Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

The Problem
You are an experienced shooter with multiple instructor certifications. You have been teaching classes successfully for the last several years and recently decided that it was time to seek an advanced concealed-carry certification.

Recently, a colleague made you aware that a national training organization would be conducting a multi-day Advanced Concealed Carry Instructor class. The course description was somewhat minimal, but it did include the boiler plate objectives implying that these subjects would be taught at an advanced level.

At the bottom of the advertisement, it stated that each student would be required to pass a practical and an academic test to receive the course certification. That seemed reasonable for a professionally run course.

On the first morning you were met by two instructors who tersely told you to get your gear on and report to the range to qualify. No introduction, safety/med brief, course objectives or explanations—just get ready and go. These instructors represented a nationally recognized organization, so you perceived this as perhaps a new method of teaching and you were there to learn.

At the end of the qualification, the scores were recorded and only two out of 10 students passed. Those who didn’t qualify were told that they could not pass the course, but could stay and participate or attend a later class when they were better prepared.

You and your friend, who also failed, decided to stay since you already had time and money invested in attending to the class. Your thinking was that the information presented in the class would be valuable, regardless of the qualification failure.

The instructors were openly irritated that you both decided to stay. Little did you know that this was the beginning of the worst training experience of your life.

Both instructors claimed they were prior military special operators, but refused to give any details about their backgrounds. Their uniforms were jeans and an untucked shirt, which covered but didn’t conceal their belt-mounted pistols. Their demonstrations were rudimentary, and they deviated from the lesson plan often, making excuses why they weren’t following the curriculum.

To add insult to injury, you and your classmates were belittled throughout the class, being told that there was no reason for you to be in the class because you would never use it for real like they had. They may have been armed professionals one time, but they were far from being professional or even polite now.

At the end they wanted you to give them a five-star rating on the evaluation sheet before they would issue the certificates of completion.

You want to ensure that this never happens to you or anyone else again.

The Solution
Unfortunately, this happens in the firearms-training community more often than we want to acknowledge. Just because an individual was a military special operator, a law-enforcement SWAT team member or a world-class competitive shooter does not mean that they can teach people outside of their sphere of operation or, teach others at all.

The companies these individuals represent may, on the face of their advertising and marketing programs, lead a po- tential customer to believe one thing, but provide an experience far from what the course description would have a potential customer to believe. This is often due to the actual experience and background of the instructors involved.

In my experience, teaching responsible citizens, law enforcement officers or military personnel requires a different mindset for each segment of the market to be most effective.

When contemplating taking any class, brand recognition and name recognition are important. Regardless, it is wise to ask for references from the providing company and/or its training staff, either directly or indirectly. Verification should be one of the first steps in planning a training trip.

Course objectives of what you will learn and be able to perform will tell you what to expect. They should be relevant and realistic to your goals. If they are lacking in these, the training probably is, too. The equipment list should follow the specific parameters of the course, which will influence the course expectations.

Social media is a powerful resource in both researching the quality of an organization’s course presentations and how their instructors are perceived by students who have taken their classes. A series of negative posts from unhappy customers is a sign that what was advertised wasn’t what was provided. But, look for a series of reviews—positive or negative—since a single unhappy student (or a single overly happy student) may not be a fair sample from which to judge.

You should post a compilation of your experiences as well. Be fair and factual without exaggerating your points, but make your feelings known for others to consider and evaluate.

Also, contact the host organization and the organization these instructors represent with a formal written complaint documenting as many deficiencies and deviations from the curriculum as you can. I would also recommend asking for a comparable class with competent instructors or a refund of your tuition for not delivering what was advertised.

In the future, vetting the providers and their previous performances through prior participants in their programs usually results in a worthwhile training experience.

Read the full article here

Share.

41 Comments

  1. Amelia T. Thomas on

    The experience described in the article serves as a warning to be cautious when selecting training courses and instructors, and to research their credentials and teaching styles before committing to a course.

  2. It’s disappointing that the instructors’ behavior and the course’s organization did not meet the expectations of a nationally recognized organization, and it’s essential to have standards and protocols in place to prevent similar experiences.

  3. The deviation from the lesson plan and the rudimentary demonstrations by the instructors suggest a lack of preparation and organization, which can be detrimental to the learning experience.

  4. The fact that the course description included boilerplate objectives but lacked specific details about the course content and teaching methods is concerning, and suggests a lack of transparency and accountability.

  5. Patricia Johnson on

    The author’s story serves as a cautionary tale for students to be aware of their rights and expectations in a training environment and to speak out against unprofessional behavior.

  6. The experience described in the article highlights the need for greater accountability and oversight in the firearms-training community, to ensure that instructors are held to high standards of professionalism and effectiveness.

  7. Mary Hernandez on

    The author’s decision to stay and participate in the class despite failing the qualification shows their commitment to learning, but it’s unfortunate that the instructors didn’t provide valuable information as expected.

  8. Patricia Rodriguez on

    The fact that the instructors refused to provide details about their backgrounds, despite claiming to be prior military special operators, raises questions about their credibility and qualifications to teach advanced concealed-carry techniques.

  9. The author’s decision to stay in the class despite failing the qualification and being told they couldn’t pass the course shows their commitment to learning, but also puts into question the value of the course itself.

  10. Michael E. Moore on

    The article raises important questions about the qualifications and experience required to become an instructor in the firearms-training community, and whether these requirements are being met.

  11. Jennifer Taylor on

    It’s concerning that this type of behavior and unprofessionalism can occur in the firearms-training community, and it’s essential to address these issues to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of training programs.

  12. Oliver Johnson on

    It’s disturbing that the instructors belittled students, implying they would never use the skills in real-life situations, which is not only unprofessional but also undermines the students’ confidence and motivation.

  13. Emma A. Miller on

    The article emphasizes the need for accountability and standards in the firearms-training community to prevent similar experiences and ensure that students receive high-quality instruction.

  14. The instructors’ attire, wearing jeans and an untucked shirt with a belt-mounted pistol, seems unprofessional for a nationally recognized organization, and their refusal to follow the lesson plan is alarming.

  15. The instructors’ behavior and attitude towards the students, including belittling and dismissing them, is unacceptable and can have long-term negative effects on the students’ confidence and motivation to learn.

  16. Mary Rodriguez on

    The lack of a proper introduction, safety briefing, and course objectives at the beginning of the class is a significant oversight, especially for a nationally recognized organization.

  17. Oliver X. Taylor on

    It’s interesting that the author and their friend decided to stay and participate in the class despite the initial negative experience, which shows their dedication to learning and improving their skills.

  18. The article emphasizes the importance of ensuring that instructors are not only knowledgeable but also skilled in teaching and communicating with students, which is crucial for effective learning.

  19. The instructors’ claim that the students would never use the skills in real-life situations is not only belittling but also ignores the fact that many students may have already had experiences where they had to use their skills in self-defense situations.

  20. Amelia Jackson on

    It’s surprising that the instructors’ demonstrations were rudimentary, given their claimed experience as special operators, which suggests a disconnect between their actual skills and teaching abilities.

  21. Patricia Jackson on

    The fact that the instructors wore jeans and an untucked shirt with a belt-mounted pistol during the class is not only unprofessional but also potentially unsafe, and it reflects poorly on the organization they represent.

  22. The author’s experience is a reminder that students should research and understand the curriculum, instructor qualifications, and expectations before enrolling in a course, especially in areas like firearms training where safety and effectiveness are critical.

  23. Linda Martinez on

    The fact that the instructors wanted students to give them a five-star rating on the evaluation sheet before issuing certificates of completion is a clear example of unprofessionalism and a conflict of interest.

  24. Jennifer Williams on

    The instructors’ behavior, such as being openly irritated when students decided to stay after failing the qualification, is unprofessional and unacceptable in a learning environment.

  25. The author’s decision to speak out about their experience with the Advanced Concealed Carry Instructor class is important, as it can help to prevent similar experiences for others in the future.

  26. Lucas W. Brown on

    The high failure rate and the instructors’ behavior suggest that the course may not be providing the advanced training it promises, and students should be aware of this before enrolling.

  27. Olivia B. Thomas on

    The author’s experience highlights the importance of researching and evaluating instructors and training organizations before investing time and money in a course, especially in critical areas like firearms training.

  28. The way the instructors belittled the students, telling them they would never use the skills for real, is unacceptable and creates a toxic learning environment.

  29. Isabella Jones on

    The author’s experience with the Advanced Concealed Carry Instructor class is a clear example of how a poorly designed and taught course can be counterproductive to learning and development.

    • This highlights the need for a more rigorous evaluation and certification process for instructors in the firearms-training community.

  30. Elijah Jackson on

    The fact that the instructors were openly irritated when the author and their friend decided to stay in the class, despite failing the qualification, shows a lack of empathy and understanding for their students’ needs.

  31. Lucas Hernandez on

    The article emphasizes the importance of having a well-structured and organized course, with clear objectives and outcomes, to ensure that students receive the best possible education and training.

  32. Elizabeth Johnson on

    The article emphasizes the need for students to be proactive in evaluating their training experience and providing feedback to help improve the quality of instruction and the overall learning environment.

  33. Michael Taylor on

    The fact that only two out of 10 students passed the qualification on the first morning raises concerns about the instructors’ ability to effectively teach and prepare students for the course.

    • James Martinez on

      This could be due to the lack of introduction, safety briefing, and course objectives, which were not provided by the instructors.

  34. The lack of transparency and accountability in the training organization is concerning, and it’s essential to have mechanisms in place to address complaints and ensure that instructors are held to high standards.

  35. The article highlights a significant problem in the firearms-training community, where instructors may not have the necessary teaching skills or experience, despite their background as military special operators or law-enforcement SWAT team members.

  36. It’s disturbing that the instructors, who claimed to be prior military special operators, refused to give any details about their backgrounds, which makes their credibility questionable.

  37. The article highlights the importance of continuous evaluation and feedback in training programs to identify and address issues like the ones experienced by the author.

Leave A Reply

© 2026 Gun Range Day. All Rights Reserved.