Teaching beginners

[Wendell]

This is an interesting article from 'Cornered Cat':

Rodney Dangerfield must’ve taught beginners (http://www.corneredcat.com/rodney-dangerfield-mustve-taught-beginners/)

January 5, 2018
<http://www.corneredcat.com/rodney-dangerfield-mustve-taught-beginners/>

[RJ]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28972-%E2%80%9CTake-Me-to-the-Range-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

[Peally]

I am glad I don't teach for those reasons. It's not a safe or easy gig.

[TGS]

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

For the average joe who isn't going into it from the outset as a dedicated gun slinger because of some life changing event?

No accuracy standard. The first session should be about how to handle the gun safely, and having fun. Have them shoot at balloons, skeet, soda bottles or whatever. I like to keep the accuracy limited to "this is the sight, put it on the target."

If they want to go further, then I go further.

[HopetonBrown]

That they hit the target and not the hanger, walls, floor, ceiling, themselves, you or others.

[Duelist]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28972-%E2%80%9CTake-Me-to-the-Range-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

Only one marksmanship standard matters for a first range visit: None of the bullets hit anyone or anything anyone cares about.

It's good if there weren't any dangerous ricochets, either.

Safety is the mantra newbies need to learn. "If it's not safe, it's not fun."

[Surf]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28972-%E2%80%9CTake-Me-to-the-Range-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

Just to preface and expand on the overall topic and not specifically in regards to your "acceptable standard" question, the majority of my life has been teaching in the LE/Mil/Gov sectors. Despite shooting courses not being my main focus in business, within the past year I have been involved in the private sector with huge success, but I have taken a very different approach in regards to private sector courses than many who have come from my background have taken. Undoubably that is what makes our events so successful.

Now more to your question, that depends both on the new shooter and the experience/skill of the person teaching them. A highly skilled instructor will get far better results than someone who is not. I know this sounds like a no-brainer and I am not trying to be crass or attempting to avoid the question, but there is a huge range here. Being able to put a new shooter at ease, make them confident quickly and produce good results on target is a definite skill set.

Having said this, most often the interpersonal skills of the instructor are the most important factor when dealing with a new shooter especially when it comes to the private sector. The LARGEST feedback we get in the private sector is that most are intimidated by perhaps the instructor's background/resume. Next the instructor fails when their personality actually matches their background/resume. This this is where many instructors with "high speed" Mil/LE resume's fail the most within the private sector and turn off a lot of people.

So #1 is getting the attention of the student, maintaining it, and actually making the student want to learn from them. Next, comes the skill set required to actually take a new shooter and getting them to hit what they are shooting at AND enjoying the process is another component.

So, your question of "what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?" is hard to answer. From a pure marksmanship standpoint, a more skilled instructor would produce better results. A very skilled instructor, maybe even far better results than what many may think even possible with a brand new shooter.

I think overall, for a reasonably experienced shooter, but not necessarily an experienced instructor, as long as they make safety a priority, have a sound understanding and ability in conveying fundamentals and base skills to the new shooter, plus the new shooter has reasonable expectations, obtaining hits that they enjoy, everyone has a good time, and leaves with a positive experience, it is a success.

[Dagga Boy]

Two thinks. First with Surf’s Post....I cannot got the like button any harder. With those beginners in the private sector, it’s about them and not about you. In para military organizations, “tradition” often does not allow for teaching students like students. That is often reflected by those stuck in that mode.

Second, had a great conversation with Kathy Jackson on this topic. A huge factor is that beginners don’t make classic mistakes that are easy to diagnose. It takes an experienced instructor to diaganose what is going on. Most of us here could have a inexperienced newbie instructor diagnose our errors right off the Classic chart. With brand new folks....they do some weird stuff you need to work through.

[RJ]

Just to preface and expand on the overall topic and not specifically in regards to your "acceptable standard" question, the majority of my life has been teaching in the LE/Mil/Gov sectors. Despite shooting courses not being my main focus in business, within the past year I have been involved in the private sector with huge success, but I have taken a very different approach in regards to private sector courses than many who have come from my background have taken. Undoubably that is what makes our events so successful.

Now more to your question, that depends both on the new shooter and the experience/skill of the person teaching them. A highly skilled instructor will get far better results than someone who is not. I know this sounds like a no-brainer and I am not trying to be crass or attempting to avoid the question, but there is a huge range here. Being able to put a new shooter at ease, make them confident quickly and produce good results on target is a definite skill set.

Having said this, most often the interpersonal skills of the instructor are the most important factor when dealing with a new shooter especially when it comes to the private sector. The LARGEST feedback we get in the private sector is that most are intimidated by perhaps the instructor's background/resume. Next the instructor fails when their personality actually matches their background/resume. This this is where many instructors with "high speed" Mil/LE resume's fail the most within the private sector and turn off a lot of people.

So #1 is getting the attention of the student, maintaining it, and actually making the student want to learn from them. Next, comes the skill set required to actually take a new shooter and getting them to hit what they are shooting at AND enjoying the process is another component.

So, your question of "what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?" is hard to answer. From a pure marksmanship standpoint, a more skilled instructor would produce better results. A very skilled instructor, maybe even far better results than what many may think even possible with a brand new shooter.

I think overall, for a reasonably experienced shooter, but not necessarily an experienced instructor, as long as they make safety a priority, have a sound understanding and ability in conveying fundamentals and base skills to the new shooter, plus the new shooter has reasonable expectations, obtaining hits that they enjoy, everyone has a good time, and leaves with a positive experience, it is a success.

Thanks Surf, that’s a really thoughtful post.

I have no .mil experience, and am not LEO. However my 32 year career in Aerospace was centered on Instructional Systems Design. So it is really really interesting to me to understand how top trainers approach this problem.

Recently, a friend of mine asked me to take her to the Range. I started with what I wanted to achieve with a new shooter. I wanted them to be safe, but I also wanted to start the process of being accountable.

So, for a target, I ended up with an 8” circle, with a 0.38” black aiming dot at the center. (I’ve read Claude Warner’s thoughts that we need an aiming point to shrink groups. And I picked 8”, since that is close to the dimension across the nipples, I.e. a hit.)

Anyway, after about three hours at her home reviewing the basics, we spent about an hour at the range.

Despite never shooting a firearm, one of her later strings she put 5/5 in a 6” group centered on the dot with an M&P Compact 2.0. She was thrilled.

Much appreciate all the comments here. I’m definitely interested in the actual “real” trainers here (I am patently not one) on the subject of teaching new shooters.

[David S.]

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?
What are your student's goals? Does she care about shooting beyond a surface level introduction, or is she interested in a deeper application?

Because that matters.

[Peally]

What are your student's goals? Does she care about shooting beyond a surface level introduction, or is she interested in a deeper application?

Because that matters.

Does it? When I started I couldn't have cared less, safety was more important. The desire to compete and better myself came naturally.

[RJ]

I ran across this tonight.

Timely.

http://www.buildingshooters.com/Article-29-01-19-2018.html

“The distributed, less formal structures that are usually involved in mentoring can produce better, safer, more effective shooters and gun owners faster and more efficiently than virtually any other known training method. All it requires is a mentor who possesses the skills themselves, along with a little knowledge about how to make the characteristics of the human brain work in the student’s favor.”

Good stuff, I thought.

You guys are into martial arts, right? Are the instructors the only ones working with the white belts? What if learning to shoot were more like a Dojo? It’s been a long time that I had a Gi on (a looooooonnnnnnngggggggg time) but some of it stuck. Is that concept applicable here?

[Surf]

Two thinks. First with Surf’s Post....I cannot got the like button any harder. With those beginners in the private sector, it’s about them and not about you. In para military organizations, “tradition” often does not allow for teaching students like students. That is often reflected by those stuck in that mode.

Second, had a great conversation with Kathy Jackson on this topic. A huge factor is that beginners don’t make classic mistakes that are easy to diagnose. It takes an experienced instructor to diaganose what is going on. Most of us here could have a inexperienced newbie instructor diagnose our errors right off the Classic chart. With brand new folks....they do some weird stuff you need to work through.Absolutely.

Also for Rich, take note of what Dagga says and I also like to remind people that yes correct diagnosis is critical as there are several potential causes for a failure in execution. Many instructors may be one or two trick ponies, or even work off of a checklist for remedies, but a truly great instructor needs to know how to most effectively fix the issue and that they should possess several workarounds to arrive at the solution because people being different, there is no one approach. They key is understanding the person as a person and how they learn or relate information and present it in a manner that is coherent to them.


Thanks Surf, that’s a really thoughtful post.

I have no .mil experience, and am not LEO. However my 32 year career in Aerospace was centered on Instructional Systems Design. So it is really really interesting to me to understand how top trainers approach this problem.

Recently, a friend of mine asked me to take her to the Range. I started with what I wanted to achieve with a new shooter. I wanted them to be safe, but I also wanted to start the process of being accountable.

So, for a target, I ended up with an 8” circle, with a 0.38” black aiming dot at the center. (I’ve read Claude Warner’s thoughts that we need an aiming point to shrink groups. And I picked 8”, since that is close to the dimension across the nipples, I.e. a hit.)

Anyway, after about three hours at her home reviewing the basics, we spent about an hour at the range.

Despite never shooting a firearm, one of her later strings she put 5/5 in a 6” group centered on the dot with an M&P Compact 2.0. She was thrilled.

Much appreciate all the comments here. I’m definitely interested in the actual “real” trainers here (I am patently not one) on the subject of teaching new shooters.Sounds like you did a great job. When learning marksmanship, I mean really learning to apply the basic fundamentals to achieve precise results, it is necessary to have a fine of an aiming point as possible. Or refining that point of aim to a finer point in which to direct our aim over a correct progression. Finer points to aim, aim small miss small, has several benefits to include giving the conscious mind something to think hard about especially when it comes to individuals who may be sensitive to the weapon discharging.


I ran across this tonight.

Timely.

http://www.buildingshooters.com/Article-29-01-19-2018.html

“The distributed, less formal structures that are usually involved in mentoring can produce better, safer, more effective shooters and gun owners faster and more efficiently than virtually any other known training method. All it requires is a mentor who possesses the skills themselves, along with a little knowledge about how to make the characteristics of the human brain work in the student’s favor.”

Good stuff, I thought.

You guys are into martial arts, right? Are the instructors the only ones working with the white belts? What if learning to shoot were more like a Dojo? It’s been a long time that I had a Gi on (a looooooonnnnnnngggggggg time) but some of it stuck. Is that concept applicable here?I generally think of myself as a mentor in that I have a long-term investment in the individual. Initially, we must all teach but becoming a mentor in the long-term goal.

There is one thing about the martial arts sensei analogy that I find to be a sore spot within the martial arts community in the my sensei vs yours. I also see quite a bit of martial arts instructors who get highly offended if you show a desire to perhaps simultaneously train under someone else even in another discipline. A truly great instructor/mentor will provide guidance on say another shooting trainer or school, but should also encourage growth by encouraging students to seek out others. A good mentor should be secure enough in their skills, or aware enough in regards to their own skills and perhaps limitations that they should not try to teach things outside of their own "lane" so to speak. The problem with the shooting world is that many instrcutors try to be all, guys teaching things that they have no business teaching.

I will also say that a truly great instructor/mentor is someone who understands people just as much or more so than the topic. They are able to be relatable on an individual level and can back up their expertise via their performance. As an example many LE agencies have instructors who may simply teach off of a lesson plan as in a checklist. They may know enough to teach, but will never be a shooting mentor, until they themselves put in the work.

[Wake27]

Awesome thread with some great advice. I’ve taken a lot of people shooting for their first time and done a lot of one on one coaching in that context, but doing that with a group of even three to four people or progressing with one person over an extended period are much more complicated tasks than I originally expected.

I can’t agree more on the importance of being able to connect with the individual student, especially if it’s a new shooter who may be intimidated. Being able to explain the “why” behind things is important as well, though probably more so to shooters who already have a basic understanding as that can get overwhelming for the brand new ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RJ]

Just for interest, here is the article on Spot Shooting I was referring to.

https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress.com/2014/07/19/spot-shooting/

“One of the biggest problems I see in current training methods is the concept of “aim for center of mass.” Coupled with the blank targets used, it’s no wonder that people have a hard time learning to hit anything. That’s the equivalent of what’s called an “area target” in the Army. Area targets are best engaged with some form of area weapon, such as a machinegun, grenade launcher, mortar, or artillery. However, we don’t carry area weapons for self-defense.”

[David S.]

However, we don’t carry area weapons for self-defense.”

Obviously you've never heard of .45 ACP. :p

[SeriousStudent]

Just wait until I get that Form 4 approved for an M203......

HEDP and CS rounds - that's area denial!

[JDD]

“The distributed, less formal structures that are usually involved in mentoring can produce better, safer, more effective shooters and gun owners faster and more efficiently than virtually any other known training method. All it requires is a mentor who possesses the skills themselves, along with a little knowledge about how to make the characteristics of the human brain work in the student’s favor.”


Not to be opposition, but I would disagree pretty strongly. I think the article vastly under-estimates the skill involved in being an instructor/mentor.

I have had a fair number of firearms instruction in my life. Many of them have been fantastic shooters. The material that I learned the best, is the material that I learned from the folks who were fantastic instructors (some of who were formal, others mentors). Teaching is a skill that requires time and practice on its own. While you can't teach if you don't intimately know the material you are trying to convey, being an expert does not also mean that you have the skills to be a good instructor.

Sure, you can pass down information the way it was passed to you, or you can follow a set curriculum, but that only works well if you are working with a student who ticks the same way you do. Knowing different learning styles, how to present information in a logical way that builds on itself but does not overwhelm at first, maintaining safety, identifying problems and working out solutions that work best for the student (not just what you do) are all part of instruction, and not necessarily things that come with being a good shooter.

This all ties back to a generalized frustration I have with instructors who were hired or who put out a shingle based on their super high-speed background, but who are not world class in their ability to transfer and impart that experience and knowledge.

[mmc45414]

One thing I have done in the past is get people to set their own standard by handing them my 22/45 that has a nice trigger and FO sights and have them shoot at about 5 yards before doing anything center fire. This establishes a better confidence level and when they start yanking and flinching we can refer back to the target they just shot with the 22 and know they are doing something that has degraded their performance. Not totally true or fair but underscores the fundamentals.

But, to sorta hijack this, I really do not have that much experience helping new shooters because few ever seem to make the transition from wanting to. I have had long conversations at social gatherings, and used to follow up when I had the opportunity for somebody to join, because, you know, it is my opportunity to give a little something back to the community. I have adjusted my expectations. Thus concludes my rant...

[Wendell]

I ran across this tonight. Timely. http://www.buildingshooters.com/Article-29-01-19-2018.html

I'll say. This part really hit home:


...wherever you may sit on the political fence, let me encourage you to keep firearms mentoring interactions apolitical—especially if this may be a potential area of disagreement between you and a prospective student. This isn’t because politics-based issues and discussions aren’t important. They are. Rather, it’s because personal opinions tend to be similar to personal anatomical waste exit ports—everyone has a unique one, but they all generally tend to stink up close, and nobody wants one shoved in their face. Irrefutable facts and actual, real-world performance, on the other hand, those tend to be relatively clean and universal. They also lead to the formation of sounder opinions. If someone is interested enough to learn from you based on what you have to offer, help them become a safe, highly competent firearms owner (in whatever discipline). Conclusions will follow experiences—and these tend to be better formulated when the experiences a) aren’t unpleasant and b) are deeply rooted in facts and personal, experiential performance.

<http://www.buildingshooters.com/Article-29-01-19-2018.html>

:o

[David S.]

I'll say. This part really hit home:

Quote about discussing politics in class.




This is a huuuuuge pet peeve of mine, particularly in classes advertised for beginners.

[gtae07]

This is a huuuuuge pet peeve of mine, particularly in classes advertised for beginners.

THIS.

We live in an area that, overall, is fairly balanced politically even though it may vary sharply at the neighborhood level. A lot of the introductory/beginner classes around here tend to have a fairly diverse group of students, and when instructors start getting political it can be a real turn-off to people.

[Frank Ettin]

....Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

I'm with a group of instructors putting on a monthly Basic Handgun class (originally it was an NRA Basic Handgun class -- our class hasn't changed but the NRA class has). We're older guys, most of us retired or close to it. We've all done a fair bit of shooting and training -- multiple classes at Gunsite, classes with a number of instructors like Massad Ayoob or Louis Awerbuck, USPSA or IDPA competition, NRA instructor certifications, and three are POST certified. Our training group is organized as a 501(c)(3) corporation. We're all volunteers, and none of use receive any compensation (except the company buys us dinner after the class where we do a debriefing). Our class fees are set to just cover our expenses and operating costs. We supply everything -- guns, ammunition, eye and ear protection, a book on California gun laws, etc.

Probably 80% to 90% of our students had never touched a real gun before. Our class enrollment runs roughly 30% female. We have students of all ages from early 20s to us more seasoned types. We've had entire families attend together.

Most of our student show varying levels of anxiety at handling real guns. We try to address this by bringing them through the course material in a step-by-step, measured and supportive way. We limit class size to 10 students, and will have at least five or six instructors at each class. The class runs about ten hours, but we try to provide adequate breaks. Periodically we discuss breaking the class up into two days; but since we often have students travel from some distance doing so might be a greater hardship.

In addition to the core lectures, the first of which is on safety, we do a lot of "hands-on" work with the students. The students handle a variety of revolvers and semi-autos under direct supervision, one-on-one, of an instructor. They use dummy rounds to load and unload the guns, dry fire and generally learn how things work and feel, and they get continual safety reinforcement.

These initial hands-on exercises help students get familiar with handling a gun and lay a foundation for safe gun handling habits. For beginners handling guns for the first time is pretty awkward. Guns feel strange in the their hands. Many are surprised by how heavy they are. They have no sense of how much or how little force is needed to operate the various "do-dads." The students begin to realize that although guns can be dangerous they can learn how to handle them safely and that safety is in their hands.

In preparation for live fire we put on a lecture and demonstration about how to actually shoot (grip, stance, sight alignment, trigger press, surprise break, focus on the front sight, and eye dominance). I usually do this one, and I like to use an airsoft gun fitted with a Crimson Trace laser grip to illustrate a controlled trigger press compared with jerking the trigger. We then work one-on-one with students on grip and stance using "blue" inert training guns.

Before going to live fire with .22s, the students shoot airsoft (the quality type) in the classroom so they can get a feel for sight alignment and trigger control (and reset) without the noise and intimidation factor (for beginners) of firing real ammunition.

After the students fire their 25 rounds of .22 (working one-on-one with an instructor), we put out a variety of guns from 9mm to .44 Magnum so the students can get the experience of firing the larger calibers. Shooting the centerfire guns is at each student's option. Most fire them all, but some choose not to.

During the live fire exercises it's not uncommon for a student to shoot 2 to 3 inch groups at seven yards with even the heavy calibers. A few months ago, a petite young woman who had never fired any type of gun before out shot everyone, including her husband, with the .44 Magnum -- putting three rounds into about an inch at 7 yards.

Going through our process most students shed a good deal of their initial anxiety. Some remain anxious to a degree but still manage to master their anxiety and perform well. In the last several years only one or two (out of perhaps a couple of hundred) could not complete the class.

Some time ago got an email from a student. She is a very petite Asian woman who is a PhD candidate in statistics at Stanford. She wrote:

Dear BayProfs,

Just wanted to say I had a great time at the Basic Pistol class this weekend. The class was very thoughtfully organized; it was very helpful to progress from watching the instructors, to doing the hands-on practice, to doing the real deal. I really appreciate how patient you all were in answering our questions and giving us feedback. So thanks a lot! I will try to send some of my friends your way, assuming I can convince them not to be scared of guns....And that's why we teach beginners.

And the foregoing was a very prolix way to answer Rich's question.

[RJ]

So I just wanted to add some basic information and a link to a model commonly used in DoD for Instructional Systems Design called the ADDIE model.

http://www.instructionaldesign.org/models/addie.html

ADDIE stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation. It’s been around for a while, in one form or another, with some ISD approaches springing off of it (Rapid Prototyping for example.)

[RJ]

What are your student's goals? Does she care about shooting beyond a surface level introduction, or is she interested in a deeper application?

Because that matters.

Let me (gently) disagree. I was trying to isolate on what could be achieved, not necessarily their motivation.

Perhaps my premise wasn’t stated well enough.

How about this: Given an adult, in the anthropometric range from 5% female to 95% male, North American, under ideal conditions, with no previous experience with center fire handguns, what is an achievable minimum standard of accuracy at 5 yards on an 8” Steel plate or equivalent paper target after one hour of training by a current, competent and qualified instructor?

I ended up at 8/10 on 8” at 15’; and my 1 of 1 student met that goal (5/5 in 6”, but bear with me).

So what would be your minimum, and why?

PS I get folks who say ‘none, just shoot’, but I happen to disagree strongly. I believe hits matter, and were I ever to become an instructor, that ethos would underpin my approach.

[RJ]

I'm with a group of instructors putting on a monthly Basic Handgun class...



Thanks Frank.

It’s interesting, the approach you describe mirrors my take on this almost exactly, less the .22 part.

[Drang]

...
How about this: Given an adult, in the anthropometric range from 5% female to 95% male, North American, under ideal conditions, with no previous experience with center fire handguns, what is an achievable minimum standard of accuracy at 5 yards on an 8” Steel plate or equivalent paper target after one hour of training by a current, competent and qualified instructor...
With what gun, caliber, and load?
The obvious answer is "They run what they brung", and then you have to convince them that they chose... poorly. Without discouraging them.
(I recall a couple who showed up for an NRA Basic Pistol class, she had a 1911, and he had a J Frame .38. He was convinced that she had too much gun, and that his would be much more manageable. I sure hope he wasn't an engineer, because that lesson in applied physics was painful for him...)

As an aside, this is why I oppose laws requiring a qualification in order to own, still less carry, a gun: The Powers That Be could easily set up the qualification course so as to eliminate everybody, or anybody they didn't want to qualify. The favorites get a match .22 using competition ammo, others a .40 S&W with +P+ ammo. If you really want to discourage them, they get .44 magnums or even .500s...

[RJ]

With what gun, caliber, and load?
The obvious answer is "They run what they brung", and then you have to convince them that they chose... poorly. Without discouraging them.
(I recall a couple who showed up for an NRA Basic Pistol class, she had a 1911, and he had a J Frame .38. He was convinced that she had too much gun, and that his would be much more manageable. I sure hope he wasn't an engineer, because that lesson in applied physics was painful for him...)

As an aside, this is why I oppose laws requiring a qualification in order to own, still less carry, a gun: The Powers That Be could easily set up the qualification course so as to eliminate everybody, or anybody they didn't want to qualify. The favorites get a match .22 using competition ammo, others a .40 S&W with +P+ ammo. If you really want to discourage them, they get .44 magnums or even .500s...

A Glock 19?

I mean, nobody still shoots those WWI guns, do they? :cool:

On Qualification, I 100% agree on ownership or in your place of business to own a gun.

For CCW, I support something stronger as a requirement. Here in FL, it’s pretty basic; “Demonstrate Competency with a handgun”. Not quite ‘Fog a mirror’, but close.

The State describes it as:

“Florida law requires you to submit proof of competency with a rearm in order to qualify for a concealed weapon license. A copy of a CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION or similar document from any of the following courses or classes is acceptable:
• any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or a similar agency in another state;
• any National Ri e Association rearms safety or training course;
• any rearms safety or training course or class available to the general public offered by a law enforcement agency,
junior college, college, or private or public institution or organization or rearms training school, utilizing instructors certi ed by the National Ri e Association, the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, or the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services;
• any law enforcement rearms safety or training course or class offered for security of cers, investigators, special deputies, or any division or subdivision of law enforcement or security enforcement;
• any rearms training or safety course or class conducted by a state-certi ed instructor or by an instructor certi ed by the National Ri e Association.
The copy of the training certi cate/document must be clear and legible. The certi cate/document must include your name, your instructor’s name, your instructor’s quali cations/credentials (National Ri e Association instructor, law enforcement rearms instructor, Class “K” Firearms Instructor licensed by the State of Florida, etc.), and your instructor’s license/ certi cation number.
Other acceptable forms of training documentation include the following:
• documentary evidence of experience with a rearm obtained through participation in organized shooting competition; • active-duty military personnel may submit copies of any of the following documents that con rm your experience
with a rearm gained during service: military orders including call to active-duty letter; a statement of military service signed by, or at the direction of, the adjutant, personnel of cer, or commander of your unit or higher headquarters which identi es you and provides your date of entry for your current active-duty period;
• former military personnel can submit a DD Form 214 re ecting honorable discharge from military service. PLEASE NOTE: Any National Ri e Association rearms safety or training course, any rearms safety or training course or class available to the general public offered by a law enforcement agency, junior college, college, or private or public institution or organization or rearms training school, utilizing instructors certi ed by the National Ri e Association, the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, or any rearms training or safety course or class conducted by a state-certi ed instructor or by an instructor certi ed by the National Ri e Association must include live re using “

What does WA mandate for CCW?

[Drang]

What does WA mandate for CCW?
Pay your money and pass a background check.
Been that way since the early 60s. (They say WA was the first "shall issue" state, I don't know.)
Oddly, we still don't have blood flowing in the streets.

[David S.]

.........

[David S.]

Rich,

Re: informal training that you and I might do.
My point was, does the "student" care about shooting beyond just being a curious novelty. My wife, for instance, finds shooting moderately enjoyable. But, in spite of receiving some solid mindset and awareness training, couldn't be bothered with personal defense. Most of the other's I've taken to the range have been the same way. If that's the case, I'm not going to be terribly concerned about accuracy standards. If the student does has competition, defensive, or other technical interest, then I'd be happy to take the student as far as I could, and I'd certainly apply accuracy standards accordingly. That's what I mean by "what are the student's goals?"

For reasonable target size, dinner size paper plate or a repair center on a cardboard backer at 3 or 5 yards seems like a good place to start. Just work with what you got, like you are. The ability to score a repair center makes things a bit more interesting.

[RJ]

Rich,

Re: informal training that you and I might do.
My point was, does the "student" care about shooting beyond just being a curious novelty. My wife, for instance, finds shooting moderately enjoyable. But, in spite of receiving some solid mindset and awareness training, couldn't be bothered with personal defense. Most of the other's I've taken to the range have been the same way. If that's the case, I'm not going to be terribly concerned about accuracy standards. If the student does has competition, defensive, or other technical interest, then I'd be happy to take the student as far as I could, and I'd certainly apply accuracy standards accordingly. That's what I mean by "what are the student's goals?"



Makes sense now.

My student was pretty motivated, which might explain her ability to absorb information. I sensed that, so it was enjoyable to say ‘Front sight, press’ and watch her do just that. Boom. Bullseye.

[Frank Ettin]

....My point was, does the "student" care about shooting beyond just being a curious novelty. ....

In my experience they do. They might not have at the time ambitions to go on to competition or more advanced self defense training, but they do relish the satisfaction of a feeling that they have accomplished something. Their getting hits on target and good groups are clues to them that they have learned something. After the lectures and the hands-on exercises it they see it come together -- first with airsoft and then on the range -- in the form of actual hits on target. We put our class on at a public range, and most of our students notice that they are actually shooting better than many of the other shooters there.

Some students have initial difficulty, and we work with them. They improve, and shooting paper targets (plate size circles) shows them that they are learning.

[RJ]

In my experience they do. They might not have at the time ambitions to go on to competition or more advanced self defense training, but they do relish the satisfaction of a feeling that they have accomplished something. Their getting hits on target and good groups are clues to them that they have learned something. After the lectures and the hands-on exercises it they see it come together -- first with airsoft and then on the range -- in the form of actual hits on target. We put our class on at a public range, and most of our students notice that they are actually shooting better than many of the other shooters there.

Some students have initial difficulty, and we work with them. They improve, and shooting paper targets (plate size circles) shows them that they are learning.

Frank - What Airsoft Gun do you use?

I know zilch about those. That’s like a BB gun that shoots those little plastic balls?

[David S.]

Frank - What Airsoft Gun do you use?

I know zilch about those. That’s like a BB gun that shoots those little plastic balls?

If you like listening, check out: The Survival Podcast: Fun, Training and Family Time with Airsoft Guns. (http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/episode-1860-airsoft-guns) Skip to 11 minutes in. Applicable content is about a 1 hour long.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Here's a presentation from KRtraining, they were one of the pioneers in Airsoft: https://www.krtraining.com/KRTraining/Archive/ForceOnForce.pdf

[Frank Ettin]

Frank - What Airsoft Gun do you use?

I know zilch about those. That’s like a BB gun that shoots those little plastic balls?

We use the sorts described in links in David's and Glenn's posts, just above. They are replicas of the real thing (we use mostly a Glock pattern, a 1911 pattern, and a SIG 226 pattern) and they operate like the real thing. They fire a 6mm plastic ball propelled by compressed green (propane) gas. The triggers are decent and reset like the real thing, and the slides reciprocate.

We've found them to be a very useful intermediate step in the transition from dry handling to shooting live ammunition. It allows the student a chance to get a feel for a surprise break, trigger reset, and what all happens when the gun fires (i. e., the slide movement) without some of the distractions that go with live ammunition. It also gives us a chance to identify and begin to correct shooting problems.

We set up targets (we use large paper targets with five plate size circles printed on them) with a heavy blanket as backstop (folded at the bottom to catch the balls). So we can see their hits on target and address problems. So if someone doesn't seem to understand surprise break, or trigger reset, or follow through we'll identify that and work with the student before going onto the range. If someone has an eye dominance issue, e. g., eyes fighting for dominance when the dominant eye is only weakly dominant, we can suggest and try somethings to help before going onto the range.

[David S.]

Airsoft really does seem like a really underutilized tool for teaching new shooters, particularly those who might be recoil sensitive.

I think it's awesome that you guys are seeing such great success with them.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

They are not without some pain. Get hosed with a full auto one very close up when only wearing a t-shirt. Ouch. Interesting exercise at Karl Rehn's. You stand in the center of a square with four people surrounding you. You had to rotate and engage each person, gun at low ready. We found that most of us shot low. So we ended with strings of little airsoft pellet welts just above belt line. Given that manly men wear their belts hanging low (haha), it was kind of funny.

However, we used them in more traditional FOF with great success. In another, FOF elsewhere, I was a rampage shooter and then surrendered to a team. I came out with hands up. But oops, I had a small airsoft in the small of my back. As they were yelling instructions, I pulled it out and shot one in the face mask (full masks). Then I died. Point was to pay attention to the person you have covered. They are great tools, IMHO.

[JRB]

I'm with a group of instructors putting on a monthly Basic Handgun class (originally it was an NRA Basic Handgun class -- our class hasn't changed but the NRA class has). We're older guys, most of us retired or close to it. We've all done a fair bit of shooting and training -- multiple classes at Gunsite, classes with a number of instructors like Massad Ayoob or Louis Awerbuck, USPSA or IDPA competition, NRA instructor certifications, and three are POST certified. Our training group is organized as a 501(c)(3) corporation. We're all volunteers, and none of use receive any compensation (except the company buys us dinner after the class where we do a debriefing). Our class fees are set to just cover our expenses and operating costs. We supply everything -- guns, ammunition, eye and ear protection, a book on California gun laws, etc.

Probably 80% to 90% of our students had never touched a real gun before. Our class enrollment runs roughly 30% female. We have students of all ages from early 20s to us more seasoned types. We've had entire families attend together.

Most of our student show varying levels of anxiety at handling real guns. We try to address this by bringing them through the course material in a step-by-step, measured and supportive way. We limit class size to 10 students, and will have at least five or six instructors at each class. The class runs about ten hours, but we try to provide adequate breaks. Periodically we discuss breaking the class up into two days; but since we often have students travel from some distance doing so might be a greater hardship.

In addition to the core lectures, the first of which is on safety, we do a lot of "hands-on" work with the students. The students handle a variety of revolvers and semi-autos under direct supervision, one-on-one, of an instructor. They use dummy rounds to load and unload the guns, dry fire and generally learn how things work and feel, and they get continual safety reinforcement.

These initial hands-on exercises help students get familiar with handling a gun and lay a foundation for safe gun handling habits. For beginners handling guns for the first time is pretty awkward. Guns feel strange in the their hands. Many are surprised by how heavy they are. They have no sense of how much or how little force is needed to operate the various "do-dads." The students begin to realize that although guns can be dangerous they can learn how to handle them safely and that safety is in their hands.

In preparation for live fire we put on a lecture and demonstration about how to actually shoot (grip, stance, sight alignment, trigger press, surprise break, focus on the front sight, and eye dominance). I usually do this one, and I like to use an airsoft gun fitted with a Crimson Trace laser grip to illustrate a controlled trigger press compared with jerking the trigger. We then work one-on-one with students on grip and stance using "blue" inert training guns.

Before going to live fire with .22s, the students shoot airsoft (the quality type) in the classroom so they can get a feel for sight alignment and trigger control (and reset) without the noise and intimidation factor (for beginners) of firing real ammunition.

After the students fire their 25 rounds of .22 (working one-on-one with an instructor), we put out a variety of guns from 9mm to .44 Magnum so the students can get the experience of firing the larger calibers. Shooting the centerfire guns is at each student's option. Most fire them all, but some choose not to.

During the live fire exercises it's not uncommon for a student to shoot 2 to 3 inch groups at seven yards with even the heavy calibers. A few months ago, a petite young woman who had never fired any type of gun before out shot everyone, including her husband, with the .44 Magnum -- putting three rounds into about an inch at 7 yards.

Going through our process most students shed a good deal of their initial anxiety. Some remain anxious to a degree but still manage to master their anxiety and perform well. In the last several years only one or two (out of perhaps a couple of hundred) could not complete the class.

Some time ago got an email from a student. She is a very petite Asian woman who is a PhD candidate in statistics at Stanford. She wrote:
And that's why we teach beginners.

And the foregoing was a very prolix way to answer Rich's question.

What an excellent class format!

If anyone knows of a class like this in the Panama City/North Florida area, please send me a PM with more info.
A family member in that area is strongly considering gun ownership for the first time in her life (she's in her late 40's) and I think a class like this would be perfect for her.

[Wendell]

More on introducing beginners...


"...our stance is simple: we’re here to bring people into the sport legally, cheaply and with as much fun as possible. This isn’t about politics,” Mr. Liu said. He added that everyone in the group has their own opinions on these matters.

<https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/>

A night at the gun club
(https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/)Yes, there are some universities that have student gun clubs – and they’re not as controversial as you might think.
(https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/)
(https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/) By THERESA TAYLER | JAN 31 2018 (https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/)
<https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/night-gun-club/>

[willie]

My profession was teaching. I learned bulls eye marksmanship at an early age. I have successfully taught many other people to shoot a handgun. But, I would only teach one person at a time. I started with a .22 revolver and then went to .22 semi auto. Next was a center fire handgun similar to their weapon, and then their weapon. I insisted on several short lessons. I avoided shooter fatigue and tried to limit frustration. If I got an idiot, then the whole gig ended. I made extensive use of intermittent reinforcement with more positive than negative comments. Safety first was the rule. My instruction was free.