James Yeager is a coward?

[ghitch75]

way to much bandwidth wasted on this asshat......

 

[GBuck]

I'd rather spend my money with JY than someone who has just taken a bunch of classes and calls themself an instructor, even if there is a hot chick that may or may not be involved.

 

[billt]

I'd rather spend my money with JY than someone who has just taken a bunch of classes and calls themself an instructor, even if there is a hot chick that may or may not be involved.

Very true. For most people, all of these "classes" have a limited usefulness. If someone makes the conscious decision to take one to shoot a bunch of ammo, and have some fun on a weekend, that's fine. However please spare me how any of this will turn the average person into a "gunfighter" over a 2 or 3 day period, along with a couple of thousand rounds and bucks.

All a "carbine course" does is require you to shoot a bunch of ammo real fast, and in the process run barrel and internal temperatures off the scale. You don't need a course to run a $1,200.00+ weapon through what basically amounts to a destruction test. Gun rags do it all the time.

Furthermore, what if anything does this tell you about a weapons quality, or you as a shooter about marksmanship? Would you test a vehicle the same way, by beating the hell out of it until it overheated and failed? Anyone can abuse something to the point of failure. Who, including law enforcement, is ever going to run their weapon like that? No one, ever. Even in the North Hollywood Bank Of America shootout, which was the worst in terms of amount of rounds spent in a civilian gunfight, did anyone shoot their weapons to the point of failure from overheating, and or breakage? Not even close. This in spite of the fact all of the AR's the police used in that gunfight, were "borrowed" straight off the gun shop rack. None saw so much as a drop of lube.

What is a 30 round mag dump into a suitcase sized target from 7 yards away going to teach you about marksmanship? If you want to learn "tactical reloads", and other such play antics that you will NEVER use in real life, then these warrior games are fine. Which is why most take them. What I get sick and tired of hearing is when someone buys a AR-15 rifle, someone will always pipe up with, "Now take a carbine course and get some REAL training!" To do what?

These people talk like these things are the cure all, end all to survival. In reality they are in the same class as going up in one of these mock fighter planes for a 45 minute "dogfight" shooting laser beams instead of bullets. A lot of fun to do, but in reality about as useful as a iron worker with a Liberal Arts Degree. In reality most people would benefit far more from attending a Appleseed shoot, than they would paying some over hyped "trainer" for overpriced weekend warrior games. They'll actually be able to hit something when they're finished. I'm not trying to berate anyone who chooses to take these "classes". Just keep the reasoning behind them in the proper perspective. Especially in todays **** poor economic world, where hustlers lurk in every avenue, all trying to separate you from your hard earned money, by trying to sell you something you "need".

 

[Shay]

Very true. For most people, all of these "classes" have a limited usefulness. If someone makes the conscious decision to take one to shoot a bunch of ammo, and have some fun on a weekend, that's fine. However please spare me how any of this will turn the average person into a "gunfighter" over a 2 or 3 day period, along with a couple of thousand rounds and bucks.

All a "carbine course" does is require you to shoot a bunch of ammo real fast, and in the process run barrel and internal temperatures off the scale. You don't need a course to run a $1,200.00+ weapon through what basically amounts to a destruction test. Gun rags do it all the time.

Furthermore, what if anything does this tell you about a weapons quality, or you as a shooter about marksmanship? Would you test a vehicle the same way, by beating the hell out of it until it overheated and failed? Anyone can abuse something to the point of failure. Who, including law enforcement, is ever going to run their weapon like that? No one, ever. Even in the North Hollywood Bank Of America shootout, which was the worst in terms of amount of rounds spent in a civilian gunfight, did anyone shoot their weapons to the point of failure from overheating, and or breakage? Not even close. This in spite of the fact all of the AR's the police used in that gunfight, were "borrowed" straight off the gun shop rack. None saw so much as a drop of lube.

What is a 30 round mag dump into a suitcase sized target from 7 yards away going to teach you about marksmanship? If you want to learn "tactical reloads", and other such play antics that you will NEVER use in real life, then these warrior games are fine. Which is why most take them. What I get sick and tired of hearing is when someone buys a AR-15 rifle, someone will always pipe up with, "Now take a carbine course and get some REAL training!" To do what?

These people talk like these things are the cure all, end all to survival. In reality they are in the same class as going up in one of these mock fighter planes for a 45 minute "dogfight" shooting laser beams instead of bullets. A lot of fun to do, but in reality about as useful as a iron worker with a Liberal Arts Degree. In reality most people would benefit far more from attending a Appleseed shoot, than they would paying some over hyped "trainer" for overpriced weekend warrior games. They'll actually be able to hit something when they're finished. I'm not trying to berate anyone who chooses to take these "classes". Just keep the reasoning behind them in the proper perspective. Especially in todays **** poor economic world, where hustlers lurk in every avenue, all trying to separate you from your hard earned money, by trying to sell you something you "need".

While I'm no fan of people taking "dress up" classes, your experience does not seem typical. Who have you taken a carbine course with?

 

[billt]

Who have you taken a carbine course with?

If you honestly feel the need to ask me that question, you didn't comprehend what I wrote very well.

 

[red46239]

 

[Birds Away]

Very true. For most people, all of these "classes" have a limited usefulness. If someone makes the conscious decision to take one to shoot a bunch of ammo, and have some fun on a weekend, that's fine. However please spare me how any of this will turn the average person into a "gunfighter" over a 2 or 3 day period, along with a couple of thousand rounds and bucks.

All a "carbine course" does is require you to shoot a bunch of ammo real fast, and in the process run barrel and internal temperatures off the scale. You don't need a course to run a $1,200.00+ weapon through what basically amounts to a destruction test. Gun rags do it all the time.

Furthermore, what if anything does this tell you about a weapons quality, or you as a shooter about marksmanship? Would you test a vehicle the same way, by beating the hell out of it until it overheated and failed? Anyone can abuse something to the point of failure. Who, including law enforcement, is ever going to run their weapon like that? No one, ever. Even in the North Hollywood Bank Of America shootout, which was the worst in terms of amount of rounds spent in a civilian gunfight, did anyone shoot their weapons to the point of failure from overheating, and or breakage? Not even close. This in spite of the fact all of the AR's the police used in that gunfight, were "borrowed" straight off the gun shop rack. None saw so much as a drop of lube.

What is a 30 round mag dump into a suitcase sized target from 7 yards away going to teach you about marksmanship? If you want to learn "tactical reloads", and other such play antics that you will NEVER use in real life, then these warrior games are fine. Which is why most take them. What I get sick and tired of hearing is when someone buys a AR-15 rifle, someone will always pipe up with, "Now take a carbine course and get some REAL training!" To do what?

These people talk like these things are the cure all, end all to survival. In reality they are in the same class as going up in one of these mock fighter planes for a 45 minute "dogfight" shooting laser beams instead of bullets. A lot of fun to do, but in reality about as useful as a iron worker with a Liberal Arts Degree. In reality most people would benefit far more from attending a Appleseed shoot, than they would paying some over hyped "trainer" for overpriced weekend warrior games. They'll actually be able to hit something when they're finished. I'm not trying to berate anyone who chooses to take these "classes". Just keep the reasoning behind them in the proper perspective. Especially in todays **** poor economic world, where hustlers lurk in every avenue, all trying to separate you from your hard earned money, by trying to sell you something you "need".

Although I know all training doesn't fit neatly into this description there is a lot that does.

 

[billt]

Although I know all training doesn't fit neatly into this description there is a lot that does.

I agree, and that is what I was trying to point out. There is good and bad in everything. This is a very lucrative business for those to practice in it. With that comes a lot of B.S. Having a, "name in the business" doesn't necessarily mean they're selling good business.

 

[flatlander]

While Appleseed is a very good starting point, it is not the only course you should take. The Corp teaches MARKSMANSHIP during boot. Do they stop there? No. You continue to build on those BASICS. That is the point of attending classes. To build your skills. I would rather find out that my gear, or the set-up of it, doesn't work like it did in my living room in the high volume, high stress course such as Pat Rogers teaches than when I need it the most.
Are all courses the same? Of course not. Just because you spend a lot of $$ and shoot a bunch doesn't mean it's a good course or turn you into an "operator" or "gunfighter". It's your money and you should spend it wisely. If Appleseed is as far as you want to go, then good for you. if you want to test yourself and your gear when you're tired, hot, cold, wet and filthy then look for some quality instructors but don't trash ALL instructors as worthless just because they don't fit YOUR needs. Most instructors start with the basics and then build on them.
To ME, I rather KNOW what I, and my equipment, are really capable of during training than fall short in a real situation. the more I sweat in training, the less I'll bleed in combat. At least so far that's proven true.



Bob

 

[45fan]

I agree, and that is what I was trying to point out. There is good and bad in everything. This is a very lucrative business for those to practice in it. With that comes a lot of B.S. Having a, "name in the business" doesn't necessarily mean they're selling good business.

Kinda like Lorcin has a "name" in the business, but most people who know puke a little in their mouths each time the name is spoken?

I can understand wanting a working knowledge of the weapons system that you own. I was one that went the other way around, I when through the training, and then decided to invest in a weapons system that I felt worthy of defending me and mine.

My honest opinion? Want training, and learn to be a gun fighter? Step to the line, raise your right hand, and get your hands dirty. Anything else is kinda like playing cops and robbers as a kid. The best training in the world, and the most expensive gear money can buy does not separate the men from the boys, only money from ones wallet. I have seen some of the hardest charging men that everyone thought would be unstoppable in combat pee themselves at the first bullet to crack overhead, and the "barney fife" of a unit turn into the person who saves the day when seconds count.

 

[88GT]

And some of you wonder why there are those who don't take training from others.

 

[lovemachine]

I can speak from experience, but rhino and obijohn from ACT has great training classes. They are nothing like what is described above. Very realistic training, a class that's built for the average gun owner.

Also, coach from Bright Firearms Training is highly recommended as well.


I'll train with them before training with anyone else.

 

[Que]

And some of you wonder why there are those who don't take training from others.

That's no excuse for not training. If reading differing opinions keeps people from doing something, there are deeper problems to be discussed.

Personally, I would train with just about anyone and if not, I would have justification based on something solid or just keep my mouth closed. I really hate seeing trainers who pile on other trainers. Is the objective to get people to take their course instead of others'? Someone said it earlier, we've given a lot of bandwidth to this discussion, but Yeager's classes are running and people are taking them. He's going to continue having a big mouth. His actions in Iraq cannot be changed. So, the discussions will continue. I only interject because I have taken his course and have gotten to know him as a man. I would feel less of a man to allow him to be dogged out by those who know squat besides what they have seen on the internet, and not say anything, just as I would if someone did that to Shay, Obijohn, Vert or anyone else I've trained with.

Bottom line, find someone to train with. A trainer can help make you better.

 

[KG1]

That's no excuse for not training. If reading differing opinions keeps people from doing something, there are deeper problems to be discussed.

Personally, I would train with just about anyone and if not, I would have justification based on something solid or just keep my mouth closed. I really hate seeing trainers who pile on other trainers. Is the objective to get people to take their course instead of others'? Someone said it earlier, we've given a lot of bandwidth to this discussion, but Yeager's classes are running and people are taking them. He's going to continue having a big mouth. His actions in Iraq cannot be changed. So, the discussions will continue. I only interject because I have taken his course and have gotten to know him as a man. I would feel less of a man to allow him to be dogged out by those who know squat besides what they have seen on the internet, and not say anything, just as I would if someone did that to Shay, Obijohn, Vert or anyone else I've trained with.

Bottom line, find someone to train with. A trainer can help make you better.

I would ask who's at fault for the persona that JY displays on the internet that most people have to base their opinion on? After all, we all cannot meet everyone in person. I guess we'll have to take your word for it. JY is GTG because you can personally vouch for him.

 

[rhino]

Are you referring specifically to Tactical Response in your message below?

If you're referring to the civilian defensive training industry in general, I'm curious about what experiences led you to your conclusions. With whom have you trained and how much?

Very true. For most people, all of these "classes" have a limited usefulness. If someone makes the conscious decision to take one to shoot a bunch of ammo, and have some fun on a weekend, that's fine. However please spare me how any of this will turn the average person into a "gunfighter" over a 2 or 3 day period, along with a couple of thousand rounds and bucks.

All a "carbine course" does is require you to shoot a bunch of ammo real fast, and in the process run barrel and internal temperatures off the scale. You don't need a course to run a $1,200.00+ weapon through what basically amounts to a destruction test. Gun rags do it all the time.

Furthermore, what if anything does this tell you about a weapons quality, or you as a shooter about marksmanship? Would you test a vehicle the same way, by beating the hell out of it until it overheated and failed? Anyone can abuse something to the point of failure. Who, including law enforcement, is ever going to run their weapon like that? No one, ever. Even in the North Hollywood Bank Of America shootout, which was the worst in terms of amount of rounds spent in a civilian gunfight, did anyone shoot their weapons to the point of failure from overheating, and or breakage? Not even close. This in spite of the fact all of the AR's the police used in that gunfight, were "borrowed" straight off the gun shop rack. None saw so much as a drop of lube.

What is a 30 round mag dump into a suitcase sized target from 7 yards away going to teach you about marksmanship? If you want to learn "tactical reloads", and other such play antics that you will NEVER use in real life, then these warrior games are fine. Which is why most take them. What I get sick and tired of hearing is when someone buys a AR-15 rifle, someone will always pipe up with, "Now take a carbine course and get some REAL training!" To do what?

These people talk like these things are the cure all, end all to survival. In reality they are in the same class as going up in one of these mock fighter planes for a 45 minute "dogfight" shooting laser beams instead of bullets. A lot of fun to do, but in reality about as useful as a iron worker with a Liberal Arts Degree. In reality most people would benefit far more from attending a Appleseed shoot, than they would paying some over hyped "trainer" for overpriced weekend warrior games. They'll actually be able to hit something when they're finished. I'm not trying to berate anyone who chooses to take these "classes". Just keep the reasoning behind them in the proper perspective. Especially in todays **** poor economic world, where hustlers lurk in every avenue, all trying to separate you from your hard earned money, by trying to sell you something you "need".

 

[88GT]

That's no excuse for not training.

Actually, I can think of a few.

You may not agree with them, but you aren't me*, and you can't judge the value/benefit of a decision for me by your standards.

Frankly, I think the whole training thing has been elevated far above it's actual worth. It has become the bare minimum of expectations for "good" firearms owners, the standard of acceptability by one's peers. And it not coincidentally happens to justify the logic that firearms ownership must necessarily go hand-in-hand with training. On a certain level, training has become valued solely for the sake of training, not for the knowledge or experience it imparts to the participants.

*It should be noted that I personally do not eschew training for myself. I am simply taking the devil's advocate side here because I dislike the demagogic approach the rabidly pro-training sect utilizes. There's more than a little "You should do what I suggest because I think it's right." The other big issue I have with it is the attachment it has cemented to ownership that there is a "responsibility" to be trained or I can't be a good firearms owner. It creates a standard that runs the risk of damaging the ability of people to defend their self defense choices by disallowing the legitimacy of their actions based on the fact that they have had no training. Nobody should be restricted in the exercise of their liberties by artificial and arbitrary standards based on someone else's ideals of "good enough" or "acceptable." There's a page every month in any of the NRA rags belying the charge that training is a necessary component to firearms ownership. I applaud the choice of someone who feels it will do him a great service to take training. But I will not condemn someone's choice not to take any, regardless of the reason.

 

[billt]

Actually, I can think of a few.

You may not agree with them, but you aren't me*, and you can't judge the value/benefit of a decision for me by your standards.

Frankly, I think the whole training thing has been elevated far above it's actual worth. It has become the bare minimum of expectations for "good" firearms owners, the standard of acceptability by one's peers. And it not coincidentally happens to justify the logic that firearms ownership must necessarily go hand-in-hand with training. On a certain level, training has become valued solely for the sake of training, not for the knowledge or experience it imparts to the participants.

*It should be noted that I personally do not eschew training for myself. I am simply taking the devil's advocate side here because I dislike the demagogic approach the rabidly pro-training sect utilizes. There's more than a little "You should do what I suggest because I think it's right." The other big issue I have with it is the attachment it has cemented to ownership that there is a "responsibility" to be trained or I can't be a good firearms owner. It creates a standard that runs the risk of damaging the ability of people to defend their self defense choices by disallowing the legitimacy of their actions based on the fact that they have had no training. Nobody should be restricted in the exercise of their liberties by artificial and arbitrary standards based on someone else's ideals of "good enough" or "acceptable." There's a page every month in any of the NRA rags belying the charge that training is a necessary component to firearms ownership. I applaud the choice of someone who feels it will do him a great service to take training. But I will not condemn someone's choice not to take any, regardless of the reason.

Well said, and I agree.

 

[Que]

I would ask who's at fault for the persona that JY displays on the internet that most people have to base their opinion on? After all, we all cannot meet everyone in person. I guess we'll have to take your word for it. JY is GTG because you can personally vouch for him.

I guess that is fair and I respect your point. James is totally responsible for his persona and I would not disagree with anyone who says he's a lot to take. If someone chose to not take his class because they believe he's a jerk, I cannot argue against that. He's a self-admitted jerk, but he is also loyal, to a fault. I would still provide my personal opinion and let it go.

However, I am not sure most of the issues people have with him are based off of personality. The title of this thread isn't "James Yeager is a jerk." People are judging the man based off of a video they saw on the internet. They are basing their conclusions because they ran the same scenario on some video game and was successful and can't imagine how he didn't achieve the same result.

Again, I just believe the guy is good. He's done some ill-advised things like challenging people to duels and posting a video that hit him in some hot water. If these are reasons people choose not to take his class, fine. All of this has nothing to do with being a coward or a good trainer, though.

 

[billt]

James Yeager might be thought of as a lot of things. I just can't see "coward" being one of them.

 

[Que]

Actually, I can think of a few.

You may not agree with them, but you aren't me*, and you can't judge the value/benefit of a decision for me by your standards.

Frankly, I think the whole training thing has been elevated far above it's actual worth. It has become the bare minimum of expectations for "good" firearms owners, the standard of acceptability by one's peers. And it not coincidentally happens to justify the logic that firearms ownership must necessarily go hand-in-hand with training. On a certain level, training has become valued solely for the sake of training, not for the knowledge or experience it imparts to the participants.

*It should be noted that I personally do not eschew training for myself. I am simply taking the devil's advocate side here because I dislike the demagogic approach the rabidly pro-training sect utilizes. There's more than a little "You should do what I suggest because I think it's right." The other big issue I have with it is the attachment it has cemented to ownership that there is a "responsibility" to be trained or I can't be a good firearms owner. It creates a standard that runs the risk of damaging the ability of people to defend their self defense choices by disallowing the legitimacy of their actions based on the fact that they have had no training. Nobody should be restricted in the exercise of their liberties by artificial and arbitrary standards based on someone else's ideals of "good enough" or "acceptable." There's a page every month in any of the NRA rags belying the charge that training is a necessary component to firearms ownership. I applaud the choice of someone who feels it will do him a great service to take training. But I will not condemn someone's choice not to take any, regardless of the reason.

I'm not sure who has stated the purpose of training in the way you have, but I would believe many would say its important for the reasons I have placed in bold. If we as a community have made people believe training is nothing more than some way to become accepted, then we have failed. I believe the argument has been about selecting a trainer. In doing this, if someone chooses to avoid training, I would ask them to reconsider. Training is a good thing and I certainly hope nothing to the contrary is inferred from our banter.