View Full Version : The next Instructor Zero?
HCountyGuy
04-09-2016, 01:16 AM
So as I lurk about the book of faces, I see one of my buddies share a video from a guy named Baret Fawbush. I'll just let you watch it:
http://youtu.be/O6SxVsxZuxg
Finding this slightly amusing, I figured I'd do some digging and see what other chuckle-worthy videos he may have put together. I came to find his YouTube channel and in it, numerous videos of him showing off his rapid draw-and-shoot abilities.
While his speed does merit some awe, his numerous videos dedicated to showboating his quick-draw abilities strike me as gimmicky. I couldn't help but feel I was watching an easier to understand version of Instructor Zero.
https://www.facebook.com/truexodus/videos/996550443714199/
996550443714199
That video directly above, was just pure show-offy nonsense that should've earned a reprimand from whoever was running the FATS machine.
Is it just me being an ass?
Hunter Osborne
04-09-2016, 01:43 AM
Is it really worth worrying about whether or not your feelings about him are justified?
Drang
04-09-2016, 02:42 AM
Hey, this is the 21st Century, we're all about the feelings!
HCountyGuy
04-09-2016, 02:50 AM
Is it really worth worrying about whether or not your feelings about him are justified?
Not really, was interested in the community's take on the guy.
My opinion is worth about what you paid for it.
Trooper224
04-09-2016, 05:27 AM
Remind me never to invite him over for fireworks on the 4th of July.
Chuck Haggard
04-09-2016, 05:30 AM
I wish people would stop linking and clicking on retard videos, they want the clicks, they makes money off of the clicks. It feeds the retardery.
This guy is obviously much better than Instructor Zero. Being able to dodge bottle rockets or as I am sure it is supposed to be a simulation of dodging bullets is an invaluable skill. The guy who got his leg blown off shooting at a riding lawnmover full of Tannerite is a prime example of someone who definitely should have had this training. Imagine how casualty rate would drop if everyone were required to learn this skill set. I'm thinking of the possibilities and maybe no one would even need firearms anymore because you could dodge and close then finish off the person shooting at you with your knife.
As I pointed out on FB recently, he definitely has the speed reholstering down.
Clobbersaurus
04-09-2016, 09:24 AM
It has all the hallmarks of derp:
1)Shooting fast on close steel.
2)Breaking 90 at 4 seconds into video.
I find him very refreshing. He's a pastor and states he's not Leo or former military. The video linked above is what made him famous. His big thing is shooting from retention. His classes fill up extremely fast. He claims "half of all self defense shootings happen within 5-10 feet" so he trains extensively on that.
Instructor zero recently uploaded a video of a headshot from owb in .86. Baret did it from concealment and turning 180 in .85. Go check out his other videos. He's very impressive.
In regards to the above video he said he did it because he wanted to simulate being shot at. He also has tons of videos of him doing simunition classes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Was that video from instructor zero the first take cold? If you can't answer that then you really can't assess his skill set. If a person doesn't know anything everything sounds good and reasonable. I didn't come up with this originally but if Instructor Zero is so good why hasn't he demonstrated his skill set publicly? IE at a venue with other known instructors or possibly writers or in a competition format?
I find him very refreshing. He's a pastor and states he's not Leo or former military. The video linked above is what made him famous. His big thing is shooting from retention. His classes fill up extremely fast. He claims "half of all self defense shootings happen within 5-10 feet" so he trains extensively on that.
Instructor zero recently uploaded a video of a headshot from owb in .86. Baret did it from concealment and turning 180 in .85. Go check out his other videos. He's very impressive.
In regards to the above video he said he did it because he wanted to simulate being shot at. He also has tons of videos of him doing simunition classes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'l add one other thing that just occurred to me. Lets take the preacher, pit him against any of the people on this forum who make their living teaching these things or train extensively with instructors known and approved by this forum and see how well that presentation to retention within 5 feet works out. My bet is not on the preacher.
I find him very refreshing. He's a pastor and states he's not Leo or former military. The video linked above is what made him famous. His big thing is shooting from retention. His classes fill up extremely fast. He claims "half of all self defense shootings happen within 5-10 feet" so he trains extensively on that.
Instructor zero recently uploaded a video of a headshot from owb in .86. Baret did it from concealment and turning 180 in .85. Go check out his other videos. He's very impressive.
In regards to the above video he said he did it because he wanted to simulate being shot at. He also has tons of videos of him doing simunition classes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'l add one other thing that just occurred to me. Lets take the preacher, pit him against any of the people on this forum who make their living teaching these things or train extensively with instructors known and approved by this forum and see how well that presentation to retention within 5 feet works out. My bet is not on the preacher.
Fawbush demonstrates his skills regularly. He does periscopes all the time which are live. Not to mention he teaches classes.
I'm not going to discredit the instructors on this forum. It's not a competition. He never claimed to be better than them.
I don't get why people are bashing Fawbush without knowing anything about him. They see one video and that's what they get their impression from. He has a YouTube channel, Facebook, Instagram and periscope channel. Judge him for all his work.
Was that video from instructor zero the first take cold? If you can't answer that then you really can't assess his skill set. If a person doesn't know anything everything sounds good and reasonable. I didn't come up with this originally but if Instructor Zero is so good why hasn't he demonstrated his skill set publicly? IE at a venue with other known instructors or possibly writers or in a competition format?
I do not know on instructor zero but Fawbush uploaded his video and he included the misses. It took him two tries. Not saying he can replicate it but I still find it impressive because I don't possess those skills.
I agree that we cannot base our opinion on one persons skill from a group of video clips. We do not know how many times they filmed it or tried. I'm curious if instructor zero ever holds classes?
Kyle Reese
04-09-2016, 02:50 PM
I find him very refreshing. He's a pastor and states he's not Leo or former military. The video linked above is what made him famous. His big thing is shooting from retention. His classes fill up extremely fast. He claims "half of all self defense shootings happen within 5-10 feet" so he trains extensively on that.
Instructor zero recently uploaded a video of a headshot from owb in .86. Baret did it from concealment and turning 180 in .85. Go check out his other videos. He's very impressive.
In regards to the above video he said he did it because he wanted to simulate being shot at. He also has tons of videos of him doing simunition classes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for making my afternoon. I haven't laughed this much in a while.
Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk
This guy is obviously much better than Instructor Zero. Being able to dodge bottle rockets or as I am sure it is supposed to be a simulation of dodging bullets is an invaluable skill. The guy who got his leg blown off shooting at a riding lawnmover full of Tannerite is a prime example of someone who definitely should have had this training. Imagine how casualty rate would drop if everyone were required to learn this skill set. I'm thinking of the possibilities and maybe no one would even need firearms anymore because you could dodge and close then finish off the person shooting at you with your knife.
I heard Alias is signing "Boris The Bullet Dodger" to teach this skillset.
Thanks for making my afternoon. I haven't laughed this much in a while.
Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk
No problem.
HopetonBrown
04-09-2016, 04:19 PM
Being able to dodge bottle rockets or as I am sure it is supposed to be a simulation of dodging bullets is an invaluable skill.
I see it as him coming up with a way to add pressure while staying on your sights. I don't think I'll be trying it any time soon, but it's a novel execution.
Judge him for all his work.
It has all the hallmarks of derp:
1)Shooting fast on close steel.
2)Breaking 90 at 4 seconds into video.
His classes fill up extremely fast. He's very impressive. He also has tons of videos of him doing simunition classes.
his quick-draw abilities strike me as gimmicky.
was interested in the community's take on the guy.
I still find it impressive because I don't possess those skills.
Hey Firefighterguy and Highcountryguy, There are lots of good instructors on this forum. People whose training and credentials are vetted. If you ask someone here will point you in the right direction for training in your area.
Ask yourself, if this guy has no credentials, and you haven't presented any, a resume so to speak where did he get the experience to teach?
And if he doesn't have the credentials then is what he is teaching of dubious value? Even worse is it tactically unsound leaving you unprepared for a real life violent encounter ?
Is it a training experience that is in a safe environment while it is being conducted.
I read that he teaches. It looks like is is from Indiana. So far I have not been able to locate a class listing, but I would be willing to go check his stuff out.
TiroFijo
04-09-2016, 05:04 PM
I wish people would stop linking and clicking on retard videos, they want the clicks, they makes money off of the clicks. It feeds the retardery.
THIS.
Now a question for Chuck and other SME: how important really is a blazing time from retention? No doubt one needs decent handling skills, but is struggling to get below 1.2 second or so worth the effort?
It seems to me that for most people, and most situations, the awareness and decision loop is much more important, as is making no fumbles/mistakes in the draw.
Hey Firefighterguy and Highcountryguy, There are lots of good instructors on this forum. People whose training and credentials are vetted. If you ask someone here will point you in the right direction for training in your area.
Ask yourself, if this guy has no credentials, and you haven't presented any, a resume so to speak where did he get the experience to teach?
And if he doesn't have the credentials then is what he is teaching of dubious value? Even worse is it tactically unsound leaving you unprepared for a real life violent encounter ?
Is it a training experience that is in a safe environment while it is being conducted.
What credentials are you speaking of? I'm just curious. I want to know what to look for in an instructor.
I am not an SME So I am going to give you an example, I am sure there will be more replies forthcoming by people who are much more qualified to speak than me.
http://rangemaster.com/about/tom-givens/
What credentials are you speaking of? I'm just curious. I want to know what to look for in an instructor.
http://youtu.be/LDXjk6itaIw
http://youtu.be/nH1HioAHPW4
Would love to hear thoughts from you all on these videos? Is what he's doing wrong?
There's a culture out there that I call the "Instagram" culture. Guys post pics of their gold barrel glocks with see through magazines. Also people upload 8 second videos of themselves shooting and it looks incredible. But I don't want to fall prey to everything they are selling. Meaning, yes they have skill but are they teaching proper skills? I don't know that's why I ask. There's so much out there it's very difficult to discern what's good teaching. That's scary for an inexperienced guy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nephrology
04-09-2016, 07:23 PM
I can't say that some of the things that he does makes very much sense, but he's a pretty decent shooter. Probably wouldn't pay for a class with him, but I gotta give credit where credit is due. He'd probably clean me out at a local IDPA/USPSA match.
I don't see any reason to be attacking this guy on the internet.
45dotACP
04-09-2016, 08:25 PM
Hey, this is America...he can do what he wants. He obviously has some modicum of skill and doesn't seem to be too...well preachy...about any dumbass dogma as far as gunwork is concerned.
I guess I don't get the indignation. Or am I the only one who ever shot bottle rockets at the occasional friend? :D
BehindBlueI's
04-09-2016, 08:40 PM
I've held off commenting because I wanted to mull it over a bit.
I get what he's trying to do with the fireworks. To me, that's where Simunitions comes in to play. Flashing and noise is great...but getting hurt makes memories stick. The pain reinforcement of getting hit sticks with you and makes you really respect the opposing force. I know playing with lasers in the Army getting killed was "meh, I can take my helmet off and rest" but getting hit with a paintball and peeling back a bit of skin at the Academy was more "DAMN IT, I got hit, shouldn't do that again."
The guy seems like he's well ahead of most gun handlers in terms of shooting ability. I don't know, or care enough to look in to, his take on tactics and techniques. I will just say that as a generalized statement when the butcher, baker, and candlestick maker decide they are self defense instructors (vs shooting instructors) I would ask and pay attention to the claims of how they know what they know, how they've vetted the techniques, etc. Shooting is an important part of gun fighting...but it's only a part and I can 100% guarantee you that the best shooter doesn't always win.
Eyesquared
04-10-2016, 01:53 PM
http://youtu.be/LDXjk6itaIw
http://youtu.be/nH1HioAHPW4
Would love to hear thoughts from you all on these videos? Is what he's doing wrong?
There's a culture out there that I call the "Instagram" culture. Guys post pics of their gold barrel glocks with see through magazines. Also people upload 8 second videos of themselves shooting and it looks incredible. But I don't want to fall prey to everything they are selling. Meaning, yes they have skill but are they teaching proper skills? I don't know that's why I ask. There's so much out there it's very difficult to discern what's good teaching. That's scary for an inexperienced guy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With all due respect to Mr. Fawbush, it seems like his approach to the retention position differs pretty seriously from the approach demonstrated by many of the credible instructors here like Craig Douglas, Paul Sharp, or Cecil Burch. Personally I don't particularly care to learn about retention shooting from someone who shoots well but has no martial arts experience, because "shooters" (using this term to refer to gun folks with little to no H2H training) tend to focus more on shooting fast A-zone hits and not enough on protecting their heads, protecting their guns, and staying on their feet in a fight. Mr. Fawbush demonstrates a retention position that I'm sure gives him good fast chest hits but it appears quite unsafe to stiff-arm someone from that position, and his backwards lean puts him at risk of tumbling tail over teakettle if his assailant presses the attack. Also, using the support hand to clear the cover garment for a draw to retention makes a lot of assumptions about your assailant not being fast enough to hit you or stuff the draw.
I don't really know jack shit about this stuff beyond what I've learned from reading on this and other forums, but it seems to me that retention shooting is an element of H2H fighting, and therefore when it comes to choosing instructors to teach retention shooting, I'm looking for fighting related credentials moreso than shooting credentials. I'm open to correction if I got anything wrong. To be honest I'm very hesitant to post about this because of my inexperience, but I think this is information that is valuable even if I'm only passing it secondhand. You can find this kind of information straight from the relevant instructors quite easily.
Wondering Beard
04-10-2016, 04:15 PM
http://youtu.be/LDXjk6itaIw
http://youtu.be/nH1HioAHPW4
Would love to hear thoughts from you all on these videos? Is what he's doing wrong?
Short version (sorry I'm in the middle of something and can only but keep it short): he has a gun only solution to a tactical problem where it may be the worse answer.
Doc_Glock
04-10-2016, 04:18 PM
He exposes tons of people to the fun of shooting who otherwise would be ignorant.
He's crazy fast. He is having a good time shooting and it is attractive.
He is safe except for a tendency to speed holster.
He works hard at his IG feed.
I find any of that hard to criticize.
With all due respect to Mr. Fawbush, it seems like his approach to the retention position differs pretty seriously from the approach demonstrated by many of the credible instructors here like Craig Douglas, Paul Sharp, or Cecil Burch. Personally I don't particularly care to learn about retention shooting from someone who shoots well but has no martial arts experience, because "shooters" (using this term to refer to gun folks with little to no H2H training) tend to focus more on shooting fast A-zone hits and not enough on protecting their heads, protecting their guns, and staying on their feet in a fight. Mr. Fawbush demonstrates a retention position that I'm sure gives him good fast chest hits but it appears quite unsafe to stiff-arm someone from that position, and his backwards lean puts him at risk of tumbling tail over teakettle if his assailant presses the attack. Also, using the support hand to clear the cover garment for a draw to retention makes a lot of assumptions about your assailant not being fast enough to hit you or stuff the draw.
I don't really know jack shit about this stuff beyond what I've learned from reading on this and other forums, but it seems to me that retention shooting is an element of H2H fighting, and therefore when it comes to choosing instructors to teach retention shooting, I'm looking for fighting related credentials moreso than shooting credentials. I'm open to correction if I got anything wrong. To be honest I'm very hesitant to post about this because of my inexperience, but I think this is information that is valuable even if I'm only passing it secondhand. You can find this kind of information straight from the relevant instructors quite easily.
You are not incorrect. I will say though that after watching a number of his video's, he does seem aware of the "proper" combative retention position and states that it may be the correct type of retention shooting to use sometimes. One of my problems with his spiel is his statements of fact that 90% of deadly force encounters occur between 1-9 feet. To me that ranks right up there with those who claim the same about "low light" encounters. To be fair though, there is a lot of disagreement on these subjects even among the informed.
I've watched a few of his videos. I can always find something to criticize, like the safety of the fireworks video and speed reholstering. Overall, he's is far better than most local trainers. He's able to convey his message without unnecessary profanity, which I appreciate. From what I've seen, he has far more positives than negatives.
Being overly critical of everyone else gets old.
I wish I had some of his speed.
With all due respect to Mr. Fawbush, it seems like his approach to the retention position differs pretty seriously from the approach demonstrated by many of the credible instructors here like Craig Douglas, Paul Sharp, or Cecil Burch. Personally I don't particularly care to learn about retention shooting from someone who shoots well but has no martial arts experience, because "shooters" (using this term to refer to gun folks with little to no H2H training) tend to focus more on shooting fast A-zone hits and not enough on protecting their heads, protecting their guns, and staying on their feet in a fight. Mr. Fawbush demonstrates a retention position that I'm sure gives him good fast chest hits but it appears quite unsafe to stiff-arm someone from that position, and his backwards lean puts him at risk of tumbling tail over teakettle if his assailant presses the attack. Also, using the support hand to clear the cover garment for a draw to retention makes a lot of assumptions about your assailant not being fast enough to hit you or stuff the draw.
I don't really know jack shit about this stuff beyond what I've learned from reading on this and other forums, but it seems to me that retention shooting is an element of H2H fighting, and therefore when it comes to choosing instructors to teach retention shooting, I'm looking for fighting related credentials moreso than shooting credentials. I'm open to correction if I got anything wrong. To be honest I'm very hesitant to post about this because of my inexperience, but I think this is information that is valuable even if I'm only passing it secondhand. You can find this kind of information straight from the relevant instructors quite easily.
What he's doing might not be what Craig teaches (which is also what I practice), but it is a commonly accepted method for retention shooting and is taught by LE agencies, including both of the LE basic firearms programs I've been through.
Might not be your favored method, but it doesn't really qualify in my mind as a reason to join in some dogpile thread on the guy.
Short version (sorry I'm in the middle of something and can only but keep it short): he has a gun only solution to a tactical problem where it may be the worse answer.
How on earth can you make that judgement based off of two videos of him shooting drills?
I've watched a few of his videos. I can always find something to criticize, like the safety of the fireworks video and speed reholstering. Overall, he's is far better than most local trainers. He's able to convey his message without unnecessary profanity, which I appreciate. From what I've seen, he has far more positives than negatives.
Being overly critical of everyone else gets old.
I wish I had some of his speed.
I agree.
Watching another one of his videos. I actually like the way he speaks to people and his teaching method.
Just so I don't keep editing the same post........
.....I'm watching another video now.
He's a staunch advocate for performance based training, objectively measuring performance, admitting to/knowing your performance cold versus performance after rehearsing, annoying his wife by routinely practicing draws/dryfire in the house, and his short spiel on why we need to be fast makes me think he took a course or two from Todd.
Yeah. Let's pile on him and ostracize him, because noob.
right.
markp
04-10-2016, 07:53 PM
Baret's latest FB post
"I see a lot of people who have taken it upon themselves to begin training for up close and personal contact drills, shooting from retention, and under stress of timers. This is a good thing. But it's only a good thing if we lay a solid foundation from which the fundamentals are built upon. A lot of people want to be fast and I think that is a noble thing to want to accomplish while shooting anything. The reality is that the consistency does not come from a shaky foundation built upon the desire to go fast, but the discipline of going slow and being intentional and deliberate. When you learned how to walk up steps you did so one foot at a time. When you learned to run, you started slow or fell trying. If you want to incorporate movement, shooting from retention, and overall defensive and dynamic movement to your training, please go slow. Not only for your safety but also for the purpose of training and getting those movements into your autonomic memory. I strongly recommend you take a class from a professional on fundamental training and close retention shooting before you attempt anything like you see here.l"
Looks to me like his head is in the right place, ymmv.
Clobbersaurus
04-10-2016, 09:42 PM
He's crazy fast. I'll give him that.
orionz06
04-11-2016, 05:28 AM
He'd probably clean me out at a local IDPA/USPSA match.
He's busy that weekend.
rob_s
04-11-2016, 05:49 AM
He exposes tons of people to the fun of shooting who otherwise would be ignorant.
He's crazy fast. He is having a good time shooting and it is attractive.
He is safe except for a tendency to speed holster.
He works hard at his IG feed.
I find any of that hard to criticize.
The shooting community is interesting. Having certified real-world experience is a requirement to be an instructor teaching gun fighting, until your favorite instructor lacks said real-world experience in which case having real-world experience is not required.
rob_s
04-11-2016, 05:52 AM
You are not incorrect. I will say though that after watching a number of his video's, he does seem aware of the "proper" combative retention position and states that it may be the correct type of retention shooting to use sometimes. One of my problems with his spiel is his statements of fact that 90% of deadly force encounters occur between 1-9 feet. To me that ranks right up there with those who claim the same about "low light" encounters. To be fair though, there is a lot of disagreement on these subjects even among the informed.
Ken Hackathorn says something similar about deadly force encounters and then spends two days training at that distance (or, did when I took his class).
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my post above. Ken says it and everyone takes it as gospel, some preacher with a flashy metube video says it and it's all wrong.
I watched all three linked videos. The first one is stupid, and is the kind of stuff that amateurs do. Someone else will copy it and get hurt. I think he is trying to think smartly about training, and then executing poorly.
The other two videos were much more interesting. Too fast to really say too much about them, but he seems to have solid technique and except for his reholstering, he seems to be safe.
There is no question that he is fast, and seems to be consistent. Seems like a decent guy too.
Personally, I think that he is working on a hardware solution to software problems (so to speak), but I have no idea how much time and effort he spends on that stuff, so I can't say anything too intelligent. It is just a short clip, not a dissertation on all aspects of self defense.
I think that civilians are perfectly qualified to teach self defense, if they have a relatively long history of high level training and ability. It's not SWAT stuff and it is pretty relevant to everyone's personal life. Some guys are able to think very well about this stuff, and when you combine that with really good training/research/practice, things will probably work out fine. Experience is always better to have, but sometimes the wrong lessons are taken from individual experiences. If he was writing for Operator magazine, I could see the disconnect.
As far as the speed and skill shown, like I said, he seems to have good technique and is a fast guy. The targets are at like 3-5 feet though, so let's not pretend this level of skill is unheard of. I don't think I could shoot three times in 1 sec at that distance, but i know I can do 2. I almost never do that though, because I really don't favor drawing my gun at that distance.
The best statistics that I am aware of, talk about officer line of duty deaths. I have never seen any that address civilian fights.
If he's being safe (which he is 2 out of 3 videos here) and he's not a jerk, I say more power to him.
Wondering Beard
04-11-2016, 01:08 PM
How on earth can you make that judgement based off of two videos of him shooting drills?
Because I'm only responding to the videos. The question was asked what is he doing wrong in the videos shown, my response is that it presents a gun only solution to the problem. I have no idea what else he does or does not teach and I certainly wouldn't presume to say he only presents gun solutions in all his teachings, but in the two videos that's the problem I see.
jiminycricket
04-11-2016, 03:30 PM
Meh if someone wants sorely to be internet famous, they should expect to be dog-piled. I met the guy, and I was not impressed by his character. He came in to our local indoor range about a year ago, and it so happened I was working with a coworker who knew Fawbush from his airsoft days. Apparently Fawbush was hot stuff in the airsoft arena, posting videos and whatnot. On this day, he had a new shooter with him that he was instructing. When they walked though the door, I saw he had a long case. Being we were a pistol and shotgun only range, I had to unfortunately break the news to him. Most people would obviously get disappointed but none got pissy like him. He demanded to be "compensated" claiming that we didn't have any such restriction listed on our website. I proceeded to show him the website and the range rules. That shut him up.
He checked in, got assigned a lane. I assigned him a lane from a bay that had no other shooters since he had a newbie with him. At our range we have a policy of only handling your firearms when at your assigned bench. Well, I approached him because he was demonstrating his weapons in the standing area outside the bay's. Granted he was being aware of muzzle directions keeping them pointed toward the wall, however beyond the wall was our parking lot. I informed him of our policy, and he whined saying it was too loud in the range to talk. If he hadn't had a new shooter with him, I would have told him tough titty. However, I told him he could use one of our classrooms. I escorted him and procured for him our blue guns and sight alignment class prop. He finally acted like he enjoyed our facilities, even calling me sweetheart. I've never been called sweetheart before.
I kept an eye on things at times through the open class door, and he seemed competent and safe in his instruction. That was when my coworker told me about his internet presence. The new shooter and a chance for a good review, led me into the classroom to tell Fawbush that even though rifles are not permitted for the general public, we do use his specific bay for swat training with AR's. Since we were somewhat low on patronage that day, I gave him permission. This made him happy, and he called me sweetheart some more.
He gave his lesson, they shot, and they both came to the front desk so he could show her our rental guns and options for a defensive piece. Speaking of pieces, Fawbush had some heavily modded glocks and AR's; they were impressive to look at. Like any of us, he had his prejudices toward certain products. For example he harped on double action pistols saying no one uses them for competition yada yada.
He recognized my coworker from their airsoft days and they chatted a bit. When Fawbush and his student were getting ready to leave, I told them I'm glad they had a good time and to tell their friends about our range. He asked if the range had Instagram, and I said no. "You need to; that's where it's at," he replied. He then told me how his student is Instagram famous for her yoga. Honestly, him talking about Instagram fame made me gag a little.
Overall, he was competent in instructing for the most part. I'm not sure what the specific goal of their outing was, but if it were an introduction to firearms for personal defensive use, I think he went a little too heavy.
She had a great time, and Fawbush never taught down to her.
Would I recommend him? Not really, but now I'm personally biased.
If someone told me they signed up for instruction from him? I'd tell them great. He's obviously got skills.
But yeah he came across as a diva and my coworker told me he's always been like that.
BehindBlueI's
04-11-2016, 04:24 PM
More info on Instragram famous for yoga lady, pls.
jiminycricket
04-11-2016, 04:33 PM
Haha she was quite lovely.
Ken Hackathorn says something similar about deadly force encounters and then spends two days training at that distance (or, did when I took his class).
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my post above. Ken says it and everyone takes it as gospel, some preacher with a flashy metube video says it and it's all wrong.
I think I would be a little disappointed if I took a Hackathorn class and we never shot past 3 yards.
He's huge on Instagram. The glocks you speak of were most likely his salient arms pistols who sponsor him. He's making money off social media and who can blame him. It won't last forever. Never met the guy and probably never will. I like how he preaches the gospel in his videos. Doesn't make him a qualified shooter but I enjoy listening to him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hot Sauce
04-11-2016, 05:51 PM
He recognized my coworker from their airsoft days and they chatted a bit. When Fawbush and his student were getting ready to leave, I told them I'm glad they had a good time and to tell their friends about our range. He asked if the range had Instagram, and I said no. "You need to; that's where it's at," he replied. He then told me how his student is Instagram famous for her yoga. Honestly, him talking about Instagram fame made me gag a little.
I understand you made a judgement about the guy based on his attitude. Fair enough. But what he says about Instagram is not wrong. It is an influential platform, and it can certainly help a business, and quite a few in the firearms industry successfully use it. Not really sure what is gag-worthy about that. It is a good way to attract new shooters, especially younger ones. Especially ones who wear yoga pants.:p
I haven't really made up my mind either way on the guy, I don't know him, obviously. But if he teaches safe gun-handling in and some decent defensive drills, then why the hell not. Those interested in taking training further will find quality instructors eventually, via PF or otherwise. But we all know that 90% of gun owners won't even make it to the stage to train with an internet celebrity like him, and will do the bare minimum to qualify for CCW permit just like most cops will shoot during the periodic qualifications.
Is he a stolen valor asshole? Is his name Tex Grebner? Is he teaching inquartata and muzzling himself while wearing a rollerblading helmet? Okay, okay, I jest.
Let's judge this stuff in a simpler way. Is someone who trains with him going to be better off learning this stuff, or worse off? Are they gonna develop some really terrible training scars (besides speed reholstering, which I have seen really squared away people in Mike Pannone's class do, as well, unfortunately)?
Ken Hackathorn says something similar about deadly force encounters and then spends two days training at that distance (or, did when I took his class).
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about in my post above. Ken says it and everyone takes it as gospel, some preacher with a flashy metube video says it and it's all wrong.
In Ken's advanced Pistol class, most time is spent shooting inside of 10 yards, the distance which he states most defensive shootings take place inside of.
More info on Instragram famous for yoga lady, pls.
No, seriously, might be the best thing to come out of this thread.
rob_s
04-12-2016, 07:14 AM
Let's judge this stuff in a simpler way. Is someone who trains with him going to be better off learning this stuff, or worse off? Are they gonna develop some really terrible training scars ?
That's a pretty good metric for measuring instructors as a whole.
One interesting thing about firearms training that is different than other hobbies/sectors/industries is the level of faith we put in our instructors relative to skills that we will never know how relevant they are, or good at them we are, until it's too late. Or at least, that's the theory in the "it's not the odds it's the stakes" crowd.
Thing is, guys win gunfights every day with absolutely zero training or practice. Most of those metube gunfights people love to post all over facebook and the forums happen between crooks and totally untrained people, or crooks and cops who (once the shooting starts) don't seem to implement any higher-order training than the totally untrained convenience store clerk.
The hidden, or often un-discussed, benefit to firearms training (even bad firearms training) is that it gets people thinking about their own safety. Suddenly the guy who thought "I'll just buy a gun and stick it in my drawer" to make himself safe is exposed to a lot of bigger concepts that he may have never considered. At that point, whether he's shooting retention with his arm draped over his head, in front of his face, or clutched to his chest is immaterial. The real benefit is the sudden realization that there is a lot more to being safe than having a gun in a drawer, and frankly the gun (and associated training) is probably the least important part of it.
Of course, simply being aware of your surroundings, eating right, installing a smoke detector, and taking a 30 minute walk per day isn't very sexy, so we all go out and buy colored Glocks and look for the next Tier 1 guy to train with instead.
11B10
04-12-2016, 07:40 AM
That's a pretty good metric for measuring instructors as a whole.
One interesting thing about firearms training that is different than other hobbies/sectors/industries is the level of faith we put in our instructors relative to skills that we will never know how relevant they are, or good at them we are, until it's too late. Or at least, that's the theory in the "it's not the odds it's the stakes" crowd.
Thing is, guys win gunfights every day with absolutely zero training or practice. Most of those metube gunfights people love to post all over facebook and the forums happen between crooks and totally untrained people, or crooks and cops who (once the shooting starts) don't seem to implement any higher-order training than the totally untrained convenience store clerk.
The hidden, or often un-discussed, benefit to firearms training (even bad firearms training) is that it gets people thinking about their own safety. Suddenly the guy who thought "I'll just buy a gun and stick it in my drawer" to make himself safe is exposed to a lot of bigger concepts that he may have never considered. At that point, whether he's shooting retention with his arm draped over his head, in front of his face, or clutched to his chest is immaterial. The real benefit is the sudden realization that there is a lot more to being safe than having a gun in a drawer, and frankly the gun (and associated training) is probably the least important part of it.
Of course, simply being aware of your surroundings, eating right, installing a smoke detector, and taking a 30 minute walk per day isn't very sexy, so we all go out and buy colored Glocks and look for the next Tier 1 guy to train with instead.
rob_s: excellent "take" on this entire thread. As we all should know, there is sooo much more to the self defense subject than shooting. It cannot be overstated. Thanks!
Hot Sauce
04-12-2016, 10:51 AM
That's a pretty good metric for measuring instructors as a whole.
One interesting thing about firearms training that is different than other hobbies/sectors/industries is the level of faith we put in our instructors relative to skills that we will never know how relevant they are, or good at them we are, until it's too late. Or at least, that's the theory in the "it's not the odds it's the stakes" crowd.
I was certainly not saying that any training is equal. More the idea that I hope training with a guy like this is gateway training to something more serious, but realizing that it is better than nothing or than very clearly bad training that brings you further from the goal of being able to successfully defend yourself.
I would encourage people to train with real BTDT types, because their theoretical approaches were developed from or validated by personal experience, and perhaps failures of previous training concepts. I'm talking South Narc, Pannone, Givens, etc.
Thing is, guys win gunfights every day with absolutely zero training or practice. Most of those metube gunfights people love to post all over facebook and the forums happen between crooks and totally untrained people, or crooks and cops who (once the shooting starts) don't seem to implement any higher-order training than the totally untrained convenience store clerk.
That sounds like relying on luck. And luck could lead to success or to bystanders getting shot. It is not a validating point that higher order training is unnecessary.
At the very least you'll be more consistent and more comfortable in the employing your weapon if you go to classes that challenge you, because you're likely to go home and practice those same skills. Maybe some convenience store clerk was going to rise to the occasion anyway because he stays calm under pressure regardless. But for the person who doesn't stay calm under pressure, one way to get them to perform better is through exposure and familiarity. I wouldn't call any of this stuff an article of faith, because I don't see it as that nebulous. Perhaps an educated guess that there are certain ways we can train to increase the likelihood of a favorable performance.
I get what you're picking for here: there isn't a statistical study that correlates some kind of higher-order training with better outcomes in gunfights, right? Unfortunately, we lack that data set at this point.
Last I heard, every one of Givens' students who has been in a gunfight (dozens of students AFAIK) while carrying their weapon has won. It is an interesting data point. I understand correlation is not causation, lest someone misread the results to mean that being a student of Givens makes it more likely that they will get in a gunfight.
You're right, being aware of your surroundings and general health-conscious practices will go a long way despite not being sexy. The self defense classes I've found most useful were enjoyable... but also grinding hard work. Not in the least sexy like a carbine space-camp where Instructor Gyro rappels from helicopters while shooting akimbo AKs. Or whatever.
Mr_White
04-13-2016, 01:06 PM
I watched all three linked videos. The first one is stupid, and is the kind of stuff that amateurs do. Someone else will copy it and get hurt. I think he is trying to think smartly about training, and then executing poorly.
The other two videos were much more interesting. Too fast to really say too much about them, but he seems to have solid technique and except for his reholstering, he seems to be safe.
There is no question that he is fast, and seems to be consistent. Seems like a decent guy too.
Personally, I think that he is working on a hardware solution to software problems (so to speak), but I have no idea how much time and effort he spends on that stuff, so I can't say anything too intelligent. It is just a short clip, not a dissertation on all aspects of self defense.
I think that civilians are perfectly qualified to teach self defense, if they have a relatively long history of high level training and ability. It's not SWAT stuff and it is pretty relevant to everyone's personal life. Some guys are able to think very well about this stuff, and when you combine that with really good training/research/practice, things will probably work out fine. Experience is always better to have, but sometimes the wrong lessons are taken from individual experiences. If he was writing for Operator magazine, I could see the disconnect.
As far as the speed and skill shown, like I said, he seems to have good technique and is a fast guy. The targets are at like 3-5 feet though, so let's not pretend this level of skill is unheard of. I don't think I could shoot three times in 1 sec at that distance, but i know I can do 2. I almost never do that though, because I really don't favor drawing my gun at that distance.
The best statistics that I am aware of, talk about officer line of duty deaths. I have never seen any that address civilian fights.
If he's being safe (which he is 2 out of 3 videos here) and he's not a jerk, I say more power to him.
Great post. Maybe it's self-serving of me to say so, but I really appreciate it when a BTDT person posts this. It pretty much echoes what my very experienced mentor said to me when I sought his counsel about me being a nonexperienced person who was finding myself more and more in the position of teaching self-defense-oriented material to others.
Great post. Maybe it's self-serving of me to say so, but I really appreciate it when a BTDT person posts this. It pretty much echoes what my very experienced mentor said to me when I sought his counsel about me being a nonexperienced person who was finding myself more and more in the position of teaching self-defense-oriented material to others.
Just for the record, I would never describe myself as a BTDT kind of guy, if only because I get to regularly associate with BTDT guys with way more experience than I have. I have been some places and done some things. I cherish those times, even the bad ones, and they have helped form me, of course. However, I really try hard not to take too much from my personal experience, as I think none of us have enough experience to speak definitively. It probably also helps me to be a better student as well. I know that doesn't always come across on the net, so I thought it was worth mentioning.
Randy Harris
04-13-2016, 03:31 PM
The best statistics that I am aware of, talk about officer line of duty deaths. I have never seen any that address civilian fights.
Was just talking about this with MVS last night. The FBI does LE stats (with regards to officers killed ) but no one really compiles civilian stats. And before anyone says the "Armed Citizen" in the NRA magazine, they only report wins.....
At best it is conjecture with regards to distance. And if 90% take place inside 10 feet is true then clearly we should all just start carrying J frames.....(I'm just kidding). It would be pretty interesting to see a poll of distances in shootings known to members here. I'm sure Dobbs and Bolke can give some insight from their people with regards to distances. Or maybe Craig D. can provide some solid numbers. I know what Tom G's students involved in gunfights numbers say, but I'd be interested to hear others.
Having said that, in full disclosure, I have spent an abnormally high amount of my training time working on touching distance to 2 arms length problems but that is also based on personal experience. That was the distance my fight took place at so I will probably forever be biased toward that known experience with regards to employing a firearm under duress. And having worked the door some, most of my experience with physical conflict has been at touching distance.
And as someone mentioned earlier with regards to speed at close distance.....There is a difference between time and timing. Doing something at the right time is better than something fast at the wrong time. It might take me 2 seconds to foul his draw and another second to turn his left shoulder and move behind him. Another second to bury my head in his shoulder and draw and fire. On the other hand it might only take me .70 to draw and shoot without moving out from in front of him.... but we BOTH probably get shot if I don't foul his draw and move..... Being fast but drawing before you are in better position is not always a winner. Getting better position to allow you to access unencumbered is what works over the largest range of problems. I'm pretty quick on the draw but even so, it is all about position before acquisition if you are smart.
As to him getting people interested in shooting from the videos....more power to him. But we don't teach bowling or racquetball we teach people skills that they may live and die by...so it is imperative that we teach what we find to be the best stuff available......and not just flashy stuff that looks cool.
Sadmin
04-13-2016, 03:46 PM
He has a solid following and uses the platform to spread The Word, which is pretty cool if your into that. He does have some solid fundamentals as well IMO
3x5 at 25y
https://www.instagram.com/p/BDZfxBSoE1X/?taken-by=truexodus
DacoRoman
04-13-2016, 04:14 PM
He certainly is extremely well practiced and fast. As a slight aside, someone wrote that he was big into airsoft at one time, and I'm wondering if he built a lot of his speed and gun handling proprioception/habits with airsoft guns. Can his hasty re-holstering, without looking, also be a training scar from airsoft? But I apologize for the sheer speculation.
To echo and reinforce what many have already said, from my perspective as a student, my problem with what he does is that he may not know what he doesn't know and be teaching bad tactics and techniques. He may be perfecting a gun solution that he came up with, on static targets, on a flat range, that may generally be the wrong solution, done in the wrong way and at the wrong time. This is where an instructor, preferably with personal fighting experience, that was trained by an organization with fighting experience, can be of great help in calling bullshit on certain tactics or techniques. All open to debate of course. But as we all would agree not all opinions are equally valid, and if he doesn't have the right experience or educational basis for espousing his techniques, then it is bullshit until otherwise proven.
Now if this guy learned this stuff from a vetted instructor, or organization, and got really good at it, and is a good teacher, then I'd consider learning from him. Otherwise, what he's doing is just trick shooting and fantasy training.
rob_s
04-13-2016, 08:48 PM
Now if this guy learned this stuff from a vetted instructor, or organization, and got really good at it, and is a good teacher, then I'd consider learning from him. Otherwise, what he's doing is just trick shooting and fantasy training.
Does it matter if he learned it from some "vetted" instructor or got it handed to him on a set of stone tablets from God?
If he's teaching good technique, what does it matter where he got it from?
DacoRoman
04-13-2016, 09:32 PM
Does it matter if he learned it from some "vetted" instructor or got it handed to him on a set of stone tablets from God?
If he's teaching good technique, what does it matter where he got it from?
I get where you are coming from. It is tempting to say good technique is good technique. However who decides what true good technique, and more importantly tactics, is? If one hasn't been exposed to the vigor of reality, let's call it, what seems like good technique superficially, may in fact be pretty piss poor flapping around that may get you face shot. We don't know what we don't know. For example, based on what I saw of his videos, I'm not sure if striving to get sub one second mozambique drills on a static target at arms distance is tactically sound, especially if a real world opponent has you at gunpoint. There is such a thing as real world experience in play here, and an instructor either has that or doesn't, and either has it in spades, with lots of samples to draw from, or not.
BehindBlueI's
04-13-2016, 09:33 PM
Was just talking about this with MVS last night. The FBI does LE stats (with regards to officers killed ) but no one really compiles civilian stats.
Well, I wouldn't say NOBODY does.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17723-1st-round-of-stats-of-citizen-v-criminal-resistance
Very much a work in progress, and of course limited to my own county.
orionz06
04-13-2016, 09:41 PM
Does it matter if he learned it from some "vetted" instructor or got it handed to him on a set of stone tablets from God?
If he's teaching good technique, what does it matter where he got it from?
I agree here, sorta.
orionz06
04-13-2016, 09:43 PM
I get where you are coming from. It is tempting to say good technique is good technique. However who decides what true good technique, and more importantly tactics, is? If one hasn't been exposed to the vigor of reality, let's call it, what seems like good technique superficially, may in fact be pretty piss poor flapping around that may get you face shot. We don't know what we don't know. For example, based on what I saw of his videos, I'm not sure if striving to get sub one second mozambique drills on a static target at arms distance is tactically sound, especially if a real world opponent has you at gunpoint. There is such a thing as real world experience in play here, and an instructor either has that or doesn't, and either has it in spades, with lots of samples to draw from, or not.
This assumes we're trying to get all things from one source. Why not learn to shoot fast as hell from someone who can teach you to shoot fast as hell? Filter that through a defensive guy and test it in an all encompassing class?
BehindBlueI's
04-13-2016, 09:50 PM
If he's teaching good technique, what does it matter where he got it from?
In a general sense, because of the underlying understanding of the technique or tactic. As you drill down into specifics, there's just a lot of things that aren't universally applicable. As an obvious and frequent example, how many guys do you know that are vets and carry on an empty chamber because the military taught them to do so in garrison. They didn't learn WHY they were supposed to carry that way. There are very valid reasons to do it sometimes, but generally as a civilian carrying for self defense they do not apply.
DacoRoman
04-13-2016, 10:07 PM
This assumes we're trying to get all things from one source. Why not learn to shoot fast as hell from someone who can teach you to shoot fast as hell? Filter that through a defensive guy and test it in an all encompassing class?
This assumes we're trying to get all things from one source. Why not learn to shoot fast as hell from someone who can teach you to shoot fast as hell? Filter that through a defensive guy and test it in an all encompassing class?
I don't completely disagree. However, learning how to shoot fast as hell is a matter of practice. What he's doing is pretty elementary: drawing and shooting, sometimes from retention, sometimes not, fast. To reach that speed one needs time and practice (if I recall correctly he stated that it took him about a year of daily practice to reach his current ability). He really doesn't have much to teach, unless he's teaching to a beginner. Moreover, like I said, spending lots of time on a technique that is foolish just for speed's sake may not be the most astute thing to do. I think knowing when to attempt a draw, versus when to attempt a clinch and body/weapon control, and perhaps even resort to a blade instead of gun, if that's an option, is more useful than spending a year of daily practice/ammo to achieve sub one second mozambique drills. I'd rather find an instructor that knew enough to give me guidance regarding which technique to use when, and how, rather than a dude who's only contribution is to demonstrate a speed draw and fast split times. By the way, if the would be attacker has a gun pointed at your face, his reaction time to shoot will probably be something like a quarter of a second, so a fast draw, no matter how fast, will never solve that problem.
orionz06
04-13-2016, 10:47 PM
This assumes we're trying to get all things from one source. Why not learn to shoot fast as hell from someone who can teach you to shoot fast as hell? Filter that through a defensive guy and test it in an all encompassing class?
I don't completely disagree. However, learning how to shoot fast as hell is a matter of practice. What he's doing is pretty elementary: drawing and shooting, sometimes from retention, sometimes not, fast. To reach that speed one needs time and practice (if I recall correctly he stated that it took him about a year of daily practice to reach his current ability). He really doesn't have much to teach, unless he's teaching to a beginner. Moreover, like I said, spending lots of time on a technique that is foolish just for speed's sake may not be the most astute thing to do. I think knowing when to attempt a draw, versus when to attempt a clinch and body/weapon control, and perhaps even resort to a blade instead of gun, if that's an option, is more useful than spending a year of daily practice/ammo to achieve sub one second mozambique drills. I'd rather find an instructor that knew enough to give me guidance regarding which technique to use when, and how, rather than a dude who's only contribution is to demonstrate a speed draw and fast split times. By the way, if the would be attacker has a gun pointed at your face, his reaction time to shoot will probably be something like a quarter of a second, so a fast draw, no matter how fast, will never solve that problem.
Correct.
He has a website that just went live ... trustandard.net (http://trustandard.net)
rob_s
04-14-2016, 07:39 AM
if the would be attacker has a gun pointed at your face, his reaction time to shoot will probably be something like a quarter of a second, so a fast draw, no matter how fast, will never solve that problem.
Without knowing anything about you, how did you arrive at this conclusion? I mean that in all sincerity. Were you in such a situation in real life? Encounter it in sims/airsoft/FOF training? Have someone else tell you, and you think "yeah, that's a good point"? somehow else?
orionz06
04-14-2016, 07:51 AM
He has a website that just went live ... trustandard.net (http://trustandard.net)
Gunswithjoelosteen.com musta been taken.
Randy Harris
04-14-2016, 08:09 AM
After looking at more of his videos the glaring thing to me is the lack of inclusion of the off hand for striking or fending in the 2 arm length interval.
As always, with a static range target and no explanation of the "scenario" we don't know exactly what the BG is doing to cause you to go for your gun. But if the BG is doing anything other than simply standing flat footed, telegraphing the draw and then fumbling the draw I have real reservations about whether trying to play quick draw without other OODA disruption (or plain old PHYSICAL disruption) is the best thing to be telling people they need to be practicing for.
If the BG has a contact weapon and is using it with conviction then that lack of fending is going to lead to getting tagged. Now MIGHT that work with a meth addled tweaker looking to score a quick $20 ? Maybe....but I still don't want to chance it. But against someone who is committed to doing damage first and going through your wallet after he takes it off your corpse ...I have my....suspicions.... that this might be ....sub optimal.
Again, I don't know this guy , I'm sure he means well (which is more than I can say for some in the industry). All I know is we are apparently brothers in Christ with a shared interest in self defense. That is it. I know nothing else about him. But I do know that when looking for successful outcomes at 2 arms length the gun is rarely plan A unless the BG is a static range target offering no forward pressure. And that stuff is EASILY proven with a NOK Trainer, an airsoft gun and foam bat.
I just looked at his site and watched another couple of videos. It appears that he does indeed firmly believe in the fast draw response to a close range attack. I was pretty turned off by a couple of things on his site. He mentions drills from other instructors and says he wants to credit them for them (even though they probably got them from someone else.) That is a big assumption on his part, and obviously depends on who we are talking about and what drill it is. Just seemed like an unnecessary swipe at others. Not to mention the coin thing:-)
Then there is the whole aiwb/4 oclock thing he talks about. For starters, he doesn't actually conceal his gun aiwb. It sticks out like a sore thumb. Of course it's fast that way, which is all that matters. When he does want to really conceal, he switches to 4 oclock. I'm sure I don't need to get into all that. I love it when people who are new to something feel like they are qualified to speak with that level of authority. This is where civilian instructors fail if they are not careful. He has no professional experience actually doing any of these things. He talks about the benefits of each position. Afai can tell, the only aiwb advantage he sees is that he can go faster on the range. For me, one of the key advantages of aiwb is a surreptitious draw. I've done it for real, several times, and always surprised the hell out of the bg. Once in a national training/competition, where the RO's/judges were looking for it and still didn't see it coming. Most of us who have actually done this stuff seem to disagree with his take on holster issues. Not to mention the whole close range response.
I've said before that I have no issue with civilian instructors, and that's true. But in 2016, why would you go to a guy who doesn't actually do what he teaches for a living? I've been to a lot of pretty advanced medical training. Should I start teaching it?
eta : I'm strictly talking about the practical application of the gun. Todd was an excellent instructor, who taught wht he knew and could prove to the students: shooting. he didn't pretend to teach any aspect of fighting, though that was his interest and certainly colored his outlook. He didn't teach MUC type stuff, even though he had learned stuff like that from various guys who had really done it. He didn't teach tactics, even though he had learned that stuff from various guys who had done it. He taught stuff that was valid at face value, and that he could execute at a high level. When I teach, which I rarely do in the private sector, I CAN teach a variety of stuff. I DO teach the stuff that stands on its own, so that people aren't basing things off my resume, but rather what I can actually do for them in the here and now. Big difference, imo.
Just thought I would share his response about being the next instructor zero or social media gun guy, "BF: I wish everyone knew that I’m not trying to be the next Instructor Zero, or top level name shooter or whatever. All I’m trying to do is to advance the Kingdom of God through shooting. Simultaneously, Im trying to show people that you don’t have to have a military or LEO background in order to be a confident and proficient shooter."
Full interview can be found herehttp://www.gunsandtactics.com/preacher-shooter-shepherd-guy-an-interview-with-baret-fawbush
As far as not teaching as a primary job, he says his call to ministry is more important. He doesn't teach to make money.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I guess this should have been clarified at the beginning. Who and what is Instructor Zero to you?
He has already been discussed here. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9535-Instructor-Zero&highlight=instructor
Your quote specifies a very narrow parameter. "Im trying to show people that you don’t have to have a military or LEO background in order to be a confident and proficient shooter." Confident and proficient is only one part of a complex ideal that this forum promotes. It would be comparable to learning to drive a vehicle in only one situation say for instance the interstate.
There have been numerous very experienced people here who have already pointed out flaws just from minimal viewing of a few videos.
If you are looking to create a fan following or someone to justify your observations I don't think this is the place that is going to happen.
Just thought I would share his response about being the next instructor zero or social media gun guy, "BF: I wish everyone knew that I’m not trying to be the next Instructor Zero, or top level name shooter or whatever. All I’m trying to do is to advance the Kingdom of God through shooting. Simultaneously, Im trying to show people that you don’t have to have a military or LEO background in order to be a confident and proficient shooter."
Full interview can be found herehttp://www.gunsandtactics.com/preacher-shooter-shepherd-guy-an-interview-with-baret-fawbush
As far as not teaching as a primary job, he says his call to ministry is more important. He doesn't teach to make money.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't understand the connection between his ministry and shooting, perhaps I haven't watched enough of his videos.
Does he think his gun/skills are like a kirpan to Sikhs?
He's a practitioner of that not-so-particularly-uncommon form of Christianity that mistakes being self-righteous as being righteous, is all. That's the connection, that performing ministry has to pervade every. single. aspect of what he does.
"Wanna deal with me...? You gotta deal with my chip, first *points at shoulder*, which just so happens to be my religion. Wait, you didn't see my chip? Lemme shove it in your face, whether it's genuinely relevant to the situation or not, so you can deal with it whether there's a genuine need for you to or not."
It will absolutely appeal to like-minded people, who will flock (entendre intended) to his classes, and give him the echo-chamber and confirmation bias his sort desperately needs.
Orion nailed it with the Osteen reference. He's this kid's spirit-animal.
All I’m trying to do is to advance the Kingdom of God through shooting. Simultaneously, Im trying to show people that you don’t have to have a military or LEO background in order to be a confident and proficient shooter."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I clipped the relevant points. It seems a bit unchristian like to somewhat demean other instructors on your website. Also, he's not teaching proficient shooting, he's adding a defensive aspect to it. You don't need to have a military or police background to teach high level shooting, if you leave it at that. From what I have seen, he is unqualified to teach self defense, on many counts. Even if he was correct, how many of his students will be able to do what he does?
Almost none of the people I've trained can do what I can do. Yet a lot of them have won their fights, sometimes against much greater odds. Teaching people to be like you is ego. Teaching people to be successful is wonderful.
I guess this should have been clarified at the beginning. Who and what is Instructor Zero to you?
He has already been discussed here. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9535-Instructor-Zero&highlight=instructor
Your quote specifies a very narrow parameter. "Im trying to show people that you don’t have to have a military or LEO background in order to be a confident and proficient shooter." Confident and proficient is only one part of a complex ideal that this forum promotes. It would be comparable to learning to drive a vehicle in only one situation say for instance the interstate.
There have been numerous very experienced people here who have already pointed out flaws just from minimal viewing of a few videos.
If you are looking to create a fan following or someone to justify your observations I don't think this is the place that is going to happen.
I'll say this and then stay out of commenting on this thread anymore. I don't know Fawbush, I've never attended a class and never will. I would rather spend $300 on different instructors. He has a very unique set of skills and whether or not that translates into being a good instructor I do not know. I find him better than most internet instructors but certainly not perfect. I've always found the gun community to be welcoming so I was just shocked to read all the people bashing a guy who loves firearms and self defense and is growing the community because of what he does. I'll check into the instructor zero thread as I would like to get a feel for what others think of him.
This forum has taught me to be wary of what instructors teach and I am thankful for that. There's so much knowledge on here and I want to humbly soak it all in.
Teaching people to be like you is ego. Teaching people to be successful is wonderful.
Thank you for that. That's great.
Wondering Beard
04-14-2016, 03:22 PM
I've always found the gun community to be welcoming so I was just shocked to read all the people bashing a guy who loves firearms and self defense and is growing the community because of what he does.
Loving firearms and self defense is not something to get anyone bashed (I also wouldn't say that he was bashed but rather aggressively questioned as people here tend to do) but rather what got a reaction was that he was instructing on self defense where the standards here on PF are quite high.
I'll say this and then stay out of commenting on this thread anymore. I don't know Fawbush, I've never attended a class and never will. I would rather spend $300 on different instructors. He has a very unique set of skills and whether or not that translates into being a good instructor I do not know. I find him better than most internet instructors but certainly not perfect. I've always found the gun community to be welcoming so I was just shocked to read all the people bashing a guy who loves firearms and self defense and is growing the community because of what he does. I'll check into the instructor zero thread as I would like to get a feel for what others think of him.
This forum has taught me to be wary of what instructors teach and I am thankful for that. There's so much knowledge on here and I want to humbly soak it all in.
I don't think you need to stay out of anything. As others have pointed out, PF tends to be a little aggressive about standards and such.
I started teaching cops when I was barely out of my teens. I thought I knew everything. Boy was I wrong. All of us need a reminder to stay in our lane from time to time. I'm a bit turned off by what I saw online from Fawbush, but I certainly don't hate him or wish him ill. I just disagree with what he is doing. I'm sure he could care less about my opinion.
orionz06
04-14-2016, 04:53 PM
http://i.imgur.com/VsfsdX1.png
Up above is just a snapshot of a drill. You can't read into that, but I will anyway. What was the guy doing in that picture to warrant deadly force?
LSP552
04-14-2016, 06:09 PM
Up above is just a snapshot of a drill. You can't read into that, but I will anyway. What was the guy doing in that picture to warrant deadly force?
Looks like a zombie to me.......
orionz06
04-14-2016, 07:12 PM
Up above is just a snapshot of a drill. You can't read into that, but I will anyway. What was the guy doing in that picture to warrant deadly force?
We have videos of the same drill though.
Just something interesting to post as his social media/website thing.
Randy Harris
04-14-2016, 07:55 PM
regarding the pic above.....
That is all fine and well, but if the dude is empty handed then you'll have a heck of a time (ask George Zimmerman) explaining why the dude needed to be shot....and our entrpid hero doesn't even have the "benefit" of being grounded and on bottom in this situation...he straight up shot an empty handed guy who appears to be reaching out to grab him . So WHY is he shooting an empty handed attacker? Better be one hell of a backstory on that.... Sorry guys but this is one of my pet peeves. Everyone it seems wants to teach retention shooting with shooter standing right in front of target and NO CONTEXT for what is causing you to draw and shoot. Just some nebulous....you need to shoot.
If you do nothing to stop them from stabbing or hitting you while you access then you are still getting hit or stabbed. If he is just punching you then WHY are you shooting? If he is stabbing you while you stand there accessing your gun....you're probably getting "F"d up permanently. Muhammed Ali could stand there and lean on the ropes and play "Rope a Dope" with Foreman and survive but Foreman wasn't shanking him with a butcher knife either.....And you can stand in front of an IDPA target and cover up and draw and shoot with 100% success and no damage to yourself but when the other guy is a living breathing opponent with opposing will and intent that stuff rarely works without you getting stabbed slashed or rocked with a fist or club or whatever he is armed with. He mentions the 21 foot rule ..... does he understand it? When the BG is close enough that you HAVE to shoot from retention you have to do something about the knife...and the answer is not to just draw faster.
If the guy is armed with a contact weapon then our hero in the pic also got stabbed, slashed or bludgeoned because the BG is TOUCHING HIM. And that was my point about no forward pressure earlier. If somone is assaulting you with real intent and this is not just the "no dude, you are attacking me wrong, come at me like this" kind of crap then the shooters upright position , head and shoulders behind his pelvis and total lack of base, and lack of fending hand (and 2 more paragraphs of why this is a big problem) is a big problem and likely to end up with him on the bottom of the pile stabbed, slashed or barely conscious from getting his bell rung while he was reaching for the gun....no matter how fast he is.....
orionz06
04-14-2016, 07:58 PM
By request:
A Proper #2 (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?462-A-proper-2)
For whatever reason I've been seeing alot of BAD retention position shooting around the 'net. Here's a pretty good piece of video that was shot from a class I did in New England last year. That's slightly abbreviated from the usual way I teach retention shooting in ECQC but you get the idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ_pi0WIrho
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ_pi0WIrho
DacoRoman
04-14-2016, 08:21 PM
Without knowing anything about you, how did you arrive at this conclusion? I mean that in all sincerity. Were you in such a situation in real life? Encounter it in sims/airsoft/FOF training? Have someone else tell you, and you think "yeah, that's a good point"? somehow else?
I was just reacting to the pure fact that a sub second quick draw would never beat the experimentally established human reaction time (to a visual stimulus, such as seeing someone draw a weapon) of 180-250 milliseconds (data found with an easy PubMed search, or even google search) that would enable an attacker pointing a gun at you to shoot multiple times before you even finished your draw stroke.
Now it just so happens that two weeks ago we did reaction time drills in a Hackathorn class I took. This drill consisted of pointing the gun at the target (in a typical isosceles stance), trigger finger indexed high on the ejection port, and then contacting the trigger and shooting as soon as we heard the timer go off. This was done from 3, 5, and 10 yards. The shots were on target in around .20-.25 seconds. For the record if you look at reaction time data, reaction time to auditory stimuli is generally a tiny bit faster than to visual stimuli, but not enough to defeat my point.
Most anecdotally, blue gun vs empty hand disarm and blue gun vs knife type drills clearly demonstrate, to me at least, that if someone is pointing a gun at you, the response of "merely" attempting a quick draw from concealment in hopes to beat the trigger reaction time of the opponent is way beyond optimistic, it is more like suicide. And if you look at the human reaction numbers, it is easy to see why.
Randy Harris
04-14-2016, 08:26 PM
We do know of instances where it has been done in real life but there is always some kind of OODA disruption/misdirection to distract and to freeze up the guy with the gun to keep him from immediately shooting.
DacoRoman
04-14-2016, 08:27 PM
regarding the pic above.....
That is all fine and well, but if the dude is empty handed then you'll have a heck of a time (ask George Zimmerman) explaining why the dude needed to be shot....and our entrpid hero doesn't even have the "benefit" of being grounded and on bottom in this situation...he straight up shot an empty handed guy who appears to be reaching out to grab him . So WHY is he shooting an empty handed attacker? Better be one hell of a backstory on that.... Sorry guys but this is one of my pet peeves. Everyone it seems wants to teach retention shooting with shooter standing right in front of target and NO CONTEXT for what is causing you to draw and shoot. Just some nebulous....you need to shoot.
If you do nothing to stop them from stabbing or hitting you while you access then you are still getting hit or stabbed. If he is just punching you then WHY are you shooting? If he is stabbing you while you stand there accessing your gun....you're probably getting "F"d up permanently. Muhammed Ali could stand there and lean on the ropes and play "Rope a Dope" with Foreman and survive but Foreman wasn't shanking him with a butcher knife either.....And you can stand in front of an IDPA target and cover up and draw and shoot with 100% success and no damage to yourself but when the other guy is a living breathing opponent with opposing will and intent that stuff rarely works without you getting stabbed slashed or rocked with a fist or club or whatever he is armed with. He mentions the 21 foot rule ..... does he understand it? When the BG is close enough that you HAVE to shoot from retention you have to do something about the knife...and the answer is not to just draw faster.
If the guy is armed with a contact weapon then our hero in the pic also got stabbed, slashed or bludgeoned because the BG is TOUCHING HIM. And that was my point about no forward pressure earlier. If somone is assaulting you with real intent and this is not just the "no dude, you are attacking me wrong, come at me like this" kind of crap then the shooters upright position , head and shoulders behind his pelvis and total lack of base, and lack of fending hand (and 2 more paragraphs of why this is a big problem) is a big problem and likely to end up with him on the bottom of the pile stabbed, slashed or barely conscious from getting his bell rung while he was reaching for the gun....no matter how fast he is.....
Amen brother.
ldunnmobile
04-14-2016, 08:28 PM
To wade into this mess ...
I'm a civilian. I've been racking up some formal training over the last several years: HITS, ECQC etc. I work hard at improving myself. The average person I encounter thinks I'm an "expert". I know nothing could be further from the truth. Still, I've been asked MANY times why don't you teach? The answer is simple: I know without question I am not a professional. How good or how bad my skill set may be is irrelevant. I'm not a professional regardless. As stated before: it's one thing to teach some shooting mechanics...it's another thing entirely to teach Defense and the application thereof... and here is the biggest fly in the ointment for me... I cannot fathom ever charging people money given the fact, for the sake of utter redundancy...I am not a professional. There are things I believe you can teach and not be a professional, sports comes to mind, self-defense is not one of them.
This gentleman professes to be a Christian. Him being or not being a Christian is irrelevant to the question of his competency. If you don't want to hear preaching mixed into your shooting class, all you have to do is use a different instructor. It's not like he's trying to ambush anybody with it....you can KINDA see it coming. If he is a Christian, then by default his Christianity must permeate every aspect of his life. I don't see anybody being forced at gunpoint to listen to a sermon.
So to sum up: Seems like a nice guy. I wouldn't take his classes. You don't have to either.
DacoRoman
04-14-2016, 08:29 PM
We do know of instances where it has been done in real life but there is always some kind of OODA disruption/misdirection to distract and to freeze up the guy with the gun to keep him from immediately shooting.
yep I totally agree, I should have written "merely attempting a quick draw", which is what the subject of this thread is doing.
I feel stupid for participating in this thread, and apologize to all.
If a member here has a question about a technique, that is worth all of us discussing. I think we would all benefit from leaving the personality or school out of the discussion. I'm not attacking or blaming the OP, we all need a reminder from time to time, as I do too.
El Cid
04-14-2016, 08:48 PM
regarding the pic above.....
That is all fine and well, but if the dude is empty handed then you'll have a heck of a time (ask George Zimmerman) explaining why the dude needed to be shot....and our entrpid hero doesn't even have the "benefit" of being grounded and on bottom in this situation...he straight up shot an empty handed guy who appears to be reaching out to grab him . So WHY is he shooting an empty handed attacker? Better be one hell of a backstory on that.... Sorry guys but this is one of my pet peeves. Everyone it seems wants to teach retention shooting with shooter standing right in front of target and NO CONTEXT for what is causing you to draw and shoot. Just some nebulous....you need to shoot.
The timer made me do it!
Kidding aside, there are instructors we go to for nothing more than improving our skill with a particular weapon. There are other instructors who can teach us how to best employ that weapon (tactics), and then instructors who can teach us when (legal/policy) to use it (as well as the important but often overlooked "when to stop shooting" as nyeti reminds us). Some can teach two or even all 3 of those subjects. I wouldn't go to Mr Leathem to learn when it's appropriate and legal to shoot an attacker, but I bet he can teach me a thing or two about speed and accuracy.
The bottom line is we as students are ultimately responsible for sorting between the training we need/want, and meshing together the types we obtain separately. I suspect the overly harsh tones toward Mr Fawbush are because of the initial exposure in that ridiculous video with the fireworks. What's that cliché? You don't get a second chance to make a first impression.
Now, wrt the side discussion that appears in this thread about whether only BTDT face shooters can teach certain aspects or tactics I tend to disagree. I imagine they can do it better if they can translate their real world experience in a manner the students grasp. But I don't think it's necessary. In fact there are certainly really kick ass operators who you want with you in a fight. That doesn't mean they can teach. Most LE instructors have not been in shootings. And when the military is between wars they don't stop training because Sgt Snuffy hasn't been in combat. Hell, even the BTDT guys teach things that may not jive with my own experiences or agency policies. It's on me to take and discard their teachings as I need.
This is a big part of why I try to do an AAR after a class and why I scour the interewebs for them beforehand. Sometimes you take a class and realize you didn't get much from it. Hopefully that doesn't happen often, but I know it does.
11B10
04-15-2016, 08:02 AM
To wade into this mess ...
I'm a civilian. I've been racking up some formal training over the last several years: HITS, ECQC etc. I work hard at improving myself. The average person I encounter thinks I'm an "expert". I know nothing could be further from the truth. Still, I've been asked MANY times why don't you teach? The answer is simple: I know without question I am not a professional. How good or how bad my skill set may be is irrelevant. I'm not a professional regardless. As stated before: it's one thing to teach some shooting mechanics...it's another thing entirely to teach Defense and the application thereof... and here is the biggest fly in the ointment for me... I cannot fathom ever charging people money given the fact, for the sake of utter redundancy...I am not a professional. There are things I believe you can teach and not be a professional, sports comes to mind, self-defense is not one of them.
This gentleman professes to be a Christian. Him being or not being a Christian is irrelevant to the question of his competency. If you don't want to hear preaching mixed into your shooting class, all you have to do is use a different instructor. It's not like he's trying to ambush anybody with it....you can KINDA see it coming. If he is a Christian, then by default his Christianity must permeate every aspect of his life. I don't see anybody being forced at gunpoint to listen to a sermon.
So to sum up: Seems like a nice guy. I wouldn't take his classes. You don't have to either.
Everything you say is spot on - HOWEVER - just because someone is a Christian doesn't mean you must "see it coming." That's called preaching. Speaking as a believer, I can think of no other reason to insert that into your "teaching."
Are we going all politically correct here? I re read all of your post and I can't find anything wrong with your responses.
It has been said by multiple people You don't know what you don't know. I don't know how anyone can miraculously become an instructor qualified to teach anything without proper training.
I know a guy who is a pretty decent competitive shooter. However he won't spend the money to get the instruction to take him to the next level. He is stuck he can't do it on his own as he doesn't currently have the skill set.
Same thing with Defensive shooting instructors, or electricians or DR's or UPS Truck drivers. They trained with someone who had the benefit of knowledge and experience and hopefully the student will learn from that experience and not get killed or kill someone else because of a stupid mistake.
We are talking a critical skill set here, not making play dough monkeys, and as such any student would be negligent not to ensure that the person teaching them is qualified via experience and gained knowledge to teach the curriculum.
There is a huge difference between a sport and life critical skill set.
I don't understand why instructor Zero or this guy would get a pass. It is obvious they are not just teaching people to shoot fast.
I feel stupid for participating in this thread, and apologize to all.
If a member here has a question about a technique, that is worth all of us discussing. I think we would all benefit from leaving the personality or school out of the discussion. I'm not attacking or blaming the OP, we all need a reminder from time to time, as I do too.
TCinVA
04-15-2016, 10:50 AM
http://i.imgur.com/VsfsdX1.png
This is why the dude is a bucket of fail.
You need at least 10 years studying something to realize how much you don't know.
And if you are going to teach, you need a process of apprenticeship to prepare for doing so.
The combination of the two should produce a clear understanding of what you can do, and what you can teach.
orionz06
04-15-2016, 10:54 AM
This is why the dude is a bucket of fail.
You need at least 10 years studying something to realize how much you don't know.
And if you are going to teach, you need a process of apprenticeship to prepare for doing so.
The combination of the two should produce a clear understanding of what you can do, and what you can teach.
Kinda funny how we've had more passionate and spirited discussions about what is proper pizza.
Are we going all politically correct here? I re read all of your post and I can't find anything wrong with your responses.
It has been said by multiple people You don't know what you don't know. I don't know how anyone can miraculously become an instructor qualified to teach anything without proper training.
I know a guy who is a pretty decent competitive shooter. However he won't spend the money to get the instruction to take him to the next level. He is stuck he can't do it on his own as he doesn't currently have the skill set.
Same thing with Defensive shooting instructors, or electricians or DR's or UPS Truck drivers. They trained with someone who had the benefit of knowledge and experience and hopefully the student will learn from that experience and not get killed or kill someone else because of a stupid mistake.
We are talking a critical skill set here, not making play dough monkeys, and as such any student would be negligent not to ensure that the person teaching them is qualified via experience and gained knowledge to teach the curriculum.
There is a huge difference between a sport and life critical skill set.
I don't understand why instructor Zero or this guy would get a pass. It is obvious they are not just teaching people to shoot fast.
I'm definitely not going PC, or anything like that. When my wife and I are sitting at the dinner table, we don't discuss other people, unless it is because they did something good. We don't want to waste our lives gossiping about others, and we don't want to teach our children to do that either. There is a great quote from Eleanor Roosevelt that I'm sure you know. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
P-F was originally created to improve the state of shooting. Gear, training, anything related. If you want to know if X technique is valid, let's talk about x technique. If you're trying to determine if a school can provide what you need, you can then take what you learned about X technique and use it, along with any available AAR's as a filter. In the grip tension thread, I refrained from naming some guys who teach isometric tension in the grip. One is a national champion and a friend of mine. I disagree with that part of what he teaches, but I have no interest in dragging him down in any way. Let's focus on the issue, not the person or school.
I am not innocent of this, but I intend to rectify it immediately. In person, I have cut quite a few people down when dissecting their teachings. None of that made me better. None of that made them better. There is nothing I will say on the internet that i won't say in person, but does all of it need to be said?
People with no experience in fighting, should not be teaching fighting. There are plenty of great shooters and great instructors out there, who have never been in a fight of any kind, and do not carry a gun full time for a living. They should teach shooting.
This is not 1995. There are lots of experienced guys running around now, with recent relevant experience. They are more accessible now than ever before. If you want to be a badass black-belt, go find a badass black-belt to train with. If you want to be a fighter, go find someone who fights. The two are not the same.
I imagine anyone can take the above and use it to figure out what I think about the school in this thread.
Un PC enough for you?
If it works for you it works for me. :cool:
I'm definitely not going PC, or anything like that. When my wife and I are sitting at the dinner table, we don't discuss other people, unless it is because they did something good. We don't want to waste our lives gossiping about others, and we don't want to teach our children to do that either. There is a great quote from Eleanor Roosevelt that I'm sure you know. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
P-F was originally created to improve the state of shooting. Gear, training, anything related. If you want to know if X technique is valid, let's talk about x technique. If you're trying to determine if a school can provide what you need, you can then take what you learned about X technique and use it, along with any available AAR's as a filter. In the grip tension thread, I refrained from naming some guys who teach isometric tension in the grip. One is a national champion and a friend of mine. I disagree with that part of what he teaches, but I have no interest in dragging him down in any way. Let's focus on the issue, not the person or school.
I am not innocent of this, but I intend to rectify it immediately. In person, I have cut quite a few people down when dissecting their teachings. None of that made me better. None of that made them better. There is nothing I will say on the internet that i won't say in person, but does all of it need to be said?
People with no experience in fighting, should not be teaching fighting. There are plenty of great shooters and great instructors out there, who have never been in a fight of any kind, and do not carry a gun full time for a living. They should teach shooting.
This is not 1995. There are lots of experienced guys running around now, with recent relevant experience. They are more accessible now than ever before. If you want to be a badass black-belt, go find a badass black-belt to train with. If you want to be a fighter, go find someone who fights. The two are not the same.
I imagine anyone can take the above and use it to figure out what I think about the school in this thread.
Un PC enough for you?
11B10
04-15-2016, 03:17 PM
I'm definitely not going PC, or anything like that. When my wife and I are sitting at the dinner table, we don't discuss other people, unless it is because they did something good. We don't want to waste our lives gossiping about others, and we don't want to teach our children to do that either. There is a great quote from Eleanor Roosevelt that I'm sure you know. "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
P-F was originally created to improve the state of shooting. Gear, training, anything related. If you want to know if X technique is valid, let's talk about x technique. If you're trying to determine if a school can provide what you need, you can then take what you learned about X technique and use it, along with any available AAR's as a filter. In the grip tension thread, I refrained from naming some guys who teach isometric tension in the grip. One is a national champion and a friend of mine. I disagree with that part of what he teaches, but I have no interest in dragging him down in any way. Let's focus on the issue, not the person or school.
I am not innocent of this, but I intend to rectify it immediately. In person, I have cut quite a few people down when dissecting their teachings. None of that made me better. None of that made them better. There is nothing I will say on the internet that i won't say in person, but does all of it need to be said?
People with no experience in fighting, should not be teaching fighting. There are plenty of great shooters and great instructors out there, who have never been in a fight of any kind, and do not carry a gun full time for a living. They should teach shooting.
This is not 1995. There are lots of experienced guys running around now, with recent relevant experience. They are more accessible now than ever before. If you want to be a badass black-belt, go find a badass black-belt to train with. If you want to be a fighter, go find someone who fights. The two are not the same.
I imagine anyone can take the above and use it to figure out what I think about the school in this thread.
Un PC enough for you?
SLG - I have been reading your posts with great interest and, like many posts here, I've learned much. I'm not ashamed to say I'm old enough to know better - but, I've been guilty of the things you've noted re: negative remarks about others. I'm going to do better.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.