NRA: No 1911s or Revolvers in NRA Carry Guard Training Classes

As part of their new Carry Guard insurance program, the NRA is offering a series of training courses for concealed carriers. They’ve recently announced that 1911 pistols and revolvers aren’t welcome as a “primary firearm” for their Level One training class, a three-day program that costs a not insubstantial $850 per person.

It’s an odd decision. Revolvers are some of America’s most popular concealed carry guns. So much so that Kimber now makes an impressive line of snubbies and Colt’s jumped back into the market with their Cobra. By the same token, the 1911 is one of most comfortable carry platforms ever created. Tens of thousands of gun owners carry them every day.

The NRA’s decision to ban revolvers and 1911’s from their Carry Guard courses no doubt reflects their desire to maintain uniformity, to ensure the pace and quality of instruction. And, it must be said, maximize throughput. Even so, they’re discriminating against an entire class of shooters.

Sources tell us the gun rights group developed their training program outside of the NRA’s training division, under the supervision of their longtime PR firm. Carry Guard’s website claims the instruction was developed by [unnamed] “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts.”

The website gives the basic course outline — including the new acronym A.D.R.E. (Avoid. De-escalate. Retreat. Engage.) and a promise of “low-light shooting, force-on-force Airsoft scenarios and more.”

Carry Guard spokesperson and face of the program Dana Loesch must know the nature of the course. “I’ve taken a lot of firearms classes,” her web testimony professes. “I consider myself very well trained. But this course was life-changing.”

We’ve yet to see course materials, attend a course or received feedback from an attendee. The link to upcoming courses tells readers “there are no training classes scheduled.”

Meanwhile, the US Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) is still smarting from the NRA’s move to compete directly with the USCAA defensive shooters’ insurance program (after the NRA picked their brains to devise their own program). Not to mention kicking them out of the NRA Annual Meetings in Atlanta.

The USCCA’s responded by expanding their own nationwide training program, teaming-up with gun guru Rob Pincus of Personal Defense Network. USCCA instructors, [already] offering full and half-day courses from $50 to $250.

Rob’s mob doesn’t discriminate against students with wheelguns or John Moses Browning’s meisterwerk. “We will not be banning any reliable firearm that’s in a safe operating condition.”


  1. avatar FedUp says:

    Carry Guard’s website claims the instruction was developed by [unnamed] “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts.”

    In other words, “Operators Operating Striker Fired Pistols”.

    Combine this with kicking competing insurance out of the NRA convention, and I’m already thinking Carry Guard isn’t for me…

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Sources tell us the gun rights group developed their training program outside of the NRA’s training division, under the supervision of their PR Firm.

      Ohhh, that explains it. Much of what annoys me about the NRA in recent decades comes through Wayne’s favorite high priced PR firms and ad agencies. Perhaps there’s a logical explanation and the PR pros just didn’t know how to say it (even though saying things smoothly and persuasively is their primary job function)?

      Like maybe “bring at least four magazines holding at least 10 rounds each for your primary sidearm” would have gotten a technical requirement across better without leaving a bad taste in anybody’s mouth?

      1. avatar Hank says:

        That makes me question the whole system. Does this, or possibly will it mean, that the insurance won’t cover you, if you decide to carry a revolver or 1911.

        1. avatar NineShooter says:

          Yes, I think they really stepped in it (or ON it) this time.
          Lots of folks still carrying those platforms. Lots.

          Bad move, NRA.

        2. avatar johnjohn says:

          They(Carry Guard) will only reimburse you no matter what weapon you use only after you are acquitted or found not guilty……same as the US Concealed Carry association and Second Call Defense…..The Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network will cover all your legal costs beyond the bail/bond and attorney retainer fees during the course of your trial , that is if your case goes to trial ….none of this reimbursement bull crap…I believe that amount is greater than $400,000 ….check it out yourself if you are still shopping around ….don’t take my word for it….stay safe out there.

        3. avatar Jeff K says:

          USCCA covers up front and in No Gun Zones and any weapon.

    2. avatar BradP says:

      Carry Guard’s website claims the instruction was developed by [unnamed] “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts.”

      Heck I’ll name him.
      James Jarret, Carry Guard Director of Curriculum, former SF and LAPD. There’s a nice pic of him showing his draw technique over on another firearms forum.

      1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

        Is that him putting finger on the trigger after barely clearing leather?

        1. avatar BradP says:


    3. avatar American Patriot says:

      The NRA has been slowly changing for years and now there in competition with their members? After what they did to USCCA kicking them out of the annual meeting the last minute really? I have lost ALL Respect for them as they have turned into nothing but internal politics and seems to do anything for money including screwing they members. So I have only two words for them now which is all they will get from me in the future “F*CK EM” and I’m not alone.

  2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Well that’s $850 they just lost from me and probably another $850 from the wife.

    1. avatar RickP says:

      Go to MAG40 instead and save $50.

    2. avatar johnjohn says:

      I would rather take the Guns Save Life “Critical Threat Management 2 day course for around $300.

  3. avatar Madcapp says:

    1911s are obsolete crap, the smart people all know that. But all the Archie Bunkers in the gun community are going to get severely butthurt because they have gun safes full of 1911s, and they belligerently refuse to accept reality. But here it is, the writing is on the wall for all to see. Even the NRA isn’t interested in 1911s anymore. Just come into the light, sell off your 1911s (all your .45 caliber guns for that matter) to some unknowledgeable idiot. Let them be someone else’s mistake.

    1. avatar QMTI says:

      This guy has no idea what he’s talking about.

      1. avatar Madcapp says:

        Hahahahaha…I know exactly what I’m talking about. Its you who clearly needs to learn about firearms, ballistics, etc. Watch this space below my comment…the Archie Bunkers are going to line up in mass, to proudly proclaim their ignorance for all the world to see…

        1. avatar Sam says:

          While I wouldn’t refer to a 1911 or the .45acp as obsolete, I am willing to admit there are better carry options for the typical person. Most of us don’t put in enough range time to shoot a more powerful cartridge or to become accustomed to “cocked and locked carry.

          In such instances, 9 mm striker fired pistols offer advantages: lower cost practice ammo, less recoil for the overly sensitive, smaller grips for those with small hands, and craptastic triggers with long pulls which while they hinder accuracy, are probably better in adrenaline fueled, civilian defense situations than a 1911 trigger

          That said, I don’t think you’re much of a handgun owner unless you have a 1911, a revolver in a magnum cartridge, a .22 pistol and some kind of striker fired, concealed carry handgun. If all you own are 1911s or striker fired 9mms, you’re just not a well rounded shooter.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          I don’t have all those guns, and I’m pretty well rounded; 5’5′, 243lbs.

        3. avatar Peter Wolf says:

          And what, pray tell, do revolvers and 1911s have to do with ballistics?

        4. avatar Jericho 941 says:

          You are mad I say. Bloody mad for sure. 1911s have the most wonderful trigger and that cannot be denied.

        5. avatar qmti says:

          Let me apologize and clarify my one line post. As far as law enforcement is concerned the 1911 is obsolete. With it’s single stack capacity it’s no longer viable for a fire fight which law enforcement gets into. Plus the number of mags they would have to carry to support that pistol. A double stack pistol is much better. But for the average carry citizen the 1911 is a extremely safe and accurate pistol. The odds of a extended fire fight by a citizen is remote at best. A spare mag is always recommended for carry in case of a malfunction. The 1911 has proven to be very durable since it’s conception. And a 1911 is just more handsome that a Glock.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “1911s are obsolete crap,…”

      “Smile when you say that, mister.”
      – The Virginian

    3. avatar Ralph says:

      “sell off your 1911s (all your .45 caliber guns for that matter) to some unknowledgeable idiot.”

      Well, it sounds like you’re buying.

    4. avatar SouthernPhantom says:


    5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I suppose you’re willing to prove how obsolete they are then by standing in front of one?

    6. avatar Hal J. says:

      Trollin’, trollin’, trollin….keep those posts a-trollin….

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Haha! I actually heard that while reading it.

    7. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

      Some of us prefer guns with real triggers and a weapon that naturally points. The NRA is dropping the ball on this one.

      1. avatar JerichoJames says:

        I have plenty of 1911s I love but I have to say none of their triggers can hold a candle to my P226 Legion.

        1. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Have to disagree with you. If you buy a 1600 dollar 1911 it will have at least as nice a trigger as the legion.

    8. avatar Hank says:

      Wow dude. Did someone carrying a 1911 bang your wife or something? Your really gonna sit their and agree two whole classes of firearms should just be ignored? I’m gonna take a wild guess and say you voted for Hillary.

      1. avatar TJ McNamara says:

        Excellent post.

    9. avatar Missouri Mule says:

      I smell a troll.
      P.S. My 1911 rocks 17 + 1 rounds of 9mm.
      P.P.S. $850 for 3 days top shelf training is not unreasonable.

    10. avatar Rob Pincus says:

      I’m not a proponent of 1911s as a good choice for personal Defense… but, we don’t outright ban them. We educate people as to why. It’s what teachers do. If people still want to bring them, they are allowed… and they usually figure it why we make the recommendations that we do.

      1. avatar That one guy says:

        I know it’s not your gig, but is there a chance that the NRA/CG classes are looking for a certain amount of capacity that single stacks and revolvers just can’t achieve?

        Since the footnote seems to include sub-compacts with the 1911 and revolver segment, and the main text refers to glock/sig options, it seems like this training only wants larger-sized double stack guns.

        1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

          Several people have proposed that rationalization. I don’t buy it. You teach the students to run THEIR guns and design courses for STUDENTS, not some arbitrary round count or pace.
          I tell single stack students to bring 5 mags instead of 3.

        2. avatar that one guy says:

          I don’t own a 1911 or a revolver, but I also don’t own a double stack. If all I ever plan to carry is a ‘secondary’, be it a 238 or an LC9s, I guess the NRA doesn’t want my training money.

    11. avatar RickP says:


    12. avatar M. Atkinson says:

      I am smart, I know better than you, everyone who doesn’t think like me is an idiot, blah blah blah!

    13. avatar M. Atkinson says:

      Lmao, what should we do with all those little micro 1911 copies like the Sig Sauer P238/938, and the little Kimber’s, etc.?
      They are just a little 1911s without the grip safety, how about those double stack 1911s, also other caliber such as 9 mm, 22 Long rifle, 380, 22 TCM, 40, 45, 10 mm, 38 super, etc.?
      And you claim other people are ignorant, that’s funny coming from an ignoramus.

    14. avatar Gutshot says:

      I suppose you use a 9mm handgun of some sort? You probably drink latte’s from Starbucks and shop at Target too. Time to man up powderpuff.

    15. avatar Red says:

      Thank you for your OPINION.

    16. avatar Dwight Cimino says:

      I suppose when this kid graduates from grammar school, he may take a course on safety.

      IF, . . . and I say IF, he does, he will find the 1911 is THE safest handgun on the market, barring none.

      But then again, . . . he’s probably spent several hours on the pot, . . . dangling his feet, . . . reading somebody’s throwaway Glock literature.

    17. avatar Bob Wilson says:

      The Hurst, Texas Police Department adopted the 1911 as their issued and only type of firearm allowed to be
      carried in the early 70’s and as I write this those officers still carry it without complaint.

      The 1911 is for a highly trained, current, and skilled operator, not for the average owner who ventures out once or twice a year to practice.
      There are many other firearms for those people to own and use for personal protection with success and thank goodness they do just that.

  4. avatar QMTI says:

    1911’s are well proven firearms. As a NRA member I’m not interested in Carry Guard.

  5. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

    Dear NRA: eff you.

  6. Dear God, please bless for eternity the soul of your humble servant John Moses Browning and all his earthly works. Amen!

    1. avatar Timothy says:

      Praise be to John Moses Browning, all glory to his name. Amen

  7. avatar Kyle says:

    As a California gun owner (rare breed I know), i gotta say, i’m continuously unimpressed by the actions of the NRA. They’re actions with regards to USCCA is simply reprehensible. I get it that they are still the best asset the gun community has in DC, but damn!

    1. avatar sagebrushracer says:

      as another CA gun owner, I agree with you.

      On a national level, the NRA seems to be doing OK and puts fear into the anti gun community/elected idiots.

      On a local level the NRA has been digging its own grave for the last 10 years.

  8. avatar jwm says:

    More and more I’m glad I kicked the NRA to the curb.

    The K frame S&W is everything you need in a fighting handgun and nothing you don’t need.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I guess that makes the GP 100 everything you need in a fighting ha ndgun and more.

      1. avatar Jeff K says:

        Can not go wrong with a GP100.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Uuuhh, uummmm, the GP100 has no polymer parts, so you are wrong from the gitgo. The only steel a gun should have is the slide rails, the striker, and the bullets.


        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Uh, plastic springs?

      2. avatar SteveInCO says:

        GP 100s work, and I have fun shooting mine (less fun cleaning it though). I don’t even bother with single action.

        But dang, they’re big. And the ammo ain’t cheap either.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Thus, my comment about the K frame.

  9. avatar BradP says:

    Easy answer is just don’t take their class. They should be teaching people to “run what you brung” instead of trying to chase people away. I wonder how many villagers Mr Jarrett refused to train because they didn’t have M16 style rifles?

    I love when gun owners attack other gun owners over stupid stuff. Goes to show you that we are our own worst enemy.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Maybe the training developers are too young to understand how steel guns work, need hundreds of rounds for putting down suppressive fiire, believe nothing less than 15rds in a magazine can get you out of trouble, are limited in their knowledge of guns on the whole, don’t want live fire slowed by guns that require you to be deadly with the bullets loaded.

      1. avatar jsallison says:

        Llikely aficionados of the Lethal lWeapon Riggs Bangittybangittybangbangbang, bangittybangittybangbangbang ‘Hey Murtaugh! Got one!!’ school of shooting. Oh, wait, Beretta 92, metallic construction, hammer fired, yep, so 20th century, and thus totally unworthy.

        Someone needs to show up at one of these things with a brace of Colt 1861 .36’s. and a Spencer carbine.

  10. avatar Hooahberry says:

    $850? Uh, nope. The revolver & M1911 discrimination just adds fuel to the fire.
    So much for helping people.
    Wonder how many SEALs helped with program development….

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      Not that many since the SEALs used to carry S&W 686s until fairly recently. Now they probably just put “Maritime” spring cups in their Glawk 19s.

  11. avatar Mr AR says:

    Proof that the Ruskies are taking over the country. JMB and EKeith are spinning in their graves; along with all Marines since 1911

    1. avatar tiger says:

      The Marine Corps was more than happy to send their M45 Colt’s back just a few years ago after buying them. So I would not be so sure about that 1911 crying

    2. avatar Bob h says:

      I love my 1911, will probably get a 2011 at some point. However if you talk to a veteran who actually was issued one of those “rattletrap” 30 year old in 1970 handguns, he would tell you how they NEVER trusted them, or carried them with full magazines OR cocked and locked because the fear/possibly of dropping it or hitting the deck quick could result in a 45 caliber hole in your leg. When the Army adopted the M9, it was 20 years too late. Guys who actually had to deal with them, don’t think to highly of the service grade 1911s. YMMV

      1. avatar Steve says:

        Any weapon that isn’t well maintained can be dangerous. The guy next to me at the Annapolis pistol range in 1969 had a M1911 go full auto on him when he followed the “Lock and load” command. Fortunately we were shooting a ten round segment and the magazine only held 5 rounds. The first went into the ground in front of him, with each successive round firing at higher elevation until the last one went straight up. Had he had seven the last one would likely have gone into his face. But a well maintained or new M1911 is a good weapon. And since I carried one for twenty years, its the weapon of choice in my mind.

  12. avatar Dave Lewis says:

    It looks like they are trying to lawyer proof their curriculum and training program as much as possible – “We’re teaching official approved methods and tactics with official approved pistols and we’ll only make good on this insurance if you do exactly what we teach. Anything else and all bets are off. Oh by the way you have to wear Under Armor tactical under shorts and $300 Oakley sunglasses too.” On another note why do all of the super operational operators all look like they haven’t taken a shower or shaved in a couple of days? Are they trying to make it look like they’re too busy killing terrorists to be bothered with a razor?

    $850 for three days of training seems to be expensive but if you price the other well known shooting schools which are usually five days long the cost is probably competitive. The big issue will be to see what’s taught – right now all I see is a bunch of advertising hype on the web site.

    1. avatar BradP says:

      And if you use a 1911 or revolver Carry Guard probably won’t cover you because THEY didn’t train you on it. Just speculation but I’ll bet it is somewhere in the small print.

    2. avatar Missouri Mule says:

      Gunsite 150 Three Day Pistol Class $1,090.
      Gunsite 250 Five Day Pistol Class $1695.
      Quality costs.
      P.S. You can bring your 1911.

      1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

        Gunsite has a track record that goes back 4 Decades to the birth of the private sector training industry… how many private sector course reviews can you google up from the leadership of Carry Guard?
        FWIW, my company generally charges between $200 & 300 per day for end user classes.

    3. avatar Big Al says:

      When the culture and people that one is working with have for the most part ZERO respect for clean shaven foreigners (read: that very few Muslims in the remote areas of the Middle East are clean shaven and are so for specific cultural reasons) one grows a beard and the ones with the most gray in them are the most respected. Additionally, unkempt beards are just as frowned upon, showing a sign of lack of self-respect and uncleanliness. Lots of good will can be made by the team showing up in a village and allowing the local barber to groom their beards providing they can do so and still be secure. Retired SF guy.

  13. avatar Dave M says:

    If you do a feature for feature comparison of Carry Guard vs. USCCA, the NRA program comes up extremely short. When they booted the USCCA from the Atlanta Convention I decided to just let my membership expire and NOT renew: this strengthens that resolve. Seems the NRA is losing it’s way.

    1. avatar What About Bob says:

      Same. They will lose me.

      USCCA and the bombardment of requests for yet more money. I start to wonder what the payroll vs mission spend really is.

  14. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Welp … This made the downselect between carry insurance options a bit easier.

  15. avatar Alan Esworthy says:

    If the class weren’t so expensive I’d be tempted to show up and present as my primary carry pistol John Moses Browning’s later and improved meisterwerk, the Hi-Power. Just to see what they’d do…

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      If the HighPower holds 10 or more rounds, you’re probably “in”. Ooooppss, wait, if the HighPower is single action, you’re probably out. Either way, in or out, you’re it.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Or alternatively, instead of a Hi-Power you could show up with a Hi-Point. That might be even more interesting.

  16. avatar DaveW says:

    This falls right into the progressives concept of divide and conquer. I’d bet the progressives will sink their teeth into this and determine that if the NRA does not support revolvers and 1911s, then there is no reason for citizens to bother having them. There you have it, another chink in the armor caused by shooting ourselves in the foot.

    It may be the course of fire the NRA is using has to do with who has to change magazines or reload a cylinder how many times versus Sigs, Glocks, etc. The course I took in college had this “problem” where those with double stacks had to load less in order to give those with single stacks and revolvers an even playing field.

    Instead of fighting each other over which gun is best and which association is best, we should all be banning together in a united front against those who would deny us our constitutional rights. Castigating those who favor 1911s or whatever does not serve the common good of the gun community… and the antis know it!

    I have my revolvers and my 1911s. They have served me well throughout my military and law enforcement years. I see no reason to give up on what never has given up on me.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Instead of fighting each other over which gun is best and which association is best, we should all be banning together in a united front against those who would deny us our constitutional rights.”

      You got it all wrong, Bucko! There is only one truth in the gun community. If you don’t believe what I believe, you are infidel. Be gone with you. Only the pure gun owners should be protected. The rest can go find a home with the anti-gunners.


  17. avatar strych9 says:

    At first I thought this was a silly thing for them to do, and the phraseology is silly.

    However, I suspect this has mainly to do with triggers. Revolvers, as many people here have pointed out, have a longish and heavier trigger which takes many people time to master. 1911’s, at least in the TTAG comment section, have lighter triggers and “must” be carried with the safety on.

    Those things present issues for an intro class that I wouldn’t want to deal with in terms of changing how each person needs to be instructed and may present safety or the appearance of safety issues as well.

    1. avatar Bob in IN says:

      The stock trigger weight of my m&p and Series 80 1911 are the same. The 1911 has an additional grip and external trigger safety, with a 10 rd mag and yet is not welcomed? I also consider the “safe” inside the trigger guard dongles as a bit of marketing compensation. Is it the safeties? No, because revolvers are excluded too? Operaters only operate with pistols with mags without safeties.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        I’m unsure what you’re trying to say.

        I’m also not arguing that the ideas are correct, merely that they’re out there and accepted in some circles.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Those things present issues for an intro class that I wouldn’t want to deal with…”

      Then perhaps the course developers (and the NRA) should provide a single model striker fired pistol for each student to use during the training. That way, everyone has the same potential performance and learning curve. Plus, the instructors do not need to know how to handle any malfunction from differing gun types.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        It’s whatever they choose but with large class sizes (if they have those) I can see why they want some standardization and might remove certain guns they just don’t want to deal with.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          I agree. Think of the advantages of knowing everything about the only gun that would be used. Issue one type firearm to every attendee. Should eliminate a whole bunch of random problems, so that instructors can concentrate on gun handling, vs. malfunction resolution.

  18. avatar Hank says:

    The ignorance of this move really has me questioning my NRA membership. Looks like USCCA maybe getting my hard earned money instead.

  19. avatar Tennbud says:

    If ALL the advertisers of High End 1911’s and Revolvers pulled their ads from the NRA magazines, How Long would it take them to make a policy change???

    1. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      Yep. Kimber has had an advertising lock on Page 2 and the back cover of American Rifleman for years…and they make (mostly) 45 / 9mm / .380 Autos on a 1911 frame and, now, revolvers. Looked at one of their all steel snubby .357’s the other day…nice! Unfortunately, no money in the budget for one right now.

  20. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    I’m going to put aside the issue of firearm choice here – because it’s clearly a decision based on insurance, conformity, lawyers or a collaboration of all of the above.

    Let’s instead focus on the people behind the curriculum – the aforementioned “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts.”

    What we have here in these two groups are people who:
    1. Were or are taking their paycheck from Uncle Sugar or one of his state-level minions, ie, a political sovereign, and
    2. as such, these people are entitled to sovereign immunity for their actions, as long as they comport with currently expressed policy and procedures, and,
    3. may also avail themselves of the funds of a government sovereign to defend themselves if someone takes them to task for their actions.
    4. Are often provided their firearms and ammo as part of their job, and
    5. who then are able to obtain training free of charge as part of their job.

    People in the private sector are blessed with none of these wonderful operating parameters. We’re having to make do with training, firearms selection, etc on our own time, on our own dime. We don’t get to do things like launch a drone attack on non-combatant civilians and then say “Whoops. My bad.” or shoot someone’s dog in their own yard because, well, they’re incapable of handling a dog without killing it – and then waltz away, with no legal or financial repercussions. We don’t get a new model of sidearm according to current fashion trends and desk jockey preferences, purchased on the taxpayers’ backs. No, that’s not the way things work in the private sector. Here’s how things work in the private sector: there’s a lawyer around every street corner, just waiting for a case on contingency as a jackpot. Your job, as a CCW carrier, is obtain a workable firearm, practice to the best of your ability, then avail yourself of as much legal advice and training so as to avoid, as much as you reasonably can, situations where you’re going to end up with one of these Bar Association parasites on your back in civil court for three years, draining your financial lifeblood, because the family of the scum you had to shoot is claiming that he was a darling child who dindunuffin’ and was “going to go to college,” whereupon he was presumably going to be the person who cured cancer, or so we are led to believe by a relentless media campaign.

    While I’m quite certain that “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts” are quite capable of coaching students how to fling rounds downrange in a furious fusillade befitting an operator operating operationally, I’m much less certain that these types of instructors provide the proper instruction in how to avoid getting into a situation where you need to use said operator operating operationally skills; ie, reading the street, viewing a situation and how to choose when/where to not be, etc. I will also NB that all of these “elite military veterans” and “law enforcement experts” operated in an environment where they could call for backup – be it air, artillery or other heavy arm support, or more squad cars and/or SWAT teams for backup when their decision making turned out to be a bit flawed. Civilians have only themselves and their own resources when the crap hits the fan.

    As one last observation, I’d have to say that “law enforcement,” in general, hasn’t exactly covered themselves with glory in the shoot/no-shoot and marksmanship areas of competence in the last 10 years or so.

    So: How about a few hours of a top-drawer lawyer’s time, explaining to students all the things you shouldn’t do, especially after a DGU? How about some sage words of advice and experience from fellow citizens who had to make a DGU, and what they went through afterwards? It’s increasingly apparent that the law-abiding and tax-paying citizens of this country are on their own, so how about we leave the government employees to lecture their classes, and we civilians quit being lectured down to by those who enjoy the perks of being government employees?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Thank you DG. I’ve said it a couple of times before. You cannot become an operator by doing a weekend class with a lawyer neutered former operator. Period.

      All the real world shooting training you need is how to daily safely handle your gun without shooting yourself or someone else by accident. If you are minute of tweaker accurate that’s good enough.

      The lawyer training and when to not shoot are much more important to us in the civil world.

      We are not operators. We are not going to engage Hans Gruber.

    2. avatar Libertydoc says:

      Dyspeptic, good point on the lawyer’s time. I recommed and have taken a class with attorney Andrew Branca in his Law of Self Defense class. He is the author of the book which has the same name as his clas. No shooting in the class but a lot of great knowledge about when to and not to shoot and how to be ready for the legal aftermath.
      For the naysayers out there, I think I recall Mr. Branca’s IDPA member number is 13 (my member number has 5 digits) so he has been shootng a long time.
      Again, your comment was spot on and the class and the hook will be worth your rime.

    3. avatar Jhon says:

      That was righteous! Well said DG.

  21. avatar Nanashi says:

    They gave us the Uniform Firearms Act, National Firearms Act, Gun Control Act, Law Enforcement Officer Protection Act, and Undetectable Firearms Act, plus undermined concealed carry laws with uneeded duty to inform clauses, and people are just now questioning their NRA membership?

  22. avatar Chris Mallory says:

    So, it is a class for females only or males who think they are females?

  23. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

    The training? I can go for three days of defensive handgun training with current and former LEO SWAT and Tier One types right here close to home for $750, with a LOT of actual shooting (InSights Training, Bellevue WA – Greg Hamilton and the group do a nice no-nonsense solid class).

    The insurance angle? That actually does have some appeal if for no reason other than it’s a decently comprehensive plan and it covers your spouse both inside and outside the home for the same price as an individual. USCCA only covers the spouse on your property – a spousal rider (let the puns begin) is an additional charge.

    1. avatar js says:

      Love Greg’s classes. Great all the way around, though he doesn’t get to this part of the country much anymore.

      1. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

        No BS, just the occasional anecdote story over lunch – and with all his time in the Army doing conventional and unconventional things, plus winning National Tactical shooter awards…he has some stories!

  24. avatar Chris Mallory says:

    “That said, I don’t think you’re much of a handgun owner unless you have a 1911, a revolver in a magnum cartridge, a .22 pistol and some kind of striker fired, concealed carry handgun. If all you own are 1911s or striker fired 9mms, you’re just not a well rounded shooter.”

    I don’t enjoy shooting revolvers any longer, so I sold mine. I have owned plastic striker pistols. I have ended up selling all of them. I will keep my 1911’s.

  25. avatar Rob says:

    Before you spend some of your “hard earned” with Rob P/PDN do some research on how he interprets the 2nd and his views in regard to compromising personal freedom. Just saying.

    1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

      Yes. I would encourage that.

      Maybe you should re-visit the topic as well. Pay close attention to the part about following the laws and being a responsible firearms owner. Some people get confused in those areas. 😉

  26. avatar W says:

    “The NRA’s decision to ban revolvers and 1911’s from their Carry Guard courses no doubt reflects their desire to maintain uniformity, to ensure quality of instruction.”

    You’ve got to call them and ask if you want to know the “why.”
    As for M1911s, in my four decades of pistol shooting, I have seen more ADs and jams with them than everything else combined. BUT that doesn’t mean those are the reason why. You’ve got to call them and ask.

  27. avatar Oliver says:

    Glocks are the Jumbo Crayons of handguns. Designed for the lowest order of shooter, i.e. Someone who is handling a firearm for the first time in their life, thinks bullets and cartridges are the same thing, can’t be bothered to properly clean their pistol and has to have the manual of arms kept to an absolute bare bones minimum. Otherwise during a stressful situation they will forget to disengage the manual safety, followed by attempting to cock an already cocked handgun and finishing off with ejecting the loaded magazine onto the deck.

    This is my troll post. Their are many like it but this one is mine.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      I wonder if the NRA got some kind of deal from Glock or another big striker company to put this out there. Not just 1911s, but to exclude all revolvers is just asinine.

  28. avatar Pliablemoose says:

    They need to put together specific 1911 & revolver classes, I suspect they will.

    1. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      For another $850…returning “members” receive a discount…only $849.99…sign up now – send cash.

  29. avatar danny says:

    Sorry but the NRA is starting to bully a lot of people so I cant support them anymore. I’ll support other groups just not the NRA.
    I think the P226 is close to a 1911 decocker etc. Just no external safety. What about XD’s with the grip safety? Similar to the 1911 also?

  30. avatar former water walker says:

    Meh…as mentioned by jwm I’m not an operator EITHER. Being COVERED by legal insurance is way more important to me than if I’m a perfect shot(but I’m good). Ptetty sure Pincus teaches this too((I saw his NRA video). It’s an awesome responsibly to carry and I hope I never have to shoot anyone…

  31. avatar Specialist38 says:

    Because revolvers and 1911s are no longer considered firearms

    So I should be allowed to carry one of either anywhere and order them through the mail.

    Sounds like a win to me. Plus I can save $850. Way to alienate your core NRA.


  32. avatar SouthAl says:

    I don’t operate operationally. Never had a ‘class’ in self defense, not against them though. I’m not taking the time to look at their website. So, I may be missing the obvious; but, what are they going to teach you or how are they going to evaluate your performance with only 40 rounds of ammunition?

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “…how are they going to evaluate your performance with only 40 rounds of ammunition?”

      Because if one cannot put 40rds in the 10 ring, what’s the point of shooting more?

      1. avatar js says:

        I was thinking that too. 40 rounds in 3 days? For $850???

        That sounds more like LFI than a carry gun class, but even LFI took 500 rounds IIRC.

      2. avatar SouthAl says:

        So, just because you can put 40 in the 10 ring you are good to go? No thanks.

      3. avatar SouthAl says:

        Sam I Am-As I was out mowing the lawn, the wisdom and humor of your comment finally struck me.

    2. avatar Wiregrass says:

      I took the NRA’s “Personal Protection in the Home” course. We fired more (50) rounds in that one day course that cost about 6% of what this course costs.

  33. avatar js says:

    It’s probably because the revolvers and 1911s have such a radical difference in operation that they don’t want to have to train for them separately.

    And buy Airsoft guns to match. With all the others, they’re pretty much the same except for the DA first pull on some.

    Take a SA-only CZ-75 or Browning Hi-Power and see what they say. I’ll bet they’re excluded too.

  34. avatar Bob says:

    Well…..1911’s do suck…….but revolvers are super.

  35. avatar Palehorse says:

    You can bring any pistol you’d like for a backup. That’s what the 40 rounds are for. Still sucks they pulled this though.

  36. avatar borg says:

    It is a shame that people with handicaps that require them to use revolvers are not welcome. It is a shame that those of limited means that could only afford one reliable gun and chose the 1911 are also not welcome. It is shame that the training is too costly for those of limited means.

    If it is their intention to offer training that discriminates against poor and disabled they then this is a success if not then it is a failure.

  37. avatar redc1c4 says:

    is my Coonan in 357 Mag allowed?


    1. avatar borg says:

      It will not be allowed as a primary but will probably be fine as a secondary.

  38. avatar Brian says:

    Hell James Yeager only asks for $500 for his fighting pistol classes

  39. avatar Accur81 says:

    I never considered NRA tactical / defense / guard training to be top notch. Gunsite, if the worthless spell check feature on my Galaxy S8 will ever allow me to say what I want, is exceptional.

    I’ve carried a “lowly” revolver as a guard for Dunbar Armored for almost a year in ’97. I moved a lot of cash through some sketchy places In Milwaukee with that gun. In ’98 I upgraded to a Glock .35 with Hydrashoks and 15 round mags, but the good old .357 is a great gun. So is the 1911. The STI 2011s are awesome. Want 26 + 1 rounds of 9mm HST without changing mags, reliability, a great trigger, and exceptional accuracy? The STI can do that. Otherwise I wouldn’t feel undergunned with my 8 – shot Smith 627 PC 5″ .357 and bonded Underwood 158 JHPs, although I’m not sure I could ding up that gun with everyday use.

    Want better guards? Get more training. Ditto for cops, who often can’t shoot as well as taxpayers. As with many things in government, people don’t always get decent service. And there’s also something to be said for a good guard dog, but that’s an entirely different subject.

    DG makes great points about liability as well. If I didn’t have a union and other legal options, I’d definitely be as USCCA member. I think they have an office in my hometown of West Bend, WI.

  40. avatar Sprocket says:

    “I consider myself very well trained. But this course was life-changing.” I suspect the greatest change was to Ms. Loesch’s bank balance.

  41. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Yes the NRA is the big dog in the room. However, they often loose their way. This is but one example. My (limited) money goes to more local fights within my state. As the old guard fades away maybe more change will come???

  42. avatar samuraichatter says:

    What constitutes a revolver is fairly straight forward but 1911’s? Are we talking any metal framed pistol? If it has stacking is it then OK? Is hammer fired OK? Paras? Browning Hi Powers?

    “NRA Carry Guard Level One is designed for training with a semi-automatic handgun (Glock 19/17, Sig P226/P228 or equivalent). We will not allow revolvers or 1911s as your primary firearm in this class.”

    This sentence makes the NRA look stupid. A 1911 is a semi-automatic handgun! If they meant striker fired, polymer framed handgun then they should have stated that.

  43. avatar Former Illinois Resident says:

    I don’t know for sure, and I’m not going to put any effort into researching it, so this is just a guess. I have been to a couple of pistol training classes and two of them said no revolvers or single stacks because of the amount of rounds fired, and the people slowing the class down because of all the reloads. Reloading was done in a slow methodical way so no “tactical” or fast reloads and most reloads were done as a group. I’m sure not saying you or someone else can’t reload fast so don’t “shoot” the messenger yust offering a guess at a possible explanation.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      We shot about 100 rounds in my CPL class (30 rounds required by the state IIRC). Those of us with 1911s (me myself and I) and those with single stack subcompacts (half of the ladies present) did indeed mess up the course of fire a bit.
      Reloads were done en masse, when ordered by the RSO.
      Not a single revolver in sight.

      Most of us were non-shooters before that day. I was the only one who could shoot a halfway decent group with a handgun, I think most or all of the other experienced shooters (deer hunters?) had zero handgun experience.

      All of us had clearly zero training for shooting at targets that might shoot back, and the instructors were trying hard to do as much towards preparing us for that as they could in the time available. They weren’t merely doing what was needed to sign off on our required CPL training.

  44. avatar Eric Lawrence says:

    Guys, even John Moses Browning himself went out into the wilderness and had the burning bush speak to him until he saw the light and created (well…started to) the P-35, otherwise known as the Hi-Power. All of the steel framed beauty of a finely crafted handgun with a fantastic trigger (mag safety or not) in 9mm with a double stack 13 round mag.

    1. avatar tiger says:

      Sigh… One day I will rent a billboard on I-95. And it will say, ” Saive, made the damn gun.”

      1. avatar M. Atkinson says:

        I’ve tried several different Hi powers, none of them including ones with the magazine disconnect removed (mine) ever equaled a 1911 trigger, as a matter of fact some of them were downright atrocious.
        I do however own one for collecting sake, and do enjoy shooting it occasionally, they are fine handguns, yet cannot equal a 1911 trigger without dropping in a whole lot of money, time, or both into it, while even most of the cheapest 1911’s have pretty good triggers.

        1. avatar tiger says:

          Light triger alone will not make me ignore why I prefer the Hi- Power. That said, there are better gun designs available today that have replaced both the 1911 & P35 for shooters and duty users.

  45. avatar Jack says:

    So the NRA has entered the Polymer jungle. Some of us carry 1911’s and the antiquated revolver.

    US Law Shield is a far better insurance.

  46. avatar Wiregrass says:

    Face it, the NRA decided to screw the people that took the required courses and paid the fees to become NRA Instructors by initiating “blended learning”. This was pretty much a move to capture more revenue as many clubs have trained their members as instructors and were offering their course for almost free.

    Well that didn’t turn out so well. They got a lot of negative feedback from the instructors that the people coming to them weren’t learning anything through the online course and they were having to redo that effort themselves at a point where people were supposed to be ready for range time. So they brought back the Basic Pistol Course or at least that was the plan last I heard. The First Steps course is done, and that’s unfortunate because it did reach some people that really, really needed training just to be safe and that is probably all they would take the time to do.

    So now they’ve decided to just step outside their own established training format completely and offer what sounds like a more advanced defensive course to make the money grab and priced themselves completely out of the market where most training is needed. I don’t see this being anymore successful than “blended learning” was.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      Interesting take. Perhaps this is the gun world version of common core?

  47. avatar Corey says:

    This is why the NRA will never see another dime from me, in fact they have not in the last 5 years or so.

    They have turned from a non profit to a for profit business. Running the USCCA out of the convention was very uncool. Lapierre is a dink who needs to just go away. And lastly, what have they actually done for your rights? Its all smoke and mirrors. How much money do they take in? How much do they spend on shit that doesnt protect your rights?

  48. avatar kap says:

    NRA is becoming brain dead and have a swelled head, has to be a striker fired weapon for a primary gun what a bunch of crap. The reason for this is so the outfit they stole the information from can’t sue them for their theft, totally different you know! bunch of Losers.

  49. avatar Mad Max says:

    Skip the NRA course and go to Gunsite, where the 1911 is king.

  50. avatar David J. says:

    The Second Amendment is 226 years old. Is it outdated and inferior too? I answer that at the end of my post.

    So . . . the 1911 is obsolete in part because of age and because of its capacity? Then why are most firearms that are marketed for concealed carry . . . single stack handguns like the 1911? Oh, that’s right; most civilians are never going to find themselves in a fire fight! Yes, there are those who carry compact double stack handguns including myself from time to time. However, the most concealable guns are subcompact, single stack guns. My Walter PPS 40S&W carries 7+1 and is the same size and has the same capacity as my Citadel 3.5″ 1911 in 45ACP. The PPS is a smidgen lighter but the Citadel has the best trigger hands down. Why? Hammer fired handguns have better triggers than most (not all, just most) striker fired handguns. Both guns conceal just as easily. (For the record though, so do my full-size 1911s.)

    For those who hate 1911s, nothing said or written will change their minds. Even the 1911A2 with its double stack magazine is not good enough for these people even when chambered in their preferred 9mm and 40S&W calibers. They simply hate the 1911 and do so because it is a “100+ year old, antiquated design” to them. Yet the only thing on their striker fired, polymer framed wonder pistols (I own several) that isn’t 100+ year old technology is a portion of the firing mechanism and the plastic grip. (You should see how much steam comes out of their ears when I quietly point out the reality of their “new is better” mentality.)

    I also like to ask the 1911 haters just how many bolt action rifles they own. After all, the first bolt-action rifle was produced in 1824 by Johann Nikolaus von Dreyse. Wow! Almost 200 years ago! How about the fact that the Gatling Gun which was patented in 1862 continues to be the fasted firing type of machine gun made today after 155 years. That’s why they are still used on gunships in our military to this day. (No, they are not as suitable for infantry.)

    The truth is that there are certain machine designs that when conceived are the epitome of perfection and little to nothing can be done to improve upon the design. This doesn’t just apply to machines in general or certain firearms specifically. The same thing is applied to certain works of literature and certain legal documents. One legal document in particular comes to my mind. It’s the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Yes, the Constitution has been updated a few times, however, the Second Amendment is 226 years old. Do we need to replace it because it too is outdated and inferior in the minds of some Americans? Or, do we stand our ground that the Second Amendment is simple perfection?

    1. avatar Frank says:

      You don’t see a guy riding in the nose of an A-10 hand-cranking that Gatling gun, though. The examples you gave have evolved a lot more than 1911s have, in capability and reliability. If you took a standard modern 1911 example back in time to the 1920s, you wouldn’t be leave any 1911 owners of that age awe struck by it. They would probably wonder how technological progress had become so stagnant that things has scarcely changed in the interim time.

      On the other hand, if you took a GAU-8 Avenger back in time and showed it to General Custer, I’m pretty sure he would have wanted to take it to Little Big Horn, instead of leaving it behind with the other gatling guns.

      1. avatar David J says:

        I get that awe in the modern day with my vintage Colt 1911. It is 105 years old and is the fourth commercial 1911 ever struck. It is just as reliable at the range today as it was when it was a newborn. I not only shoot it; I carry it too. Yes, modern day 1911s have evolved and it is clear when placed next to my Colt. At the same time, the timelessness of the design is evident. Anyone who claims 1911s aren’t accurate or reliable obviously is either ignorant or lying. And anyone who doesn’t think a 1911 can hold its own in a self-defense situation is dead wrong. Oh, and yes, it is very popular when I bring it out.

        As to the Gatling gun, yes they are electric now but it does not change the fact that it is still the fastest machine gun and has been since it was patented. It has never been knocked from that position by any other design. Period.

        1. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          Well said!

  51. avatar Ian says:

    I agree that capacity seems to be the only reasonable explanation I can think of. With 1911’s I can sorta kinda understand they might be concerned about them from a safety stand point. I took a defensive handgun class at my LGS and one guy did it with a 1911 that he carried in an iwb holster. After every round of fire he would slam it back into his holster, and I was worried he was going to shoot himself in the leg at some point. However in that same class I went the whole day, with about 400-500 rounds with my S&W Model 10. The guys running the class had no concerns with that and actually had me shoot more than others to force me to reload more often, which is good training with a lower capacity pistol. I laughed when I saw the headline, as my two most commonly carried full size firearms are my Springfield Range Officer Operator or S&W 686SSR.

  52. avatar steve says:

    If I can’t use a 1911, is it okay to show up with an STI 2011? No problem with capacity, I have magazines that hold 21 rounds and others that hold 28 rounds. Let me guess, then I’m not having to change magazines enough times to meet course requirements…

  53. avatar Nicefish says:

    At that price does the course include a pistol? They should at least throw in a Hi-Point or something.

  54. avatar dwb says:

    Yeah, won’t be signing up for this. Kinda dumb.

    NRA acts like they have won the fight for carry rights, when in fact we are not even close.

    Know what happens when groups get complacent and declare victory too early? They get Hillary-itis.

  55. avatar Nicefish says:

    At that price does the course include a pistol? They should at least throw in a Hi-Point or something.

  56. avatar derfel cadarn says:

    The mental giants at the NRA, as is their modus onperandi, have once again managed to pull a defeat out of a victory. Opening this door to insurance liability control over us only benefits them, as you can be certain a hefty fee accompanies these classes, and have no doubts that you will be able to purchase an NRA sponsored firearms liability policy for thirty pieces of silver.What a bargain ! I spent my youth being sold out by these jokers now it seems it will be my old age as well. l am done with compromise, do these clowns have any concept of what inalienable means ?

  57. avatar Windhorse says:

    There are YouTube videos of Rob Pincus stating he does not allow compact 1911’s in his classes, and I’ve watched other trainers who don’t allow any 1911’s though I can’t remember their names.
    Too many buttons and levers and jams with them. And too many interruptions in the class. This is more an issue for new shooters than experienced 1911 fans.

    1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

      There are plenty of videos, articles and social media comments in which I make it very clear that, based on the umber of problems I (and every other instructor I know) see with them, I don’t recommend sub-compact .45 1911s for defensive use. I also don’t think any 1911 is the best choice for the majority of people. That said, I certainly don’t “ban” them from any of my classes. In fact, if you go look at my youtube video from about 5 years ago when I loudly and clearly condemned the mini-45s, you will see that my most frequent comment to the people who claim theirs works perfectly is simply “Bring it to a class”… that’s an invitation, not a restriction!
      I also offered tuition refund and ammunition reimbursement for anyone who makes it through a 2 day class without a malfunction or safety operation error with a 1911… haven’t had to pay out yet. 🙂

      1. avatar TS says:

        Does that challenge include full size government models?

    2. avatar Rob Pincus says:

      Not true.

      I don’t recommend them… but I certainly don’t ban them.

      In fact, I encourage anyone trusting their life to one to bring it to a class. If you check the comments under my infamous “Subcompact 1911’s Don’t Work” video from about 5 years ago, you’ll see that my most frequent comment reply is “bring it to a class”. I invite 1911s, not restrict them!

      1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

        (sorry for double reply.. didn’t realize the first one was being “moderated”….)

  58. avatar GonHtn says:

    Without the benefit of inside knowledge as to the NRA’s motives, I can offer insight based on 50+ years with a number of 1911 platforms, and 35 years as both a police firearm instructor and civilian CCW instructor.

    Many people are not familiar with the 1911, and it is not a beginners gun. It isn’t difficult to learn, but few people want to put in the time and ammo it takes to learn it. I don’t consider it to be inherently more dangerous that any other handgun, especially striker fired trigger safety pistols. If one devotes the time and ammo to learn the safety coordination required to safely and efficiently operate the 1911, the only safer handgun is the double action revolver.

    No, I’d be willing to bet that the main reason they don’t want 1911’s or revolvers is because they would interfere with the smooth flow of the training. Reloading magazine and cylinders takes time, which leaves all the other trainees sitting around doing nothing. Also, a training sequence which requires 10 or 12 rounds will require a reload, which requires the course designer to either slow the pace for hi-caps, or over-speed the low capacity shooters. Smooth flow…gone.

    The only fair thing they should do is to offer training specifically geared to the 1911 or revolver. Me- I’ll look for other options.

    1. avatar Rob Pincus says:

      “No, I’d be willing to bet that the main reason they don’t want 1911’s or revolvers is because they would interfere with the smooth flow of the training. Reloading magazine and cylinders takes time, which leaves all the other trainees sitting around doing nothing. Also, a training sequence which requires 10 or 12 rounds will require a reload, which requires the course designer to either slow the pace for hi-caps, or over-speed the low capacity shooters. Smooth flow…gone.”

      None of that is a thing if you are doing realistic defensive training. “Flow” is Gone when the bad guy shows up… If you are catering the drills to your students gear, you are just playing range games anyway. The fight is the fight, regardless of what the student shows up with. -RJP

  59. avatar RetroG says:

    What single “training sequence” requires 10-12 rounds?? Double tapping 5-6 opponents? Mozambique drill on 4-5 opponents? Those sound a lot like gun game setups.

    And for the record, you really NEED to learn how to reload under pressure. It is part of clearing malfunctions for a semi. With a little practice with a speed loader, reloading a revolver is almost as fast as a semi.

  60. avatar Ralph Jones says:

    Pro Custom 14.45 from Para Ordnance. Double stack hi cap magazine in 45 ACP on a 1911 platform. I carried one o duty and I carried it cocked and locked with a thumb-break retention strap. The trigger was a thing of beauty. No striker fired pistol can even come close to the trigger a good gunsmith can tune on a 1911 platform. If I knew I was going to be in a gunfight, and couldn’t get to a long gun, the Para 14.45 would be my next logical choice. The goofs at the NRA are making a BIG mistake by banning 1911’s and revolvers.

  61. avatar D. Brian Casady says:

    I carried a 1911 some in the Army, and was quite dismayed when I found out that my small experience and skill was considerably better than my instructors skills. I never could find anyone in the Army who could shoot a 1911 better than I could, and I am only what I consider average in the civilian world. Just because someone was an operator in a “Special” military unit is no reason for me to think they are knowledgeable with a firearm.
    If you want to talk down about any firearm which has been around for more than 50 years and which has been used in at least one war, you need to give me some concrete information rather than personal bias. I don’t like the Beretta M9. Personal bias. I don’t like the way they fit my hand, and I don’t like the way they don’t point naturally for me. Unlike many who style themselves as experts, I can see the difference between personal bias and genuine quality or design issues.
    When I last took the CHL class, I used a sub-compact carry gun. The instructor, a retired Sheriff’s Deputy, who was very knowledgeable was somewhat concerned that I was the only student using anything other than a full sized Glock. He asked some questions to assess my level of competence. I agreed to even demonstrate some skills for him. He allowed me to take the class with what I brought. I passed with no problem. He thought I was left handed for a long time after that. It was about a year before he found out that I am right handed and was using only my left hand that day. Maybe it sounds arrogant, but I had practiced, and still do, with my left hand quite a lot just because of the possibility that I might be injured some on my right side some day and just have the bad luck to need to defend my life that day. I have never been in the situation as a civilian where I needed to draw my gun. I try to actively avoid the need, but I realize that circumstances may be out of my control at some point.
    Still, if you cannot prove that you are better with a gun than I am, or that you know more without using personal bias, then why should I listen to you? Terry Murbach, Buck Elliott, and Denis Prisbrey are some of the people I look up to. If you know who they are, then you can make some accurate assessments of me.

  62. avatar TS says:

    So a 8+1 round SIG P225 is OK? Rather proven firearm..

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