Survey results- Why people do not take training

J

JimConway

Instructor
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
946
Likes
92
Location
Pepperell, MA
Feedback: 2 / 0 / 0
When I started the thread on why people that carry do not take training, I never expected to level of respone that I received. First and most important, I want to thank everyone that offered their thoughts. Over the next few days i will try to summarize the results into a small list of categories. I hope that this will enable all of us to see where we fit on our reasons for not training.
If you remember, i started the survey with some data taken from Kathy Jackson's site (www.corneredcat.com). Kathy did a very similar survey and got the following results:

"I can teach myself to shoot.
I do not need to know about that "high speed - low drag" ninja stuff and tactics would have no value to me
It is a "guy" thing
I took a class once and hated it.
A guy at the gun store told me that taking a class would get me into legal trouble.
What is in it for me? I already use a gun safely
I would be embarrassed to train with police and military types."

Just a quick review of her results shows that our results are going to differ from Kathy's. As just one example, in our survey no one mentioned "that "high speed - low drag" ninja stuff" I should mention that I will be interpreting you responses and will include not just what you said but also what I think that you meant or implied. I summarizing the results, I will not single out any specific response or responder. Do not fear, even if I strongly disagree with the comment it will be included in the summary.

I completed the sorting about a month ago and found the rough results both interesting and helpful to me and the staff of Neshooters. One of the reasons that I started this whole process was that kathy made a comment that firearm instructors could do a better job at communicating the details of what we offer. At neshooters, we all want to keep improving and to do that we must reach you the student or prospective student.

Again, I want to thank all of you for the time that you spent giving us the data that we needed.
 
Last edited:
Survey

I am going to send you the results in a series of messages. Last night I finished sorting the reasons why people that carry firearns do not get training.

Three different reasons are tied for last place, as follows:

I took a class and hated it.
I will not know the people what will be in the class.
The courses are over priced.

There are a lot of reasons to "hate a class". The one that I have seen most often relate to not having an open mind and being open to trying different ideas. I have seen people that have always shoot "weaver" that were bent out of shape at being asked to shoot isoceles. I know of several people that have taken entry level classes and now think that they should only take advanced classes. The problem that these people share is that they have not got the basics down fully and have to remember the basic technique while they are trying a more advanced technique. This can be very frustrating.

I have a hard time understanding people worrying about knowing the others in the class. My assumption is that they are worried that the others in the class will be a lot better than they are. My approach to this is that I have never learned a thing from someone that is worse than I am. This is not entirely true, in that I may learn something not to do from such a person.

The comment that training courses are overpriced in an interesting one. When we first decided to start being trainers to New England, our goal was that the training be more affordible. Conside the cost of going to Gunsite or Thunder Ranch, for example. These courses cost over $1,000.00, not including airfare, lodging, meals and ammo. Thus the cost will be somewhere arround $2,500.00 or more. The outside trainers that we bring to New England cost somewhere between $400.00 and $550.00 plus a range fee of about $25.00. The Suarez courses that we teach cost $265.00 includuing the range fee. Finally, we are offering 2 free shooting clinics this summer where the total cost is a range fee of $20.00. I am totally baffled as to why anyone would feel that any of the courses are over priced.
 
There is a big difference between "overpriced" and beyond "beyond the price many in the target market are willing to pay". I suspect that many people who don't have $500 or so to pay for a course really mean "I'ts not something I can spend $500 on" rather than "it's overpriced." If you want meaningful data on the price issue, I suggest your survey attempt to capture the nuance between these two very different possible responses.
 
Over priced

Rob
Redoing the survey is an interesting thought. The problem is that we have very little control of the prices structures except for paying part of the cost ourselves. We have, to some extent done that in the past, but as our number of courses have grown, we are unable to continue picking up portions of the cost.
I think that our course prices are fair as we have had students for as far away as Georgia, South Carolina and North Dakota, to name a few.
 
I didn't mean to suggest changing prices (just check the cost of a computer technology course sometime to get perspective and your courses look cheap); just suggesting that you may be missing the mark if you think the issue is "people think the courses are overpriced" rather than "people aren't interested enough to spend that kind of $$ on a class".
 
Over priced

Rob
Thanks for the comment. One responder's comment was that the courses were "over priced" and those were the words that I used. As you pointed out some people may not be interested in spending that kind of money on a course. I am sure that that is true.
I am trying to not interpret any meanings other than the exact words. In some cases the sub meaning is painfully obvious but I should not and will not list that as a reason for not training. I will leave it to the readers to make their own interpretetions or the specific remarks.
 
Last edited:
JimConway said:
The outside trainers that we bring to New England cost somewhere between $400.00 and $550.00 plus a range fee of about $25.00. The Suarez courses that we teach cost $265.00 includuing the range fee. Finally, we are offering 2 free shooting clinics this summer where the total cost is a range fee of $20.00. I am totally baffled as to why anyone would feel that any of the courses are over priced.
Click to expand...

There are a few training topics that have open discussion and my comments are wrapped up here.

The prices stated above are not fully loaded costs for the course. The $400 and $550 dollar courses state there is an ammunition expectation of 1000+ rounds. At 9mm this is adding at least $150 for commercial ammo. If you reload, sure there is a savings, but it is not like I can get ammo or components shipped to me. The less expensive course has a ~300 round need. Some of these courses are on weekdays. This requires spending vacation time or time that you are not earning. The limited vacation budget gets spent on the family first.

Not training with Rambos: I do not have a Rambo job so I don't expect to have to a basic need for a high level of training. I don't think that I will be in a N Miami type shootout so I don't train for it. I think that some are too paranoid and train for something that will not happen.

As Derek stated, I use my situational awareness. I do find that the strange people out there always seem to find me. I have found that waving my hand and saying "These aren't the droids you are looking for" helps.

Other people in the class: I do practice safe firearm handling and watch the other people when I am on the range. I took a course over the summer and there were 2 people in the class that I did not trust. I was not the only one that was watching him. One guy was mucking around with his Sig's magazines and popped a spring out into the woods. The other mags he had were not latching or feeding. There were more than a few malfunctions. I saw the muzzle come my way, but not cross me, more than once. I had trouble concentrating on my own shooting and what was going on with the instructor, because I was really expecting an ND from this guy. It was warm and being out in the sun was too much for some of the people. These 2 guys should have been pre-screened to a more fundamental course. Remember this one Jim?

Being a Teacher: Not everyone is cut out to be a teacher. Taking a number of courses does not make someone a teacher. It might be that people are not taking training since they have not found a teacher that they believe transfers knowledge to them. A number of these instructors teach to military, police, body guards. Their time is paid for by someone else's budget. The attendees are paid to take the course. Different situation from the rest of us.

There are a number of books and videos on the market. This may

Training is a form of insurance. you don't think you will need it, but a little can go a long way. I'll take training when I find a course that meet my goals/needs.
 
Tweed said:
As Derek stated, I use my situational awareness. I do find that the strange people out there always seem to find me. I have found that waving my hand and saying "These aren't the droids you are looking for" helps.
Click to expand...

[laugh2]

As for the rest, well said.
 
Survey Results - Part 2

Before I get into the next part of the survey, I want to remind all of you of my main question. You carry some or part of the time and have not got any training or than that required to get your CCW. I have assumed that when you carry it is for the right reasons and not just for a fun or macho thing. In other words, you recognize that we live in an uncertain and sometimes hazardous world and may need to protect our selves or our loved ones.

The second least popular reasons to not get training are, in no particular order:


What's in it for me? I know that I am safe.
I can teach myself. Books and Videos are cheaper.
I do not want or need to get any better.
I am embarassed to train with people that are better than I am.
The gun store guy said that training could get me into legal trouble


I do not have a lot to say about these items, other that to point out that the reason for carrying is to protect our selves or our loved ones. On the legal problem posed by the gun store guy, Lisa Steele has advised me that getting training is a demonstration of your responsibility. Remember that by taking training, you are trying to learn and improve yourself and that is a good thing.

On the subject of "What's in it for me?" , I must mention an esteemed member of the forum that carried this quest fo knowledge to a new high. By my count this person contacted me with questions over 15 times and also contacted the trainer almost as many times. Both the trainer and I tried to answer all of his questions willingly and happily. This person did take the first course, found value and has taken other courses. In the course of all the questions and courses, this person became a good friend.
 
Last edited:
I agree that ammo costs do add up.
However, there is no substitute for training with a good instructor that has a proven curriculum.
A case in point, yours truly.
I received my LTC in 04/06. Before that I was a fire arm enthusias and thought I knew a thing or too about guns. I took my basic firearm safety course through North Andover sprotsmans club. It filled a complete NRA curriculum and lasted over 8 hours. However, I learned very few things relating to combat handgunner at basic firearm safety course. The main thing I learned - which I consider very important - is safe firearm handling. So having received my LTC, I promptly went online and got 2 books: The gun digest book of combat handgunnery, 3rd ed by Massad Ayoob (CH) and David Kennik's (sp) book (the title escapes me now). In CH Ayoob does a good job of explaining different things as pertaining to carry position, grip etc...Unfortunately, he doesn't say which position is best / suggested and kind of leaves it up to the user. As a result, I my "career" using a "revolver" hold of thumb over thumb on handguns and israeli (or slingshot) style of slide manipulation. In addition this being a book, you can't ask it questions and you are left to your own devices, other range members and the - to use Pat Rogers' term - errornet. Neither of which can replace having an instructor observe and correct you.
Luckily I came across northeastshooters in early June, just in time to sign up for Tom Givens' class.
This class is taught over three days and covers everything from proper carry methods, grip, and most importantly mindset.
Over the period of three days we practiced draws, dry fire, firing from the holster, deploying from concealment, as well as having a few interesting lectures on mindset and your body's reaction to fight or flight stimulus. I think the latter - fight or flight stimiulus - is perhaps the most important aspect of combat firearm or survival training. It looks into issues such as what happens when your heart rate skyrockets and your mind begins to receed into the limbic system. You can be the best shooter in the world, but can you function under extreme stress with adrenaline coursing through your system?
I found experience at Tom's class invaluable because it showed me all the areas that I need to work on, while providing a solid foundation, that no book or DVD would ever do. They are great supplementary aids to an actual class but a poor substitute.
Regarding people being unsafe - luckily I have not had the displeasure of being with one in a class. I would hope is such were to occur in my class an instructor would either put the guy on the end of the line or sent him packing.
Rambos - I don't know where you get the idea that people attending classes have "Rambo" syndrom. Have you seen Jim Conway? He is the furthers anti Rambo I can think of.
I am yet to see anybody take their shirt off and tie a bandana around their head.
I agree that situational awareness is very important. However, if the merde does hit the ventilator regardless of your situational awareness, in come the technical skills.

Andrew.
 
Survey results Part 3 (Final) - First part

Before I get into the final part of the survey, I want to remind all of you of my main question. You carry some or part of the time and have not got any training or than that required to get your CCW. I have assumed that when you carry it is for the right reasons and not just for a fun or macho thing. In other words, you recognize that we live in an uncertain and sometimes hazardous world and may need to protect our selves or our loved ones.

The most popular responses that were posted to my question are as follows:
I do not have the time to take any course.
I can not afford the course, gear or ammo cost.

I have no comment to make on those with a cost issue but have a hard time understanding why anyone can not find at least 16 hours out of their life to learn the differences between target shooting and defensive shooting. Please let me assure you that they.

To close out this discussion, someone in another thread mentioned that they did not need "Rambo" training because they would never be in that kind of situation. Since Kathy Jackson addressed this topic better than I can on a Minday morning, I am going to quote her eloquent words:


"I'm not Rambo ..."
One of my respondents opined that he isn't Rambo, just an ordinary citizen who carries a gun for self protection. I can certainly appreciate that perspective. How could a normal person fit in among all the police, military personnel, and armed guards in a shooting class?

Guess what. That's not quite the way it is.
Who do you think fills most firearms classes? I'll give you a hint: it ain't the cops. Police departments usually have their own trainers, and usually work with certified police instructors on dedicated ranges. It's a rare officer who gets extra firearms training on his own and pays for it himself. It ain't the militree, either. They've got this thing called Basic Training which the military folks believe imparts all the ballistic wisdom a soldier needs to know.
So who's left? Accountants and office workers and housewives and lawyers and auto mechanics, that's who. No matter how the gun school sells itself in its advertising, the fact is that most of its students are ordinary citizens who do normal stuff for a living. Students are ordinary citizens who do normal stuff for a living.

" ... so I don't need that high-speed, low-drag ninja stuff."

Here is a look at some of the typical skills taught in firearms schools, and how they apply to ordinary citizens in real life. Most people believe they are already safe gun handlers. Many do not believe they need to be taught the first and most basic lesson most instructors stress: the ability to safely manipulate a firearm. I'm here to tell you, those who haven't had a class from a competent instructor often overestimate their abilities in the safety department. The folks I've seen in classes who are notoriously the most dangerous are the people who've been shooting for years and think they've already got the safety thing down pat. I'd be willing to lay out money, by the way, that 98% of the folks who read this will think I am not talking to or about them -- and the other 2% will be offended that I've insulted their unsafe gun handling because after all, they haven't shot themselves (yet!).1
Safe gun handling includes the ability to load or reload your firearm quickly under stress. Again, this one sounds kind of silly to most of us; what are the odds of needing to reload in a hurry? Are we going to take on a horde of invading zombies by ourselves? Doesn't seem likely. Yet this skill is simply a subset of safe gun handling. If you cannot easily load your firearm quickly under stress, without pointing it at any important body parts, and without losing muzzle awareness, then you have not yet completely internalized how to handle your firearm safely. And if that is the case, you are at risk of negligently shooting yourself or a family member if you ever need to handle your home-defense firearm under the extreme stress of a home invasion.
Accurate shooting is usually next on the syllabus. Again, most people reading this probably already consider that they are accurate enough. Yet a fellow who opines that if he were engaged by a criminal at 15 feet he would simply "fire in the direction of the target" is not only at risk from an attacker - he is a risk to the rest of us. You are responsible for every bullet that leaves your firearm, not just the ones that hit the intended target. (An aside: Most people are unable to judge distances at all, let alone to do so accurately under stress. That poor fellow might surprise himself someday by trying to shoot at someone who is a lot further away than he has ever tried to shoot at the range.)
 
Survey results - Second part

Once accuracy is achieved, speed is often stressed. Firearms instructors show their students how to bring the gun out of its holster and onto target quickly. How fast is fast enough? How much time would you have to draw and fire if you were attacked? When a student asked defensive firearms instructor John Farnam that question, Farnam replied, "The rest of your life." While the answer sounds flippant, it cuts right to the heart of the issue. You do not know, in advance, how fast you will need to be. But it is a good idea to learn to become as fast and as accurate as you are able.
There is another reason to learn how to draw and fire quickly. This is because a fast draw is a smooth draw, and a smooth draw is a safe draw. Not everyone will need to draw fast, but everyone with a holster should be able to draw safely. A smooth draw brings the gun out of the holster without fingering the trigger, it doesn't get tangled up in the clothing, and it doesn't point anywhere it shouldn't on the way up. A smooth draw is a safe draw.
Being able to shoot multiple targets well is another subset of quick and accurate shooting. While being attacked by a herd of rampaging criminals might seem a bit far-fetched, the fact is that few criminals attack when they think the odds are even. Criminals like the odds to be in their favor when they attack. If you are young and healthy looking, you are very unlikely to be accosted by a lone criminal, but your odds of being confronted by a gang of criminals working together are relatively higher. As Marc MacYoung puts it, "Bad guys have friends, too."

Another subset of quick and accurate shooting is the ability to shoot well with only one hand. This looks like a show-off range trick, but the fact is that in real life, it is quite possible that if you need to fire your weapon, you may not be able to use both hands. Maybe one hand will be carrying a small child, or keeping a grasp on a larger child so you know where she is. Perhaps it will be fending off a close attacker, or shoving the door shut while an assailant tries to open it. Or perhaps, heaven forbid, one hand will be disabled in the initial attack. If you carry a gun for self-defense, you should know how to safely draw and use the weapon with either hand alone.
Moving targets are fun and challenging on the range. They really catch the students' attention and they appeal greatly to the Walter Mitty fantasy guys. But that's not why good classes include moving targets. Quite simply, good classes include moving targets because in real life, criminals do not just stand there and imitate a piece of cardboard; they move. If you are unable to reliably hit center mass on a moving target, you are not yet prepared to deal decisively with a living opponent.

Similarly, while it appeals to wannabe warriors to shoot while their feet are moving, that's not why good classes teach students how to do so. The reason moving while shooting is taught is because anyone with half a brain is going to be running for cover when a criminal attack happens. If you carry a weapon, you owe it to yourself and everyone around you to learn how not to shoot the innocent grandmother putting her groceries in her car on the other side of the parking lot while you boogey to cover and get away from the bad guys.

Most criminal attacks happen in the dark. Of course a good class will teach you the most obvious tactic: turn on the lights and equalize the environment if you can. But if you cannot turn the lights on, it's really a good idea to be sure you can hit the bad guy instead of the innocent bystanders.
"We don't need no stinkin' tactics."

It's surprising how many people malign learning good tactics. Undoubtedly this is because "tactical" is such a joke online. On chat boards, people post the most amazingly convoluted, idiotic scenarios, stuff that could never possibly happen in real life in a million years ... and then everyone is surprised when the ensuing discussion is silly and stupid. (But if we ever get attacked by mutant zombie bears while armed with any one firearm produced before 1963, by golly, we'll all know what to do!)

A tactical firearms class, simply put, teaches students how to think about and solve life-threatening criminal problems. Such a class might teach students how the physical body reacts under stress, and then how to use the body's stress reactions rather than simply endure them. Students might practice making shoot/no shoot decisions with cartoon targets or tactical teds, first under the mild stress of a timer and later under more extreme types of stress. The class might discuss specific scenarios, but this is usually in the larger context of discovering how to solve a tactical problem.
Look at it this way. If you could figure out how to win a fight without getting hurt, why wouldn't you do it? In the long run, learning good tactics just means learning how to do what you want to do (survive!) with the least amount of damage to yourself and to the people you love. It isn't as though any particular tactical problem in any shooting class will ever be repeated in real life. Nobody expects that! The trainer's goal is to teach the students how to think on their feet to solve these types of problems. It's kind of like taking a class in mathematics. The teacher's goal isn't to teach you the answers to the specific questions on page 23; his goal is to teach you how to solve mathematical problems, period.

By the way, every single criminal attack is a tactical problem. Even if the intended victim is unarmed, she still must employ some sort of tactic in order to survive the situation. Carrying a gun gives you more options, but the most important tool you carry is still the one between your ears."
 
Andy T's comments

Thanks for a very cogent discussion. Andy did not mention it but his shooting skills also improved greatly during the class.
Andy also addresses the Rambo syndrome and said the following:

"Have you seen Jim Conway? He is the furthest anti Rambo I can think of.
I am yet to see anybody take their shirt off and tie a bandana around their head."

What you said about me not being "Rambo" hurts. Do you know the amount of time that I have spent cultivating that image? Are you saying that I should throw away all of my new bandanas, that I just bought?

On your comment about bare chests and bandanas, we are adding bandanas to the required equipment list and will be requiring "bare chests" for all men in at least one day of every course. On second thought, I think that the requirement for "Bare Chests" may have to be dropped because some of the ranges will not think that it is politically correct and I am sure that some women will complain.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Chris Costa on Training
Replies
0
Views
525
FPrice
FPrice
The Double-Tap by Clint Smith
Replies
1
Views
478
enbloc
enbloc
Laser Training Systems
Replies
4
Views
804
MaverickNH
MaverickNH
Laser pistol training
Replies
10
Views
1K
tinhorn
tinhorn
Best use of a QUICK 50RDS of TRAINING video
Replies
3
Views
1K
Waher
Waher
Back
Top Bottom