------------------------------------------------
Intro for P&S audience: This class was simply astonishing to me that it was an NRA course. Apparently, the NRA is starting to come to terms with just how far behind the curve they are, and this is an attempt to address it. It may be a signal that the future of NRA training is about to change significantly.
-------------------------------------------------
More and more, I'm starting to understand that I'm a bit of a "training junkie." And in the introductions for this class, we were asked "What do we hope to gain from this course?" My response was, "I want to learn anything I can, from anyone I can. And, I'd like to get faster and more accurate." This drive to learn more and get better has turned me into a training junkie. I train everywhere and every time I can afford to do so. I think that makes me an addict.
The general flow of the course was, being an NRA course, for me, shocking. Many in my circle are absolutely aware of how much of a running joke comes with the title "NRA Instructor." I am one. And in certain circles, the title hangs about me like an albatross. But I will say this. If this course is indicative of a direction shift in the NRA, times are a-going to change. Yes indeed.
Both days of the two day course started with academic discussion of safety, preparedness, awareness, and a large and critical dedication to defensive mindset. And when I say defensive mindset, I truly mean it in the sense of every other top-tier national-level course I've ever attended. Again, this being an NRA course, I could hardly believe my ears. So much of my contact with NRA instruction has involved poking holes in bambi or paper. Not this course. This course was about reality. Defensive reality.
The classroom time rolled through academic discussion of safety and shooting concepts, followed by real-life video of deadly force encounters (more on this later). The class then progressed to the range and running drills, all designed to maximize the use of time, distance, and accuracy.
I'll now split the AAR into pros and cons. I'll start with the pros, next the cons, and then a net summary.
Pro: The classroom/academic discussion and analysis of real-world incidents, and breaking them down into terms of preparedness, awareness, and mindset was outstanding. The class watched graphic real-world incidents, and broke them down (admittedly in a monday-morning quarterback role) under the lens of those three principles. I found myself shocked to be watching people get shot in an NRA course. This is what is needed. People who carry for defense need to understand the realities of the world. And here was some reality. In high-def.
Pro: The academic discussion of "post-incident" actions was excellent. What to do. What to not do. This is something a lot people who carry guns daily simply don't think about. And handling this stage of a shooting incorrectly could lead to prison.
Pro: Grip. A huge portion of the discussion regarding shooting fast and accurately hinged around grip. This was my number one takeaway from the course. Another national-level instructor has been trying to beat grip into my head off-and-on for a couple of months now. For some reason, I wasn't quite getting it. But in this course, beause there was so much emphasis put on grip, I decided to really focus on it during live fire time. Interestingly, we ran a diagnostic drill (it's a real bear) that I've run three or four times in the past. By implementing the grip techniques taught in this course, I saw a 30% improvement in my score. 30%. That is a HUGE leap at my level. Win. Pure win.
Pro: The course emphasized heavy use of objective metrics on EVERYTHING. Very few drills were run (literally from the first drill) without a shot timer and a scorecard. EVERYTHING had metrics. Everything was measurable. And this is something I've seen the top-tier training community screaming for a year. And here it was. In spades.
Pro: Academic discussion of conflict avoidance and mindset. The videos really drove home the importance of mindset, too. We could see, in full color, shooting incidents where mindset was a huge benefit to a person's survival, and where lack of it clearly cost them their lives.
Pro: Integration of competition training and defensive training. I dabble a little in competition shooting, and know well it's value and cross-over to defensive shooting. And if we were to draw a venn diagram with a competition circle and a defensive circle, this course taught the competition side perfectly in the area where the circles intersect. I have never experienced this before in a defensive course. And had I been warned up front that it was going to happen, I probably would have curled my nose and started grumbling about gun racers and all the terrible tactics employed. But it turned out, the competition-related instruction actually dovetailed perfectly with the defensive shooting. As an instructor, I could not have done that. It was unique, and it was valuable.
Pro: Excellent instruction (and shooting drills) driving home the importance of time, distance, and accuracy.
Con (sorta): The course was run in a "cold range" manner. Which meant, we rarely had hot guns in the holsters. There was a lot of time spent on "unload and show clear," where instructors verified clear weapons at the end of shooting a drill. Initially, this drove me nuts. I'm used to "big boy rules" in classes, wherein guns are always hot in the holsters, and students are trusted to keep them in the holster until it's time to shoot stuff. But then it dawned on me. I have never, ever, been in an "intro" defensive course before. Many years ago, I received personal training from an assistant instructor to a known national level guy, and that waived me through the "defensive I" course, straight to "defensive II." I admit that it makes sense, in retrospect, that in an open-enrollment class with completely unvetted students, to run the range that way, at least until everyone in the class has demonstrated safe gun handling. So, it's a con for me. For everyone else, no, it's probably a pro.
Con: There were some minor terminology differences to which I'm accustomed with regard to reloads. What I term an "emergency" reload, was called a "speed reload." What I call a "speed reload," was also called a "speed reload." We did agree on "tactical reload," and emphasis on it was (in my mind appropriately) minimal. This is a really minor con.
Con: The instructor taught an administrative method of "unloading" that bothered me. It is geared towards the "unload and show clear" administrative procedure. Students were told to cant the gun 45 degrees, hit the mag release, and with the support hand pull the mag free. Then, they would use the "slingshot" method to pull the slide back and show clear. I was concerned that this could build unsound procedural memory, and develop into a training scar. In my view, even administrative unloads should be done in a proper defensive/combat method to help build correct muscle memory.
Con: Use of cover discussion was minimal, and every drill we ran involved "crowding cover," which is a common criticism of utilizing competition as training. The appropriate use of angles and distance with cover was not discussed either while shooting, in the classroom, or in a situational awareness context.
Summary: I'm not sure of the details, but I believe this course was the tail end of a pilot program, set to go fully live very soon. It was astonishing to me that this was an NRA course. The instruction on shooting fundamentals, speed, accuracy, technique, and the realities of defensive shooting were top notch. The *appropriate* blending of competition instruction was excellent. It is my hope that this is a signal of a real shift in mentality with the NRA. It's my hope that the days of NRA instruction being a running joke among shooters are soon to become an embarrassing past "dark time" in NRA training history. I was a little advanced for the course in that I am capable of far more complex shooting drills and scenarios. But even stating that, I learned, and I improved. In my opinion, this course was an outstanding "first real defensive course" for anyone.
Intro for P&S audience: This class was simply astonishing to me that it was an NRA course. Apparently, the NRA is starting to come to terms with just how far behind the curve they are, and this is an attempt to address it. It may be a signal that the future of NRA training is about to change significantly.
-------------------------------------------------
More and more, I'm starting to understand that I'm a bit of a "training junkie." And in the introductions for this class, we were asked "What do we hope to gain from this course?" My response was, "I want to learn anything I can, from anyone I can. And, I'd like to get faster and more accurate." This drive to learn more and get better has turned me into a training junkie. I train everywhere and every time I can afford to do so. I think that makes me an addict.
The general flow of the course was, being an NRA course, for me, shocking. Many in my circle are absolutely aware of how much of a running joke comes with the title "NRA Instructor." I am one. And in certain circles, the title hangs about me like an albatross. But I will say this. If this course is indicative of a direction shift in the NRA, times are a-going to change. Yes indeed.
Both days of the two day course started with academic discussion of safety, preparedness, awareness, and a large and critical dedication to defensive mindset. And when I say defensive mindset, I truly mean it in the sense of every other top-tier national-level course I've ever attended. Again, this being an NRA course, I could hardly believe my ears. So much of my contact with NRA instruction has involved poking holes in bambi or paper. Not this course. This course was about reality. Defensive reality.
The classroom time rolled through academic discussion of safety and shooting concepts, followed by real-life video of deadly force encounters (more on this later). The class then progressed to the range and running drills, all designed to maximize the use of time, distance, and accuracy.
I'll now split the AAR into pros and cons. I'll start with the pros, next the cons, and then a net summary.
Pro: The classroom/academic discussion and analysis of real-world incidents, and breaking them down into terms of preparedness, awareness, and mindset was outstanding. The class watched graphic real-world incidents, and broke them down (admittedly in a monday-morning quarterback role) under the lens of those three principles. I found myself shocked to be watching people get shot in an NRA course. This is what is needed. People who carry for defense need to understand the realities of the world. And here was some reality. In high-def.
Pro: The academic discussion of "post-incident" actions was excellent. What to do. What to not do. This is something a lot people who carry guns daily simply don't think about. And handling this stage of a shooting incorrectly could lead to prison.
Pro: Grip. A huge portion of the discussion regarding shooting fast and accurately hinged around grip. This was my number one takeaway from the course. Another national-level instructor has been trying to beat grip into my head off-and-on for a couple of months now. For some reason, I wasn't quite getting it. But in this course, beause there was so much emphasis put on grip, I decided to really focus on it during live fire time. Interestingly, we ran a diagnostic drill (it's a real bear) that I've run three or four times in the past. By implementing the grip techniques taught in this course, I saw a 30% improvement in my score. 30%. That is a HUGE leap at my level. Win. Pure win.
Pro: The course emphasized heavy use of objective metrics on EVERYTHING. Very few drills were run (literally from the first drill) without a shot timer and a scorecard. EVERYTHING had metrics. Everything was measurable. And this is something I've seen the top-tier training community screaming for a year. And here it was. In spades.
Pro: Academic discussion of conflict avoidance and mindset. The videos really drove home the importance of mindset, too. We could see, in full color, shooting incidents where mindset was a huge benefit to a person's survival, and where lack of it clearly cost them their lives.
Pro: Integration of competition training and defensive training. I dabble a little in competition shooting, and know well it's value and cross-over to defensive shooting. And if we were to draw a venn diagram with a competition circle and a defensive circle, this course taught the competition side perfectly in the area where the circles intersect. I have never experienced this before in a defensive course. And had I been warned up front that it was going to happen, I probably would have curled my nose and started grumbling about gun racers and all the terrible tactics employed. But it turned out, the competition-related instruction actually dovetailed perfectly with the defensive shooting. As an instructor, I could not have done that. It was unique, and it was valuable.
Pro: Excellent instruction (and shooting drills) driving home the importance of time, distance, and accuracy.
Con (sorta): The course was run in a "cold range" manner. Which meant, we rarely had hot guns in the holsters. There was a lot of time spent on "unload and show clear," where instructors verified clear weapons at the end of shooting a drill. Initially, this drove me nuts. I'm used to "big boy rules" in classes, wherein guns are always hot in the holsters, and students are trusted to keep them in the holster until it's time to shoot stuff. But then it dawned on me. I have never, ever, been in an "intro" defensive course before. Many years ago, I received personal training from an assistant instructor to a known national level guy, and that waived me through the "defensive I" course, straight to "defensive II." I admit that it makes sense, in retrospect, that in an open-enrollment class with completely unvetted students, to run the range that way, at least until everyone in the class has demonstrated safe gun handling. So, it's a con for me. For everyone else, no, it's probably a pro.
Con: There were some minor terminology differences to which I'm accustomed with regard to reloads. What I term an "emergency" reload, was called a "speed reload." What I call a "speed reload," was also called a "speed reload." We did agree on "tactical reload," and emphasis on it was (in my mind appropriately) minimal. This is a really minor con.
Con: The instructor taught an administrative method of "unloading" that bothered me. It is geared towards the "unload and show clear" administrative procedure. Students were told to cant the gun 45 degrees, hit the mag release, and with the support hand pull the mag free. Then, they would use the "slingshot" method to pull the slide back and show clear. I was concerned that this could build unsound procedural memory, and develop into a training scar. In my view, even administrative unloads should be done in a proper defensive/combat method to help build correct muscle memory.
Con: Use of cover discussion was minimal, and every drill we ran involved "crowding cover," which is a common criticism of utilizing competition as training. The appropriate use of angles and distance with cover was not discussed either while shooting, in the classroom, or in a situational awareness context.
Summary: I'm not sure of the details, but I believe this course was the tail end of a pilot program, set to go fully live very soon. It was astonishing to me that this was an NRA course. The instruction on shooting fundamentals, speed, accuracy, technique, and the realities of defensive shooting were top notch. The *appropriate* blending of competition instruction was excellent. It is my hope that this is a signal of a real shift in mentality with the NRA. It's my hope that the days of NRA instruction being a running joke among shooters are soon to become an embarrassing past "dark time" in NRA training history. I was a little advanced for the course in that I am capable of far more complex shooting drills and scenarios. But even stating that, I learned, and I improved. In my opinion, this course was an outstanding "first real defensive course" for anyone.