?

Sounds like an ad for Obamacare. Some (actually, probably most) students only want to pay for the minimum training they have to in order to get their license. Nothing wrong with running a business that caters to them.

 

[Pir8fan]

You can lead a horse to water........

 

[Rich M]

Ok, the OP only has 4 posts, two are identical complaints about other instructors and... the OP is an instructor.... hmmm... drumming up some business?

Thank GOD Im NOT in NY. Lots of the initial complaint seem to be common sense, well here anyway.

Does anyone assist with writing letters to the Judges? Um, your lawyer?
What about choosing the first firearm, holster and ammo? Friends, salesmen, range dude, family....
What about assisting with which range to choose? Try the 3-4 closest to home
What about their first shots, not everyone is required to "live fire" qualify? Head to local range of choice.

This post feels like an advert.

 

[NavyLCDR]

This post feels like an advert.

It did to me too when I first read it.

 

[wolf_fire]

It did to me too when I first read it.

And the second time in the other thread he started with the same post... :sarcastic:

 

[BC1]

You are correct that there is no written law that says that but in Chicago the Police Chief basically said that everyone who carried in Chicago would be treated like they were a BG! I can not say what NY thinks about legal CC'ers but the commie mayor seems to be very much against everything that we hold dear.

I understand. But we're talking about NYS. And the commie/socialist NYC mayor doesn't matter outside of one city.

 

[cds0699]

Because training is a lifelong affair. It should be done as long as you carry a gun. Shooting and Defensive tactics are a deteriorating skill. Otherwise the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force and Navy could just do one year of training and say ummmmmmOK I know it all now, I don't need to do this anymore.

I do train, probably more than most cops, I just don't need to pay some instructor to do it. I take initiative, I take responsibility in being proficient, and I don't need my hand held every step of the way.

Now with that said, I am quite sure there are people that would benefit from structured ongoing training in a package deal. I am all for freedom of choice and offering a package like is described in the original post is great, it's just not for everyone.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

 

[JWClingan01]

Each person is responsible for themselves and for the consequences of how they choose to use their tools. Guns are certainly no exception.

I offer four different classes, and a free practice clinic at the range once a week. Since the end of the required concealed carry "permit" here, my classes are small and infrequent. Very few students have ever taken the time or trouble to attend the weekly shooting clinic. It is the gun owner's responsibility to get whatever training they think they need.

I am responsible for the accuracy of the NRA instructional material I provide during the class, whichever one the student takes. I am not responsible for how well they learn it, how they use it, or their subsequent activities. I avoid, as much as possible, giving information or instruction on "the law" because that is also the responsibility of the student. They need to research it and learn it from the "official" sources. I don't want anyone to come back and say they went to jail or had a problem because what I taught was different than what they actually encountered. Since I don't KNOW what they might do or encounter, it would be seriously stupid for me to give them any such excuse to blame me.

Thats an interesting you point you raise as to how responsible your clients are after the completion of instruction; specifically the legal side. Here (Ohio) we are required to admin a 12 hour course for the purpose of the CCW requirements. Basic Pistol (8) Range Qual (2) and Reviewing the CCW handbook/laws as presented in a book on the Ohio AG site. I have always been reserved on the legal side of the instruction and have on occasion been able to bring a sheriff or attorney into the class to cover that. I don't care for how the state makes us list the verbiage on the certificate where we (the instructor) "attests to the course being compliant with ORC..." which includes the 2 hour legal lesson. It can perceived that the state puts the "follow-up", at least for the legal familiarization, on the instructor in the beginning of the process.

Also, like you, once they check the box to obtain their CCW no one comes back for any additional range time or instruction...