Tactical training for the CCW holder

[Clay]

I think Tom Givens' Combative Pistol and Dynamic Marksmanship classes would be ideal, followed up by regular range visits - say once a month or so. A basic first aid course dealing with gunshot wounds, etc. would be ideal. Mas Ayoob's MAG-20 or MAG-40 would be a great choice, too. I think the average CCW holder needs a really good mindset/ use of force class, along with basic marksmanship fundamentals - and not so much the runnin and gunnin high speed gunfighter stuff. Clint and Heidi Smith's Defensive Concealed Carry class is another excellent choice, if you have the cash.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

Sounds like ECQC & AMIS would be a great start and refresher to this subject matter on a lot of levels.

Hopefully SN can way in on his experience.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

I'm not sure there is as much value in those classes without some level of competency prior to attendance. They are both on my list of must take classes. I think AMIS is really the only one out there that addresses the solo structure problem from a civilian/lone LE perspective. Many other classes I have seen or been in have been team tactics taught for one person against paper targets that can't tell you about your use of cover.



As far as relevancy for handgun use I think Tom Givens puts out a very realistically balanced class, with data to support the material. Plus he actually carries a gun all the time.

[Dagga Boy]

Having taken some classes from Tom Givens as well as just finishing his three day Instructor class as a student, I would concur that he is at the top of the food chain for training armed citizens. What is interesting, is that a ton of what we teach that is geared towards individual police officers (tons of stuff out there geared toward SWAT operations, but we have gotten away from this) operating alone or with very limited assistance. While we differ with Tom on a few things (mainly tac reloads, and I can easily articulate why for both LE and non LE, and some revolver stuff that are both pretty minor differences) a majority is exactly the same.

Keep in mind that for problems citizens face, they are a regular day at the office for local patrol cops, with all the same folks as adversaries and all of the same investigative review and the same legal system in place for both the LEO's and armed citizens. We feel that there is "something" to this, others disagree. Also keep in mind that off-duty LEO's are essentially CHL folks and many of the lessons learned with off-duty encounters mirrors CHL carriers experiences. The main issue from a training standpoint is that there are a ton of LEO's (former and current) training people that had no business training there own people and certainly shouldn't be training others. The hard part is that a vast majority of armed civilians get very questionable "training" and are often reeled in by those good at marketing and not so good with content.
The answer is for people to take a very serious look at who they are going to for training. Often, easy replaces serious.

[KevinB]

Good points all.

I was basing my response more to the PF Crowd - as a baseline -- not to the national average. I believe a number of folks here take classes regularly (1/month, or 1 every 2 months), and shoot at least 1/week.

I was also basing this on my assumption that before seeking any sort of CQB class that one has a core background in weapons handling and safety.
I would not recommend it for anyone who just bought a gun.

I would hope anyone carrying a gun has taken a TCCC class.

[Jay Cunningham]

I started teaching in 2010 because I saw patterns in the firearms training industry that I didn't like. I hoped that I could do the shooters one better than I'd been seeing.

I didn't like dogmatic instruction, I didn't like lots of down time and long lunches, and I didn't like low round counts and a slow tempo when it was time to shoot. I didn't like irrelevant war stories or trash-talking other instructors in the industry. I didn't like hero-worship from student cliques, and I didn't like very specialized techniques and tactics thoughtlessly pawned off as great for general consumption. I didn't like the complete inability of most shooting instructors to properly diagnose shooting. I didn't like students playing dress-up and screwing around when I was trying to learn. And I really didn't like when instructors seemed to just "phone it in".

So I decided to do my best to effect change.

The tactics, techniques, and procedures I teach are rooted in analysis of proven military, law enforcement, and competition methods. I run all of this material through a filter to give people everything they need and nothing they don't.

I use a systematic approach to training: I design and develop my clinics and courses from the best available information and tailor them to the responsible armed citizen. I strive to continually evaluate the implementation of my programs to ensure that I'm responsive to student needs and current events. My goal is to provide armed citizens with the necessary tools to prevail against a lethal threat in the everyday world. I start with training the fundamentals, then move to training the middle of the statistical bell curve for civilian armed encounters, then move to training for outliers on that bell curve. To supplement the full coursework, I run half day clinics to provide high intensity training for experienced shooters, as well as development opportunities for newer shooters.

Tom Givens does a huge amount of it right. Craig Douglas does a huge amount of it right. Pat Goodale's Practical Firearms Training does a huge amount of it right. Others have pieces parts which are very, very good.

[SouthNarc]

Sounds like ECQC & AMIS would be a great start and refresher to this subject matter on a lot of levels.

Hopefully SN can way in on his experience.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

Well since you asked I don't think the solo/lo-vis/singleton/non-kinetic/ "don't have a tactical version of the NFL behind me" paradigm is adequately addressed by former mil guys well at all, unless they served clandestinely. That's rare. That's not a regular part of their mission. Guys that serve(d) Blue or Green may have some training in that regard but that's not what they do. There are SMUs that do that are small and rarely discussed. Sean would probably agree with me on this but may very well have insight that I don't. If he does, he probably can't really discuss that openly.

Solo skillsets are completely different IMO. Hyper-vigilance and technical expression of awareness, spatial relationships, verbal agility, initiative, geometry, and decision making trump marksmanship as far as priority.

These aren't things you generally learn on ranges.

Random outpouring I know but I'll try and post more later.

[KevinB]

Well since you asked I don't think the solo/lo-vis/singleton/non-kinetic/ "don't have a tactical version of the NFL behind me" paradigm is adequately addressed by former mil guys well at all, unless they served clandestinely. That's rare. That's not a regular part of their mission. Guys that serve(d) Blue or Green may have some training in that regard but that's not what they do. There are SMUs that do that are small and rarely discussed. Sean would probably agree with me on this but may very well have insight that I don't. If he does, he probably can't really discuss that openly.

This is one area where some of the Brits can be awesome - Regiment or Int guys with a lot of Northern Ireland time had to do it solo -- the Aussies and Canadians as well with no Posse Comitatus have some additional abilities due to the Domestic CT role

Solo skillsets are completely different IMO. Hyper-vigilance and technical expression of awareness, spatial relationships, verbal agility, initiative, geometry, and decision making trump marksmanship as far as priority.


These aren't things you generally learn on ranges.

.

Agreed.

Looking forward to your comments.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

From the perspective of the FOG consumer of courses - I opine that the basic package should be:

1. Solid basics of gun usage - with a realistic carry gun.
2. Solid exposure to the legal issues and mindset
3. A well thought out and refereed FOF experience. This should include not just a shoot'em up but avoidance, dealing with the aftermath and associated things that happen in a critical incident

That's the minor in civilian SD usage

For the major:

1. Low light
2. First aid
3. Retention and H2H
4. More advanced gun utilization skills to increase speed and accuracy.

Electives:

1. If you claim you will use a long arm to defense the castle: Long arm training (not advanced shotgun racking to scare aware folks )
2. Things related to cars
3. If you can afford it and go - try something like Given's conference or the old NTI.
4. If you end up carrying a mouse gun in your pocket or a snubby - train with that too and shoot it.
5. Knife class

Then - practice - pragmatically, repeat courses are expensive - so most probably would go with some competition venue (not for 'tactics') but to keep handling skills up.

As far as whom I've trained (or been in classes) with:
Mas, Insights crew, Givens, Spaulding, KRtraining (Karl - has an integrated and affordable course sequence that would easily take one through the curriculum, esp. with the guest instructors added to his AT sequence), Moses, Gomez, Stanford, Givens' conference - various folks, Claude Werner for snubby - might have missed someone. I have found all these to be informative and a good learning experience. No commandos or nuts.

There is one trainer I won't mention who is a putz. No need to be nasty.

So, I would tell folks who aren't truly into - do at least do the minor. It is hard to get folks to do that though.

[Dagga Boy]

"There is one trainer I won't mention who is a putz. No need to be nasty."

I have been called far worse. Go ahead, it won't hurt my feelings.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Not you! Haha!