MKEgal
Regular Member
Whoa!
Especially with the wave of dubious classes that's inundated us in the last couple weeks, that's sensible advice.
If there are classes being run by uncredentialed people, they could have really good info, or they could be crap, but if the trainers are uncredentialed (according to the requirements of the new law) people have wasted their $ as far as getting a WI permit.
They'll send in their certificate & get a denial, then have to find a conforming course, pay more, take the class, & send in another application. And if they're like most people, they won't be carrying while they're waiting, because most people (say they) won't carry openly.
Making someone minimally competent, not likely to harm themselves or anyone they don't intend to shoot, & hopefully knowing the law about self-defense, is a start.
That's where I started out. That's probably where a lot of us started.
Very few people have the elite military training you've been lucky to have. That's part of why what you teach is so valuable.
Given that it's not likely any particular person would actually shoot at an attacker, "minimally competent" will work for most people most of the time.
And even as cynical as I can be, I think people will realize that they are only minimally competent & seek better training.
But meanwhile, having more good people prepared to defend themselves is a good thing.
Pot, meet kettle.
Besides, I think you're exaggerating just a bit.
Which is exactly what I've thought he meant.jpm84092 said:
Especially with the wave of dubious classes that's inundated us in the last couple weeks, that's sensible advice.
If there are classes being run by uncredentialed people, they could have really good info, or they could be crap, but if the trainers are uncredentialed (according to the requirements of the new law) people have wasted their $ as far as getting a WI permit.
They'll send in their certificate & get a denial, then have to find a conforming course, pay more, take the class, & send in another application. And if they're like most people, they won't be carrying while they're waiting, because most people (say they) won't carry openly.
I've said it before: ya gotta start somewhere.CalicoJack said:
Making someone minimally competent, not likely to harm themselves or anyone they don't intend to shoot, & hopefully knowing the law about self-defense, is a start.
That's where I started out. That's probably where a lot of us started.
Very few people have the elite military training you've been lucky to have. That's part of why what you teach is so valuable.
Given that it's not likely any particular person would actually shoot at an attacker, "minimally competent" will work for most people most of the time.
And even as cynical as I can be, I think people will realize that they are only minimally competent & seek better training.
But meanwhile, having more good people prepared to defend themselves is a good thing.
CJ, you know I respect your knowledge & ability to teach...CalicoJack said:
Pot, meet kettle.
Besides, I think you're exaggerating just a bit.
Whoa! This is way off base.CalicoJack said:
Last edited:
