I completely and whole heartedly agree there are idiots in the firearms training world, both within the law enforcement world and outside of it. Hell, I have attended classes instructed by many of them, both on the agency's dime, and my own. Where I part ways with Mr. Spaulding, however, is the where he seems to believe that unless the entire instructor field is on the same page, teaching the same material, anarchy ensues. Law Enforcement trainers, and not solely those in the firearms world, are renowned for denigrating those who dare teach methods that differ from the status quo. Attitudes like this is why my state's law enforcement academy was still teaching Weaver only as late as 2005.
Luckily, the new crop of instructors that fit squarely within the mold described by Spaulding have made available training that falls well outside the bounds of the norm. Yes, there are a considerable amount of snake oil salesman, and yes, many of them are just plain goofy. Hidden within them, however, are those who don't pretend to seek the approval of the establishment, and who are not beholden to tradition. Silly is silly, unsafe is unsafe....but bucking the system has merit.
I don't for a minute mean to demean the contributions made by the likes of legacy instructors like Bill Jeans, Lewis Awerbuck, and Mr. Spaulding himself. What they have contributed to the shooting and combatives world is absolutely priceless. Without the courage to try new things, and the confidence to thumb one's nose at the establishment, Col. Cooper and his ilk would never have become mainstream, and this whole mess would have never happened.
See? This^^^^^is why I read your posts. I happen to agree that Spaulding is trying to convince the audience that we (instructors) should look to history and stay within the basics, everyone, as you say, on the same page. I don't agree with that. We can be teaching different techniques for cover/concealment, moving, etc. As far as a firearm goes I believe the basics are truly the best way to shoot a firearm. Your stance, natural point of aim, sight picture, sight picture on the target, push/pull grip, thumbs off (of defensive guns), put the pointer finger on the trigger between the pad and the first joint, the trigger finger is independant, it stays outside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot, press to the rear in a smooth continuous motion, the back sights are slightly blurred, the front sight is in sharp focus, the target is slightly blurred, focus on the front sight front sight front sight, follow through...
Beyond that I think it helps to show them some likely scenarios that they might encounter. Encourage visualization, etc...
We have a curriculum that has to be approved by the state, and after what the state mandates is put into the lesson plan, we really don't have much time for practical exercises like shooting with the weak hand, shooting from behind a barricade with both left and right hands. Shooting off-hand, shooting kneeling, shooting prone. I think we're doing the students a disservice by not being able to shoot more...a LOT more.
They qualify shooting a static line, 5 yds, 7 yds & 10 yds. 10 rounds at each yard line - no time limits or reloads required. Absolutely no drawing from the holster. They begin at the low-ready position with the firearm loaded. They can bring a .22 and qualify with it. The only limiting factor is if they want to carry a semi-auto they have to qualify with a semi-auto - revolver, the same conditions. If the bullet touches the black silhouette, even the sleeve, it's scored a hit.
70% passes.
