Nothing like bad publicity to get you publicity. Seems like Dave went off on a rant and now it's everywhere. I can say I've never met him, nor do I have anything against him, but I have a different take on the instructor/training situation. For the record, I have an NRA pistol instructor cert (almost a joke to get) and shot competitively for 25 years (not a joke). I've never taught a formal class though - nor is it a goal of mine.
First, three things have to be noted. One is defensive training appropriate for a potentially life threatening situation using a handgun. Two, the business of firearms and shooting. Third, shooting skill. They overlap, but not always. It sounds to me like Dave is saying some instructors in the second category and maybe a little of the third category are promoting training for the first category. I concur, that could be an issue. If someone genuinely wants to learn about personal defense with a handgun, it's best to find a experts (plural) in that area - and it's easier said than done. I highly suggest one of those instructors in the defensive pistol class be an attorney - which to my knowledge Dave is not.
In the second category, WTFC? That's who the f*** cares? Not that I'm into it, but if someone wants to pay an "instructor" to shoot tannerite targets with a mini gun while hanging upside down from a helicopter and completely dressed in tacticool garb - great. Have at it. Might be fun, and there's nothing wrong with that. More power to the instructor for capitalizing on a business opportunity. The tactical stuff isn't my style, but it's not different than the wanna-be Harley warriors donning leather chaps and vests on the weekends. Again, not my type, but have at it and kudos to the guys making money at it.
Finally the last category - which is a little closer to me personally. In my experience, and this is just my personal experience, the shooters in the first two categories aren't that good - in the true definition of shooting skill and marksmanship. It's more of did you stop the threat, did you hit the tannerite, can you shoot effectively while moving, etc. Not that those aren't are super valuable skills for their respective categories, but fast, clean, precise, accurate shooting generally doesn't happen in either of the first two. It's the experts in 3-gun, USPSA, IDPA, steel challenge, Camp Perry, Bullseye, etc. that get the nod for the last category.
Caveat emptor. There are no rigid checks and balances as to exactly what category an instructor's class fits. It's up to the student to decide the type of training and research the appropriate method of seeking that training themselves. Negatively slamming your business competition in an emotional rant though only comes across as childish, desperate, demeaning, and even incompetent.
Competitive shooting is excellent for mastering the mechanics of accuracy, and gun handling w/ the pressure of performing in front of your peers. It does nothing to address the key elements of positive target identification/discrimination that are essential in a defensive context. I can shoot targets faster than I can effectively discriminate bad guys from good and will a pass through strike an innocent.
Speed must be moderated by perfect target ID and absolutely not missing. This goal takes a lot of work and would help a seeker find a good teacher.
Don't wish it were easier Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that. Craig Douglas ECQC
The biggest problem that I've identified in the training industry is that so few instructors understand how to teach, and IMO that's because so few of them really know what they're doing in the first place.
Running shooters though drills is not the same as teaching people to shoot, but it's a lot easier.
The best class I've ever taken was taught by a total dick of a guy in raggedy clothes who shouted obscenities and mocked me for two days. But he knew how to shoot and how to diagnose shooting problems like no one else I've ever met.