NRA Changes Carry Guard Training Policy, Allows 1911’s and Revolvers

We reported a couple of days ago that for the training classes being offered by the NRA in conjunction with their new Carry Guard insurance program, they had decided to prohibit students using 1911’s and revolvers. Despite claiming that the curriculim had been designed by “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts,” we were told by people in the know that the decision was made by (or, at least, in consultation with) their longtime public relations firm, Ackerman McQueen.

Whoever made the call, the NRA has now decided to drop the prohibition and has released the following statement:

In response to clear feedback surrounding the NRA Carry Guard Level I course announcement, we have modified the required firearm platforms as well as our site language to clearly articulate how firearms will be used in the class.

Bottom line: our decision to not include 1911s and revolvers as primary firearms in our initial Level I course was a mistake, and we appreciate the feedback we have received from the firearms community.

In response to the clear and overwhelming demand for these firearms to be used throughout the entire course, our instructors have decided to accommodate all safe, reliable handguns with a capacity of 6 rounds or more. Firearms with less than 6 rounds of capacity will still be allowed as secondary platforms.

We welcome anyone serious about building the skills necessary to defend themselves and their families to attend our NRA Carry Guard Level I course, beginning in July.

comments

  1. avatar Frank says:

    Well dough. That had to or they would have lost millions of people who would have joined up.

    1. avatar El says:

      You think millions of people would have signed up? Seriously?

    2. avatar DaveR says:

      Dough?

      Suddenly I want cookies

      1. avatar kenneth says:

        I think that was supposed to be spelled; “DOHHH!” as in Homer Simpson, followed by the NRA slapping themselves in the head for their stupidity. Seriously, can their be ANYONE who believes that they didn’t receive all this “feedback” from “the firearms community”, BEFORE (almost) their most boneheaded move ever?
        So we are left with an organization attempting to control other’s procedures and perception with influence and lies, and then backing off (temporarily, OFC), when it won’t fly. Does that M.O. sound familiar to any other orgs we all know and loath?

    3. avatar P.T. McCain says:

      “Millions” …. LOL.

  2. avatar former water walker says:

    There ya’ go NRA haters! Just got a new membership…thankz for all you do!

    1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      Don’t worry, they’ll find something else to whine about, but can’t find the time to cut a check for Life Membership.

      1. avatar Ed says:

        I cut my checks to USCCA….i wouldn’t give the NRA fudds a squirt of piss. There…now YOU can continue stroking your lifetime membership….it’s your money and its a (somewhat) free country, if you want to be a sucker to the fudds…go for it.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Because an organization that gives Hannity a big ole pile of cash to buy radio ads/love has to be nifty? So “messaging” driven?

      2. avatar mer says:

        And one would think that doing so would at least slow down the “your membership is expiring” just a little, no? Because after Life there is “Patriot Life” and then “Patriot Benefactor Life” and then likely steps beyond that. Yes, I did cut that check and this is what I get.

        1. avatar will ford says:

          NOPE, I have sent their letters back several times saying just that. I guess wayne needs a few more millions?

  3. avatar Tiger says:

    The squeaky wheel gets some grease.

  4. avatar O2HeN2 says:

    Do these folks talk to anyone in the know before rolling out policy? “Blended training” comes to mind as another example.

    O2

    1. avatar El says:

      As inconvenient as it is/was, Blended Training was made necessary by instructors who taught their own course while using the NRA title to gain credibility, or just sold the certificate (because some states recognize it as more than enough training for a CCL), etc. The online part, which was the classroom portion, was thus standardized. The solution would have been to remove certification from the bad instructors, but that’s a pretty tall order. I reported one instructor who not only ran a really bad “tactical” course instead of the actual Basic Pistol Shooting course but bad-mouthed the NRA the whole time. Also a Training Counselor who was just charging $1000 to certify instructors without doing anything but meeting for coffee. NRA Training is excellent. Sadly, some of the Instructors are just all too human.

      1. avatar Henry says:

        Gee, sounds just like oppressing gun rights for everyone instead of going after the individuals who abuse them. And we know that works out special well.

        Indeed my first thought here was that NRA was at least more responsive to this issue (three days?) than they were to their own instructors about Blendered Training (a year and a double-digit instructor attrition rate before they reversed themselves).

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Of course they do. They consulted a PR firm and they told them that banning 2/3 of the most popular han dguns available was good PR for the NRA!

      1. avatar bLoving says:

        reading this yesterday, my inner troll thought of showing up with a Browning Hi-power…

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Someone else posited that and I suggested that he show up with a Hi-Point instead, just for sh!ts and giggles. ‘Sorry but you said no 19 11s or revo lvers and this is the only other han dgun I’ve got.’

  5. avatar SouthernPhantom says:

    Well, that was fast.

  6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    No mention of who was fired for making the policy in the first place.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Wayne-O’s favorite PR firms never get fired. They just get bigger contracts.

  7. avatar Doc Hollidae says:

    Nope, still doesn’t rectify the fact that they are cutting into supporting organizations market with an inferior product.

    1. avatar joe3 says:

      ^THIS^

      and I heard there was also some rule change also jammed in, that makes it harder to change the executive board?

  8. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    1. How come the NRA now sounds like an Insurance company.?!

    2. Wow! Wouldn’t be a hoot if someone showed up at the course with their favorite black power percussion cap, and ball revolver…Or a brace of flintlock coat, or horse pistols…Bwhaaaaaa! Go full 19th century…

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      1. They noticed how much money AARP is making off insurance products.

  9. avatar Stinkeye says:

    Well, shit… What am I supposed to do with this torch and pitchfork now? First the story about the sheriff reneging on the reward turns out to be all bullshit, and now this. I’m starting to get angry-mob blueballs here. Somebody better say or do something that is a slight deviation from the Approved Orthodoxy™, or I’m going to just have to pick a random stranger to get all het up about and demonize far beyond what’s merited by their imaginary crime.

    1. avatar Big Bill says:

      There’s always Hillary.

  10. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    I support any and all measures to alienate/purge the last remaining FUDDS from within the NRA, which this was. They are as destructive to the second amendment as any anti-gun, would be confiscator out there. The good news is that almost all of them have been removed from positions of power. Pete Brownell’s recent takeover of the NRA leadership, and his unyielding support for black rifles, marks the last dying gasps of any cancerous FUDD influence.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      “which this was”

      What this was, was stupid.

      If you define a FUDD by the gun he or she chooses to carry, as opposed to the opinions he or she has, you’re as bad as the gun grabbers.

    2. avatar Hank says:

      ^ Yeah, I second that. If you believe someone is an anti 2A purist because they happen to prefer 1911s or revolvers then it’s you who need to revaluate what you believe in. Perhaps your attitude would be more compatible with the “I’m with her” camp.

  11. avatar Tom in NC says:

    ” … our instructors have decided to accommodate all safe, reliable handguns with a capacity of 6 rounds or more. Firearms with less than 6 rounds of capacity will still be allowed as secondary platforms.”

    So I can use a new Colt snubby as a ‘primary’ handgun for this course, but not a J frame Smith and Wesson? Glad they cleared up those policies that didn’t make any sense!

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Nice how it was decided 6 rounds will be the min. in wheelguns.

      That threw out the vast majority of concealable .357s like the LCR…

      1. avatar ACP_arms says:

        I saw that and the first thing I thought was WTF. Not everyone is going to carry a full size 6 or more shot revolver.

        Is the program a tactical course?

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          5 shot primary or 5 shot BUG?
          It’s a 1500 shot class, over what, 3 days?
          I think it’s geared towards full size primary sidearms.
          Better take 100 moon clips with you.

        2. avatar ACP_arms says:

          5 shot primary.
          Seeing as they have this on the website- “…We created the NRA Carry Guard program to be the gold standard in concealed carry training to prepare responsible citizens who legally carry to effectively confront today’s evolving conflict environment…” You better be willing to work with the people who don’t carry anything but a 5 shot.

    2. avatar Andrew Lewis says:

      Well there goes the option of using my BFR as a primary. Guess it’s relagated to deep conceal BUG duties.
      Darn.

  12. avatar Pistol Pap says:

    There were probably tons of eager students with there $1k+ 1911s and then was like “WTF”

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      Yeah they must have realized that people that went out and bought a $350 M&P Shield weren’t as likely to pay $850 for a training course as someone that coughed up $1000 for a SA EMP.

      Those 5 shot snubbie guys are cheap bastards so f-’em.

      Sometimes I think they put this stuff out there just to see who is paying attention.

      Hint to NRA: We’re paying attention.

  13. avatar No one of consequence says:

    “our decision to not include 1911s and revolvers as primary firearms in our initial Level I course was a mistake”

    That was fast.

    Which tells me that either a) there was no good reason for this in the first place (which implies some bad things about how much thought went into the rest of the course) or b) they decided to ignore their good reason rather than spelling it out and standing by it (which implies their trainers wouldn’t “stick to their guns” for what they believe is best for their students). I now have even less desire to be a beta tester than I did before.

    Thanks, but for the money and time commitment (including hotels, for us), my family would rather take a course at Gunsite. Even moreso now.

    1. avatar kenneth says:

      Gunsite is awesome, even not comparing it to shit like the NRA. OFC, I went back when Cooper was still alive and it was called “Gunsite Raven”(circa 1980s), so my experience might be a little out of date.

  14. avatar Docduracoat says:

    Training certainly sounds good and I’m sure would be a lot of fun
    Plenty of people have defended themselves with a gun and no training at all

  15. avatar Mike says:

    Benefactor Member here. Love the NRA. I’m aware of the history of mistakes that the leadership has made over the years. Could that possibly be because they are HUMANS? For all you haters commenting here, join, then you too can be responsible for making perfect decisions….oh wait, the only perfect man lived 2017 years ago. Grow the hell up. If it wasn’t for the NRA, the 2nd would have been rendered moot long ago.

    1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      The NRA still has a lot of things they AREN’T doing. I see zero activity on getting the NFA or the Hughes Amendment repealed.

    2. avatar former water walker says:

      Well said Mike…and it’s possible the Hildebeast would be President! Everybody moans about the big dog!

  16. avatar Kyle says:

    Christ, I live in CA, aint no PAC, Interest Group, Industry Lobbyist that is going to do a thing for me. Our only hope is to count on the (*gulp) federal government.

    “Dear Adolph, would you be kind enough to escort my daughter on to the train?” Jewish german citizen to der fuehrer

  17. avatar Batterycap says:

    I see the gun world is as filled with as much infighting as the motorcycle world. It’s no wonder that rights are challenged by the anti-gunners. The NRA has been and will be the number one defender of the 2nd. It takes money. That means encouraging membership. For those you wish to moan and groan about an extra mailer, go ahead and freeload. The NRA’s successful efforts will still apply to you.

  18. avatar Johannes Paulsen says:

    Still shaking my head over this one. Double-action revolvers? Really? The handgun that requires you to take multiple obvious steps to have a negligent discharge?

  19. avatar Fiight islam Now says:

    NOTE A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN USCCA And Carry Guard

    USCCA will cover you where ever you are and weather you are in a state where your permit is recognized or not.

    Carry Guard will use every possible tactic to exclude your coverge. No coverage where your permit not recognized…….(I would imagine that means carry guard also will not cover you in a constitutional carry state if you constitutionally carry)

    As with every other nra product – the benefit is for nra NOT the member and is as limited and expensive as they can possibly make it

    Support USCCA for REAL coverage and a feeling of security that just being armed will not give you. If you have to think about pulling the trigger because your coverage sucks, you might as well not carry.

  20. avatar Fiight islam Now says:

    In fact, it seems like Carry Guard is a gun registration subterfuge in that they will not cover you if you have no permit (registration)

    Register with the state or we won’t cover you

    Really need to look in to this!

  21. avatar Fiight islam Now says:

    PS: nra LIFE MEMBER 35+ years. Not just speaking out my a**

  22. avatar Vincent says:

    I am disappointed in the the NRA with their reversal. People should be discouraged from using an antiquated pistol such as the M1911. The Gun Community and the muh M1911 mafia is a joke.

    1. avatar Jay Loveless says:

      The 1911 is the most popular semi automatic handgun in history. It has a 106 year history with our armed forces, and has consistently won gun fights all over the globe in the hands of military, police and civilians. When any other handgun can match that record, they and you, will have something to say. Till then, just remember, she may be old fat and slow, but she gets the job done EVERY time.

  23. avatar Ralph says:

    So the NRA made a mistake and retracted it. Good. But what I want to know is why it excluded the M1911 and revolvers in the first place. WTF were they thinking?

    I get that some schmucks don’t like revolvers and 1911s, but it’s really none of their business.

    1. avatar Gruney says:

      You wheel gunners are the fuddiest Fudds of all. That design is even older than the 1911, which is practically a fossil. It’s hard to believe they even make ammunition for a gun that old. Everyone that’s anyone knows that the modern 9mm is the way to go. Just don’t put it in a revolver or 1911.

      /sarc off

  24. avatar Tsquared says:

    The wheel gun may be an antiquated design but it works. It does not have a FTF or FTE. If it does not fire pull the trigger again. No need to clear and charge the gun again. A simple design that works. A Glock is almost as dependable as a Ladysmith. Other striker fired polymers not so much.

  25. avatar Ralph Jones says:

    Yes, the NRA responded to members outcry at the banning of 1911s and revolvers. I’m not impressed by the NRA caving to our well founded demands. I am concerned that they even tried to exclude any handgun that was not a striker fired, hi cap mags in 9mm. If I am certain I’m going to have to engage an adversary with a firearm, and I can’t get my long gun, the 1911 is my first choice of handguns. The guy who wins the gun battle is not the one who got the first shot off; the winner by a wide margin is the guy who scored the first HIT. The 1911 has no peer(s) when it is called upon to score the first hit.

  26. avatar Douglas Phillips says:

    I would like to think it was me that changed their minds with my simple comment.

  27. avatar Gordon Miller says:

    What did the NRA have against 1911s?

  28. avatar William Nelson says:

    Seriously disappointed in the NRA for trying to squeeze out some of the other trailblazers in the “industry” like USCCA!

    Decide to be a political party or not! Why Not?

    But don’t shit on your friends and allies!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email