INTRODUCTION:

This article is based on a recent squabble on the web about the bona fides of an instructor. He and the originality of "his" material and "his" past were cussed and discussed at considerable length.

The charges against him, are not mentioned here, as IMO they were just a smokescreen to obscure the real reason "WHY the dissing-session was started in the first place."

The "WHY the dissing-session was started in the first place," was recognized by one of the participants. His posting cut thru the verbal fog, and provided a picture of the driving force behind the charges.

He is a long time shooter, and has attended training classes given by the trainer in question, as well as classes given by other professionals. His thoughts formed the basis for this article and are presented here with his OK.

..........

A BACKGROUND NOTE:

The police and the military are strict hierarchical organizations that are charged with keeping citizens safe, and the ship of state afloat. And because of the seriousness their work, little or no variation is allowed in the way things are done.

They have established and fixed ways for doing things (their dogma). And interwoven into the dogma, are ideals, emotions, and mysteries that are part and parcel of dealing with the real life and death issues that they are confronted with.

A large proportion of gun trainers come from those ranks.

TRADITION Vs. INNOVATION

In TARGET SHOOTING, 1. targets can be shot again and again, 2. different people can be taught in different ways, and 3. their training results can be compared. Through that process, we can gain statistically significant information about the best techniques of both target shooting and techniques of training target shooters..

With COMBAT SHOOTING we can't do that. We can't shoot enough people under a wide enough range of controlled, but real life conditions, to thoroughly test what works and what does not. The result is that MISinformation can be and is passed down from generation to generation.

Many trainers claim to have been there, done that, and know all there is to know because they have survived two or three gunfights but they have little or no comparative knowledge at all.

I have the greatest respect and admiration for our soldiers, Marines, Seals, Rangers, LEOs and other uniformed shooting men, but they tend to be not very innovative or open minded. That is because of the nature of their organizations, and because of the business they are in. They rely on authority which is not to be questioned. They follow orders rather than relying on logic, rationality, facts and testing. And many trainers come from such a background.

The consequence is that it can be hard to find a combat shooting trainer, who will not train you in the "bad ideas" that he was trained with himself.

Past dogma becomes the dogma of the present, and the more Guru like a trainer is, the more the new disciples will accept it and defend it with the intensity of a religious zealot. Woe is to any, who does not recite the new mantras, or go along to get along.

On occasion, a trainer comes along, who does not march in lock-step with the past, who has a new idea or innovation, and who is able to present it rationally and convincingly.

In such a case, there is no doubt in my mind, that he/she will be attacked as a heretic, and/or treated like the "Galileos" or "Joans of Arc" of the past. (On February 17, 1600, Gioedano Bruno was burned at the stake for like behavior.)

Such is, as it is in the world of the gun.