Jljones, Steve459, Jbourn and the others of you that are firearms instructors, an interesting thing happened to me at work last night, which made me start thinkin' (which is usually where I start to get into trouble)...

Do you "vet" or do any background research on your students?
Have you launched any students for reasons other than the obvious (i.e. Safety violations, stupidity...)?


Interesting call last night, on the other side of of Midway Airport, which is why I ask this question...


Neighbor dispute, the one neighbor is obviously attempting to be the HMFIC on the block, with full support of his "significant other". 110% SJW, way left leaning liberal trash. Probably Commies, Marxist or Socialists... Complete with the blm sign in rainbow colors on the front lawn.


Long story short, he starts chortling on absolutely "the next revolution" and how bad we need one, how he is in the process of getting his CCL, how he wants his wife to get hers, and bla, bla, bla... I just kinda tuned the rest out because I really had to suppress my gag reflex because of all his sjw crybaby bullshit.


Yep, it's his absolute right under the 2nd Amendment afforded by the Constitution for this total jag-off to own a gun. You and I know, THIS IDIOT IS THE ENEMY. Unfortunately, you and I see them on the news at protests in their plate carriers toting AR's too. I know that "IF" the shit hits the fan, these idiots will be nothing more than a minor inconvenience.

But what happens when they get trained? Now they're more than a "minor" inconvenience.
It kinda dawned on me as I was catching up on paperwork watching planes at Midway.
"Man, if the instructors in Fla figured out that something was messed up with them Arab dudes that didn't want to learn how to land, things might be different today..."

This is such a non-issue. Do you know how many flag-waving die hard conservative gun owners bother to get any training beyond any near useless mandated minimum to get a permit? Almost none, I bet less than 10% of gun owners bother.

Their entitled know it all attitude and priorities (of these SJWs) make it even less likely.

Heck, how many LE do any training beyond what’s required?

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:
Do you "vet" or do any background research on your students?

Yes, in a way: No real vetting per se, but after the one class leading to a state permit that I opened up to anyone interested, I decided that I would limit my training to people I knew. That was due more to concerns about liability than objecting to anyone’s politics, though.

One interesting thing I noted recently about the training that applicants for a CHP must have was this from Colorado Revised Statute 18-12-202 (5)(a)(II):

“A firearms safety course offered by a law enforcement agency, an institution of higher education, or a public or private institution or organization or firearms training school, that is open to the general public and is taught by a certified instructor ….” [Emphasis added.]

That’s not the only acceptable training and there are types that don’t have to be open to the general public, but would “open to the general public” mean that an instructor couldn’t say, “No, no Communists allowed”?

Added: I know that the SIG Academy requires a level of background checking, IIRC something like a formal background check, concealed carry permit, or law enforcement credentials. But like other formal background checks, that’s not the same as refusing to teach someone due to their political beliefs. Other than personal knowledge, I’m not sure how that would be determined in any case—a pre-enrollment survey of some sort? “Are you now or have you ever been …?”

Our NRA Basic Pistol and Personal Protection in the Home classes are taught at the local Sheriff's Department. All students are background checked and some are rejected for previous indiscretions.

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess that most of former clients have leaned more left than right.

I always saw it as an opportunity to show that Pro-2A folks weren't the knuckle dragging monsters they believed and as an opportunity to bring them to our side on @a issues.

You don't win votes on issues important to you by excluding people who have different views on other issues. I've had many clients from the LBGT+ community as well as PoC and Pro-Choice folks.

I too have taught some people I felt were lefty. Their right to self defense is the same as mine. But I would not teach people who are openly hostile, use the word "revolution" or otherwise advocate some type of pre-emptive violence.

I don't have as much training experience as those you mention in the OP, or many others here, but my experience is that classes generally include some amount of 2A review and discussion. All my instructor certifications are from the NRA, and their Basic courses in the various disciplines all have a slide that talks about "Americans enjoy a right that citizens of other countries do not." Not that a single PowerPoint slide is going to change someone's fervently-held political beliefs, but it is a start, and the discussion tends to smoke out those who are not seeing the light. I, personally, have never bounced someone for other than safety reasons, but it is funny, the leftists seem to be the ones who ignore safety rules and act out in class (funny how that is).

Not in an instructional context, but I know many people who, at one point in their lives, had strong anti-gun attitudes, and who turned this around after being exposed to shooting and discussions explaining why self-defense might not be the worst idea in the world. I would think that this would tend to endorse the concept of providing training to those on the "other side."

My buddy teaches CCW in NC. He just teaches the class as proscribed by the State, he figures it’s less of a mental hassle for him.

But he demands payment up front. That usually filtered out some of the troubles.And he has tossed one guy from the class because he was spouting off during a break-James walked up, handed the guy a hundred dollar bill, and told him he was done-to go find someone else to teach him but he was no longer welcome on the property.

He also has told people that he might think are sketchy, that he needs to see a pistol purchase permit before he will enroll them in the class. In NC a Pistol Purchase Permit is required for any transfer of a pistol in the state, even between citizens. It’s a local check of the same stuff that’s on a NCIS check and the sheriff asks the same questions as the 4473. None is actually required for the class, but he uses it to filter some people out before it becomes a problem.

I witnessed him tell someone that, and the guy said that some other guy in Raleigh didn’t require it for the class…James told the guy to “well go take the class there”…they charge $150ish inRaleigh

Several of the local “training” facilities I’ve looked into locally say they perform a background check. That here in DFW.

Taught Concealed Weapons Classes for over 20 years here in Florida.

The two gun shops I taught for wanted the $ and didn't screen OTHER than eyeballing the person and chatting. A couple of times they shooed the person away and twice, IIRC, I refused a student.

But, generally, if the person wanted to pay for the class, they got it.

Bob

A background check tells you very little. You can learn a lot more from a brief interview. I don't think any more is required for due diligence. Common sense reasoning and judgement and a certain level of intelligence is what is required.

I'm a NRA Law Enforcement instructor in Handgun/Shotgun,and an instructor in all the NRA civilian areas. I'm also a certified instructor in IL.and WI.I also hold a certification from the IL. State Police as a CCW instructor. I worked as the Midwest Regional Firearms Instructor for a large Armored Transport Company before I retired.
I had little choice but to train new employees,I held my nose while doing it.Many made me cringe with the thought of them on the street armed.The IL. students were only required to receive one day of training before they hit the street.The State of IL. had no minimum on training. All other people in the State of IL. who carry a firearm are required to receive 40 hrs but Armored Truck employees are allowed to skirt this minimum, all from some ancient grandfathered law.All these employees were supposedly background checked before hiring. In Wisconsin 40hrs training was required.
When IL. approved CC I began giving the 16hr class. I soon abandoned excepting "anybody" into class and only tout people from work. I always heard the voice of my NRA Law Enforcement Instructor say "the Firearms Instructor will ALWAYS be suede or at the least dragged into court when somebody from a class is involved with a shooting at a later time.
I also had to face the fact that the overwhelming majority of my Chicago (Downtown; people from the Tinley Park and Schaumburg branches were much better)) students were Democrats that didn't even comprehend the fact that the Dems they vote for want to take guns away. Milwaukee employees were MUCH better to train and show common sense.

While I was employed I was covered by insurance and legal deep pockets. After I retired I did not want to gamble with my own bank account for legal protection.
Now, I will not even train my wife or other relatives for CC. I won't allow somebody to carry a gun if I feel they will not devote the time to practice and become proficient with a gun and be willing to actually present the gun and use it. Otherwise they easily could be shot and killed because they hesitated at the worst moment of their life.Even worse, they shot and injured innocent people.

You must learn and remember that just because you have a gun does not mean you have to use it.

CPD, on the LE side, the officers we train have already been hired by a department and are considered probationary for the first year. Under CLEST regulations (Arkansas LE's "governing body" for standards and training), officers must attend an academy within 9 months of their hire date. Yep, that does mean they can work for their agencies for nearly a year before attending a basic training academy. Prior to coming to us at an academy, they've been required to pass a background check and psychological test. With regard to your question about political leanings, our LE students skew almost exclusively conservative, pro-Constitution, pro-2A, and many are CHL holders. Those who lean left are usually the ones with the degrees who've recently graduated from a university or college. They are often not at all popular with their classmates and are a very, very small minority.

As for my non-LE CHL students, the story is exactly the same. I've probably trained 1000 since 2000, and I don't remember anyone who was an openly flamboyant leftist making seditionist comments.

I've not dismissed anyone for what I would consider "extra-Constitutional" remarks or obvious anti-American sentiments. I've just not dealt with that. I did dismiss 3 elderly students who could not safely manipulate their handguns, or the ones I allowed them to borrow from me because they simply lacked the hand and wrist strength to do so. I refunded their money.

I did get into an argument with a thug student who seemed entirely too eager to get into a gunfight and didn't want to understand use of force law. He wasn't a liberal. He was a stupid redneck. Civilian CHL candidates in Arkansas receive an exhaustive background check after they complete the basic training course, and the CHL application does require students to pledge allegiance to the Arkansas and US Constitutions.

That said, make no mistake, violent leftists (Antifa, etc.) have figured out that rifles are more lethal in ambushes and are certainly beginning to formally train, but as far as I know, there are no mechanisms to "vet" them other than those I've mentioned above.

Rogue may have some input, too.

State-Certified LEO Firearms Instructor for 25+ years.

The vast majority of my students have been sworn officer recruits for various types of agencies - PD, SD, DOC, etc. They all have been thoroughly vetted prior to their arrival at the Academy, and even so every once in a while we'll boot somebody if they show demonstrated unsuitability to carry a firearm.

On the civilian side, I'm extremely restrictive as to who I'll teach. Since NJ is currently a 'May Issue' state - which, if you read the fine print between the lines really says "May Issue (when pigs fly over Uranus)", training is not a requirement. Nobody can get a CCW permit here.

I have spent lots of time with family & friends doing what I'm sure we all do - teaching safety, taking them to the range, advising on purchases and coaching once they have their firearms. Occasionally, I'll get asked to do the same for a friend of a family member, or friend(s) of a friend, that I don't know. I'll do it, but it always starts of with a 'handgun 101' session. They'll get exposed to handgun safety rules, and then get to fondle a bunch of revolvers and autoloaders. No ammo on the premises, except for whats on my hip, and the firearms have been modified to not chamber live ammo. They'll see the differences between SA/DA, SAO, DAO, decocker vs DAK, striker vs hammer, etc. And I get to develop a feel for them as a student.

One of my personal rules is to count how many times the 4 cardinal rules of safety are broken during that first couple of hours - especially fingers off the trigger. Get corrected too often, and there won't be a second lesson. I'll always be too busy, and they'll get the message and move on. Otherwise, I will go with them to the range. They rent a lane, buy the ammo, rent the gun, and I'll coach. Occasionally, I'll let them try one of mine, but thats rare unless they're related or a close friend. And I don't have many close friends left that haven't already been either trained, or judged unsuitable and advised to go elsewhere for training.

This is such an anti-gun state that I welcome the opportunity to increase the number of responsible gun owners in it, in my own way.

Not firearms, but aviation. I have been a flight instructor for well over fifty years. During that time I have declined to train a handful of potential clients, mostly because they were unwilling to accept the safety aspects of the training.

CDP Sig,

The problem with your idea / proposal is it is just another prime example of gun control.. We as a country have done this for years with blacks and other minorities. If we don't do it outright.. then our government does it by selecting minor violations of law that certain groups do more than other groups and make that a felony.. then pass a law that you can't vote or own a gun if you are a felon. One of the on going issues with democracy is taking power away from those we don't agree with.

Here in UK, where firearms laws are, quite frankly, utterly ludicrous, we don't query the politics or ethnicity of the people who want to join us in our sport. TBH, although I've been in my present gun club since 1995, I have no idea of the political bent of anybody I know.

I guess it's mainly because we don't have firearms courses like you do, but I don't see - at least, here in UK, I don't see - what politics, religion or ethnicity has anything to do with shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:
Here in UK, where firearms laws are, quite frankly, utterly ludicrous, we don't query the politics or ethnicity of the people who want to join us in our sport. TBH, although I've been in my present gun club since 1995, I have no idea of the political bent of anybody I know.

I guess it's mainly because we don't have firearms courses like you do, but I don't see - at least, here in UK, I don't see - what politics, religion or ethnicity has anything to do with shooting.

Hi tacfoley. Love the UK. I will visit there someday.

Regarding your last paragraph, if I'm reading your context correctly, I think I can expound on this.

You're right, here in the US, it's extremely different, and we are at a crossroads nationally. We have extremely violent Marxist anarchist leftist groups (Antifa, BLM, etc.) who have grown in number and are now using firearms against law enforcement and citizens. They're Marxist revolutionary groups who operate against the Constitution and seek an overthrow of our Constitutional Republic in favor of a socialist regime. For example, Dallas PD HQ was attacked and officers murdered a few years ago, and Portland has been a leftist madhouse for over a year now, with millions of dollars in damages done to legitimate businesses there. Basically, I think the fear is that people who oppose the Constitution as the law of the land, and in particular the Second Amendment, should not own or train with firearms. If they do, it should be considered suspicious, not on the basis of religion, race, or ethnicity, but on the basis of their brazenly outspoken political agendas that run counter to the Constitution. Why empower domestic enemies?

It'd be like training suspicious people to fly small planes in Florida, fail to report that suspicion, and then finding out later that they were the 9/11 attackers. Imagine a version of that...but with guns.

They don't teach the defensive or offensive use of firearms in any CCW class I've ever been in, and I've been in 3. Arizona, Florida and Utah.

They just taught the safe use of firearms and nothing more.

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
CDP Sig,

The problem with your idea / proposal is it is just another prime example of gun control.. We as a country have done this for years with blacks and other minorities. If we don't do it outright.. then our government does it by selecting minor violations of law that certain groups do more than other groups and make that a felony.. then pass a law that you can't vote or own a gun if you are a felon. One of the on going issues with democracy is taking power away from those we don't agree with.

Blume, I totally agree with you... To a point.

I'm not talking about depriving them of their right to own a firearm at all. That's their right. I'm worried about taking on the responsibility of giving them knowledge and information.
Think of the Flight School for the terrorists from September 11, 2001.

Somewhere around here I have a few certificates that have "instructor" and my name on them. I've taught and coached in a few places; military- mostly overseas, here in Chicago- mostly L.E. but also civilians. A lot of friends in the State's Attorney's office, wives & girlfriends of State's Attorney's and Cops, and my friends and neighbors. <--- that's all CCL stuff. Some is a little more with AR's, and some advanced pistol.


I've had to put one person "in check" in one of the classes because he was being a total idiot and becoming a safety risk. Thankfully he pulled his head out of his ass.

I'm not talking about those people. Handing a "goof" or a safety violation is easy; pull your head out of your ass or take a hike. If they haven't figured out (and in VTails case as well) that this stuff, if not done a certain way and treated with respect CAN / WILL KILL SOMEONE.

Jbourne hit the nail on the head- Antifa/blac bloc, other radical groups.
There is NO WAY in Gods green earth that I'd teach one of them.

Sure, there's more than enough YouTube videos from anyone that was DevGru, CAG, all the way to Cub Scout that shows tactics, tricks and secrets of the trade. One can easily gain valuable information there. I'm not going to be responsible for giving some left-wing radical screwball any information. At this point of the game, I'm hesitant on giving information and training to a really far right-wing radical as well.

I'll toss another one out there:
That "squirrelly" kid...
I'm not talking about Mr Socially Awkward. I'm talking absolute Mr Anti-Social! Think of Dillan Klebold all grown up. The one that's going to walk into a McDonalds with an AK and have at it.... Some of us have been around one or two of those people. Another one I'm not going to be responsible for giving information to.