INGunOwners - View Single Post - Innovative Tactical Concetps-Richmond Indiana

Tinman · 07-10-2008

Sorry for the delayed response, between unstable net access, and a very crazy travel schedule, this was my first opportunity to get back here.

Brian,
Since you were kind enough to answer me directly, I'll respond directly.

As I recall the previous post, your comment was that if a friend took a class and brought back something you liked and wanted to teach, you saw no reason to run off and take whatever school this came from. This was your justification for not having a long "gun school" resume. What you train internally, amongst your friends is completely different from the issue of using someone else's material for your classes. In the previous post you were justifying your obvious lack of gun experience by saying your friends took the classes and brought back the information. So which is it, are you using the information from another "student" or are we now to believe that you just use that information for your own personal training?

As far as your training group and what you train amongst yourself, you're still wrong. You do not get proper instruction from a student to make a judgment call on whether the information presented was of value or not. Hence the reason to go get it direct from the source.

Secondly, I never expected you to admit you were quoting someone else, so it comes as no surprise that you didn't. Then again, you profess to have this "new and innovative approach" to weapons training and in the same breath say it's impossible to state something without quoting someone else in the industry:

And as far as “verbatim”, how many things can be said without “quoting” someone else? How many times each day do you quote someone else’s words without knowing it?

So which is it, are you new and innovative no one else out there is like us, or are you just another trainer running the same stuff with your own twist on it?

Now, on to your latest diatribe. first, reality based training is a buzz word in the industry that gets way too much attention. In order to be of any value, we need to know what reality you are basing your training on. I'm not talking about what world you live on, I'm talking about what world you have lived in. Obviously, if you've spent your whole life as a civi, running out and teaching professional door kickers how to clear a house isn't going to go over real well, because you've never done it for real. That's where your background as an instructor is of significant value. It seems that everyone wanting to label their stuff as new and innovative seems to use the Reality word these days. When in truth, there were guys out there grinding out their technique with splatmasters and pellet guns years before the advent of sims guns. Incidentally, you do use some kind of sims or airsoft in your classes right, after all if the techniques won't hold up to real pressure from a thinking breathing role player who isn't intent on hurting you, you wouldn't expect them to work on the street.

As far as us being a gun centric crowd, recheck the resume brother. You'll see some of the top open hand, edge weapon, and integrated defensive experts in the nation on there. I have chosen to spend my dollars with the guys who have successfully survived dozens of violent encounters, and done research on thousands more. Generally, I trust that the information they are giving me works. Then again, we run it hard enough in those classes that we prove that for ourselves as well.

Last one, then I'm out of this thread. On the issue of us being a bunch of keyboard commandos. I find that one rather offensive coming from a guy sitting comfortably in Richmond Indiana while I'm living, working, and applying my training to survive in a third world country. You want real world training try applying some of your "new and innovative" stuff in an 8X10 room with 6 non combatants, and 2 pissed off bad guys. When it works there, it's probably something of value to me.

Yea, I know it was a little long, and I came down kind of heavy, but so be it, that's the way I see it. No need to respond, I won't be wasting my very minimal net time rechecking this thread. I'm done here until Fen comes back with his report.

Tinman....

07-10-2008	#82 (permalink)
Tinman Plinker Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: North Central Indiana (Most of the time) Posts: 192	Sorry for the delayed response, between unstable net access, and a very crazy travel schedule, this was my first opportunity to get back here. Brian, Since you were kind enough to answer me directly, I'll respond directly. As I recall the previous post, your comment was that if a friend took a class and brought back something you liked and wanted to teach, you saw no reason to run off and take whatever school this came from. This was your justification for not having a long "gun school" resume. What you train internally, amongst your friends is completely different from the issue of using someone else's material for your classes. In the previous post you were justifying your obvious lack of gun experience by saying your friends took the classes and brought back the information. So which is it, are you using the information from another "student" or are we now to believe that you just use that information for your own personal training? As far as your training group and what you train amongst yourself, you're still wrong. You do not get proper instruction from a student to make a judgment call on whether the information presented was of value or not. Hence the reason to go get it direct from the source. Secondly, I never expected you to admit you were quoting someone else, so it comes as no surprise that you didn't. Then again, you profess to have this "new and innovative approach" to weapons training and in the same breath say it's impossible to state something without quoting someone else in the industry: And as far as “verbatim”, how many things can be said without “quoting” someone else? How many times each day do you quote someone else’s words without knowing it? So which is it, are you new and innovative no one else out there is like us, or are you just another trainer running the same stuff with your own twist on it? Now, on to your latest diatribe. first, reality based training is a buzz word in the industry that gets way too much attention. In order to be of any value, we need to know what reality you are basing your training on. I'm not talking about what world you live on, I'm talking about what world you have lived in. Obviously, if you've spent your whole life as a civi, running out and teaching professional door kickers how to clear a house isn't going to go over real well, because you've never done it for real. That's where your background as an instructor is of significant value. It seems that everyone wanting to label their stuff as new and innovative seems to use the Reality word these days. When in truth, there were guys out there grinding out their technique with splatmasters and pellet guns years before the advent of sims guns. Incidentally, you do use some kind of sims or airsoft in your classes right, after all if the techniques won't hold up to real pressure from a thinking breathing role player who isn't intent on hurting you, you wouldn't expect them to work on the street. As far as us being a gun centric crowd, recheck the resume brother. You'll see some of the top open hand, edge weapon, and integrated defensive experts in the nation on there. I have chosen to spend my dollars with the guys who have successfully survived dozens of violent encounters, and done research on thousands more. Generally, I trust that the information they are giving me works. Then again, we run it hard enough in those classes that we prove that for ourselves as well. Last one, then I'm out of this thread. On the issue of us being a bunch of keyboard commandos. I find that one rather offensive coming from a guy sitting comfortably in Richmond Indiana while I'm living, working, and applying my training to survive in a third world country. You want real world training try applying some of your "new and innovative" stuff in an 8X10 room with 6 non combatants, and 2 pissed off bad guys. When it works there, it's probably something of value to me. Yea, I know it was a little long, and I came down kind of heavy, but so be it, that's the way I see it. No need to respond, I won't be wasting my very minimal net time rechecking this thread. I'm done here until Fen comes back with his report. Tinman....