Advanced Pistol Fighting Course

[Brian@ITC]

Advanced Pistol Fighting Level II

In this course we will teach you things you need to know and do to maximize your chances of survival from a self-defense aspect and not just from a “firearms” perspective. One of the issues is that if you focus on drawing your gun and not on surviving first, you may miss other opportunities that would allow you to do something that could have saved your life. If you attempt to draw your firearm and you die (or get seriously injured) while doing so when you should have done something else, then the gun was your “enemy”.

Here is a hard core fact: It doesn’t matter how good of a marksman you are if you are unable to survive long enough in the confrontation to ATTEMPT to draw your gun. Furthermore, if you are lucky enough to be able to attempt to draw your gun, but you get hung up on your holster or cover garment while doing so, what are you going to do then? We will teach you what to do in this situation. If you carry concealed and believe you WILL be able to draw, fire, and hit your target every time, you are sadly mistaken. The reality of it is, you may never have that chance if you do not stay alive long enough to fight to be able to execute the option of drawing and firing. Expert marksmanship is NOT what is going to win the fight in most situations! Your mindset and tactics play a larger role in your survival than your marksmanship.

What makes our course different from most others is that our tactics are valid whether or not you have a gun on your person. After all, why should you change your tactics simply because you have a gun on oneself? ITC teach a progressive system in which students begin their training with how to deal with approximately seven different life threatening situations without a gun. After that, students learn now to implement their gun into the FIGHT in a realistic manner.

There are 3 basic principles that we teach as part of our course. Movement is critical in your survival! Therefore movement is a big part of what we do! The second thing is to deliver a distraction of some kind. You might throw your cell phone, change, breathe mints, lighter, etc., at the attacker to provide you with a split second in order to possibly draw your gun and/or escape. Lastly, you must know when to ATTEMPT to draw your gun and when you should do something else. Most firearms instructors focus on using the gun to resolve the situation.

We, the staff at ITC, feel that we are the first to truly integrate unarmed combatives and “firearms training. Don’t take our word for it… here is what one of our students had to say. “ITC has finally provided the complete merger of advanced pistol craft, close quarters battle, and hand-to-hand techniques.”—Clint Lake, Columbus, OH.

If you are serious about self-preservation, then you MUST attend this course! Please be sure to visit our website for more information regarding this course. In addition, be sure to pre-register for this course online because it WILL fill up quickly. Class size is limited to the first 15 students!

This is a two day course and costs a mere $300. Course date is May 17th & 18th, 2008.

______________________
Brian K. LaMaster
President -Innovative Tactical Concepts, LLC
Instructor - Counter Force

[MarcS]

When you say integrated combatives and shooting, do you mean that this course includes full contact force on force? Fist helmets and the whole deal?

[Thekatar]

Brian, I read your bio (kick ass music, BTW) and am trying to determine your creds for teaching any type of "advanced" firearms course.

It sounds like you have a lot of time invested in Bujinkan ninpo taijutsu and To-Shin Do, but aside from taking a lot of ninja classes, what is your real world experience?

From your bio:

Brian has trained in firearms for over 20 years and he is a certified Counter Force instructor. Brian is a certified NRA Pistol instructor and teaches concealed carry courses in Indiana and Ohio. Brian has experience in the private security sector, and he has served as a personal protection specialist for former heavyweight champion boxer James “Buster” Douglas.

Can you explain what a "certified Counter Force instructor" entails? What does your experience in the private security sector consist of? What is a "personal protection specialist"? Does that mean you served in the executive protection role? I don't see any military, PMC or LEO history listed.

Have you ever seen time on a two-way range? Or did you just attend a lot of training classes?

Sorry to be so abrupt, but I'm trying to figure out why I should spend my hard-earned money to take training from you when there are so many other options available.

[Robert Desrosiers]

Brian,

I was looking over your web site. To mirror the above requests
, I too would be interested in your shooting background.

Now, on a side note I was to say the very least, a bit confused by some of the techniques you are advocating. Deep karate like stances, leg cross-overs while moving, etc... If you could start another thread outside of this sub-cat where your views could be discussed would be very appreciated.

Thanks

[PeteG]

Brian, I read your bio ... and am trying to determine your creds for teaching any type of "advanced" firearms course.

It sounds like you have a lot of time invested in Bujinkan ninpo taijutsu and To-Shin Do, but aside from taking a lot of ninja classes, what is your real world experience?
. . . .
Can you explain what a "certified Counter Force instructor" entails? What does your experience in the private security sector consist of? What is a "personal protection specialist"? Does that mean you served in the executive protection role? I don't see any military, PMC or LEO history listed.

Have you ever seen time on a two-way range? Or did you just attend a lot of training classes?

Those are all good questions to ask. (I am curious myself what a "certified counter-force instructor" is, who does the certification, and what it means.) But they are fraught with presumptions.

If one says, "32 years Police Experience," what does that tell you about his or her ability to instruct in pistol technique?

If one says "two years service in RVN," what does that tell you? I friend of mine is fond of telling people his year was spent in an air-conditioned trailer monitoring equipment. Does that make him a firearms instructor? He doesn't think so, nor do I (although he did get subsequent training that does, in my view, qualify him to instruct others on some things).

If one has been in a gunfight ("two-way-range"), what does that establish? How is that different from "just" being trained?

Identifying what makes a good instructor is not simple. I submit that none of the above are reliable indicators (even where the information you receive is true . . . which it often is not).

For example, one can be "in" a gunfight, and do nothing at all productive to end it. They might survive only by luck, or by virtue of thier role in the fight having never placed them in danger. They might have blundered into the fight, fought poorly or not at all, and then been rescued by someone competent. How would you know? And what would that mean?

Indeed, the fellow who blundered into the fight and fought poorly might nevertheless be a good instructor for some people on some topics.

I am regularly instructed by martial artists who have never been in a life-or-death fight. To suggest that means they do not know what they are doing - or, more to the point, they are not good teachers of the art -is just silly. These are tough, disciplined, highly skilled individuals who regularly compete with each other, full contact. I have no doubt whatsoever a number of them could cripple or kill me or anyone else I know pretty much any time they wanted to (and I have the lumps to prove it).

In order to make any of the background information people put out useful, one would have to know exactly what each job entailed and how they performed it. Otherwise, one cannot relate that experience to the specific training task at hand, and the information is meaningless. Getting the information necessary to make the base information meaningful is nigh impossible.

I suggest all we can do is ask the following two questions:

Question 1: What is it you are trying to learn?

Question 2: What does the prospective instructor's personal experience have to do with that?

We all have "real world experience." The question is whether it is material to what you want to learn to do.

If what you are trying to learn is how to protect yourself or your family, this means you are asking to learn how to fight. There is no way around that fact. Therefore, and in that case, it is important the individual teaching you be familiar with the experience of fighting.

This might be extended military combat; experience in any martial art which integrates full-contact sparring (boxing, wrestling, tae kwon do, karate, judo . . . it's not real important which, so long as it involves actual, full-speed fighting); police experience that dealt with long periods of dealing with surly, combative people; substantial experience as a bar bouncer; MMA fighting; etc. Having been in a fight, or three, whether they involved guns or not, doesn't tell us much at all.

Other things to consider (none of which are fool-proof or determinative):

- Where and for how long have they trained? This is sometimes called "training pedigree."

- How are they regarded by people you know and respect? (Note: how they are regarded by Internet commandos, ideologues or markeers who are economic competitors is pretty useless information).

- How many people have they trained, and where?

- What do they do to keep themselves abreast of changes and advances? A guy who teaches 40 courses over three years is much more valuable than the guy who taught the same course 40 times. If your guy takes a basic course somewhere every year, you can at least be assured you have someone who understands the process.

- If they teach a method, technique or principle, can they explain, in plain English prose (absent any jargon or woo-woo stuff), WHY they do it that way, such that you can understand? They may be a combat genius ninja-batman, but if they can't make you understand they are useless to you as tits on a boar hog. The best they might do is to indoctrinate you (which is something other than teaching). If you walk away wondering what he just said, the deficit more likely rests with him than you.

- When others have taken their course, can those others, three weeks later, demonstrate specific skills acquired, or articulate intellectual deficits in information overcome (again without jargon or woo-woo spiritual concepts about "warrior eye" and "combative energy").

- Does your personal bulls--t meter jump?

- How is thier ego? Are they humble, professional and matter-of-fact about what they do, or do you get the feeling they are selling themselves as something special?

- If you ask about their background, do you get immediate, straight answers, or do they become vague or defensive?

- If you ask any question (pertinent to the training), do they become hostile or defensive? If so, it is a very bad sign. If they tend to "call people out" for questioning them, I would walk.

- How to they treat the slowest and the dumbest in the group?

Other folks have articulated other good ideas; I'm just not coming up with them at the moment.

While the above are not very objective, they are more reliable, in my view, than naked declarations about prior employment with some sexy job title.

[DanV1317]

I'm going to be watching this thread also to hear a response. I read the bio also, but didn't see much about the instructor's real life experience with any years of police/swat real life experiences. Alot of hand combat and possibly gun training, but i want to learn from somebody who has experienced these things in real life situations, not just training sessions.

[TonyF]

I'll tell you what ....................

Nevermind.

Screw it.

[Thekatar]

Those are all good questions to ask. (I am curious myself what a "certified counter-force instructor" is, who does the certification, and what it means.) But they are fraught with presumptions.

If one says, "32 years Police Experience," what does that tell you about his or her ability to instruct in pistol technique?

Nothing.

If one says "two years service in RVN," what does that tell you? I friend of mine is fond of telling people his year was spent in an air-conditioned trailer monitoring equipment. Does that make him a firearms instructor? He doesn't think so, nor do I (although he did get subsequent training that does, in my view, qualify him to instruct others on some things).

Did your friend ever present himself as a firearms instructor? If not then I don't get your example.

If one has been in a gunfight ("two-way-range"), what does that establish? How is that different from "just" being trained?

It establishes that one has experienced violence and survived. For whatever reasons which can hopefully be fully vetted.

Identifying what makes a good instructor is not simple. I submit that none of the above are reliable indicators (even where the information you receive is true . . . which it often is not).

For example, one can be "in" a gunfight, and do nothing at all productive to end it. They might survive only by luck, or by virtue of thier role in the fight having never placed them in danger. They might have blundered into the fight, fought poorly or not at all, and then been rescued by someone competent. How would you know? And what would that mean?

Indeed, the fellow who blundered into the fight and fought poorly might nevertheless be a good instructor for some people on some topics.

This is all true, but an instructor can be vetted through many different means.

I am regularly instructed by martial artists who have never been in a life-or-death fight. To suggest that means they do not know what they are doing - or, more to the point, they are not good teachers of the art -is just silly. These are tough, disciplined, highly skilled individuals who regularly compete with each other, full contact. I have no doubt whatsoever a number of them could cripple or kill me or anyone else I know pretty much any time they wanted to (and I have the lumps to prove it).

Rob Leatham and Brian Enos are two of the best pistol shooters in the world but I would not want to learn tactics from them. I'm pretty sure that they would be the first to tell you that they have no business teaching anything other than technique.

In order to make any of the background information people put out useful, one would have to know exactly what each job entailed and how they performed it. Otherwise, one cannot relate that experience to the specific training task at hand, and the information is meaningless. Getting the information necessary to make the base information meaningful is nigh impossible.

The only time I've ever had trouble verifying the creds of a particular instructor was when their particular creds were troubling...

I suggest all we can do is ask the following two questions:

Question 1: What is it you are trying to learn?

Question 2: What does the prospective instructor's personal experience have to do with that?

Good questions.

We all have "real world experience." The question is whether it is material to what you want to learn to do.

If what you are trying to learn is how to protect yourself or your family, this means you are asking to learn how to fight. There is no way around that fact. Therefore, and in that case, it is important the individual teaching you be familiar with the experience of fighting.

This might be extended military combat; experience in any martial art which integrates full-contact sparring (boxing, wrestling, tae kwon do, karate, judo . . . it's not real important which, so long as it involves actual, full-speed fighting); police experience that dealt with long periods of dealing with surly, combative people; substantial experience as a bar bouncer; MMA fighting; etc. Having been in a fight, or three, whether they involved guns or not, doesn't tell us much at all.

I was with you until that last part. You are right that it doesn't tell the particulars of the fight, but it does at least tell you there's experience with violence. That's something.

Other things to consider (none of which are fool-proof or determinative):

- Where and for how long have they trained? This is sometimes called "training pedigree."

- How are they regarded by people you know and respect? (Note: how they are regarded by Internet commandos, ideologues or markeers who are economic competitors is pretty useless information).

- How many people have they trained, and where?

- What do they do to keep themselves abreast of changes and advances? A guy who teaches 40 courses over three years is much more valuable than the guy who taught the same course 40 times. If your guy takes a basic course somewhere every year, you can at least be assured you have someone who understands the process.

- If they teach a method, technique or principle, can they explain, in plain English prose (absent any jargon or woo-woo stuff), WHY they do it that way, such that you can understand? They may be a combat genius ninja-batman, but if they can't make you understand they are useless to you as tits on a boar hog. The best they might do is to indoctrinate you (which is something other than teaching). If you walk away wondering what he just said, the deficit more likely rests with him than you.

- When others have taken their course, can those others, three weeks later, demonstrate specific skills acquired, or articulate intellectual deficits in information overcome (again without jargon or woo-woo spiritual concepts about "warrior eye" and "combative energy").

- Does your personal bulls--t meter jump?

- How is thier ego? Are they humble, professional and matter-of-fact about what they do, or do you get the feeling they are selling themselves as something special?

- If you ask about their background, do you get immediate, straight answers, or do they become vague or defensive?

- If you ask any question (pertinent to the training), do they become hostile or defensive? If so, it is a very bad sign. If they tend to "call people out" for questioning them, I would walk.

- How to they treat the slowest and the dumbest in the group?

Yes, this is called vetting. I am attempting to vet Brian K. LaMaster because when I checked out his website and bio it made my personal bulls--t meter jump.

Other folks have articulated other good ideas; I'm just not coming up with them at the moment.

While the above are not very objective, they are more reliable, in my view, than naked declarations about prior employment with some sexy job title.

Um... roger that.

[sgt7546]

"We, the staff at ITC, feel that we are the first to truly integrate unarmed combatives and “firearms training. Don’t take our word for it… here is what one of our students had to say. “ITC has finally provided the complete merger of advanced pistol craft, close quarters battle, and hand-to-hand techniques.”—Clint Lake, Columbus, OH."

Did anyone notice that "Clint Lake" IS one of THEIR instructors. Not a student writing in.

[RLS]

Are the participants certified Mall Ninjas upon completion of the course?





Rick