USCCA, what's up?

[cobb]

Is anyone up to speed with USCCA? I have been a member off and on over the past several years, but as of late it seems that they are taking on the image of a corporate used car salesman. So much of their membership stuff seems to be about BS fluff and advertising, not serious carry information other than to sucker in the uninformed.

Another question, is anyone here a certified USCCA instructor? The local instructor in my area is taking new shooters, people that have never fired a handgun and taping their sights and teaching what they call defensive combat shooting or something of that sort. This USCCA instructor supposedly claims that a person will not use their sights in a defensive situation, so they are training new shooters to shoot without using their sights. I have to say that I have not seen this instructor do this, but have been told about this practice by people that have witnessed this, one a competition shooter that I have known for years and took their class. I believe the basics should be taught first, focus on the front sight and trigger press, then progress from there.

So what is up with USCCA?

[jshuberg]

I agree. The whole "you won't see your sights" might be true, but it also might not be. It depends entirely how proficient and well trained you are. It's an interesting exercise to practice point shooting every great once in awhile after you're already reasonably proficient, but asking a new student to train and shoot that way is about the worst possible thing that you can have them do. Without a front sight, you don't have a feedback loop, and your mind can't observe what the gun is doing in real-time.

Perhaps this is USCCA curriculum, perhaps that one particular instructor is holding on to old and disproved theories on the physiological effects of a chemical cocktail dump. Either way, the guy needs to update his curriculum and stop training new students in extremely bad habits.

The USCCA offers carry insurance, to pay for legal expenses, etc. should a person have to use a firearm in self defense. My info might be dated, but I don't believe they've ever had a claim, so there's no way to know how readily they pay out, or if you have to fight them for it. Most homeowner policies can be extended to cover you if you use your firearm in self defense, just make sure that your policy contains a self defense exeption to the intentional acts exclusion of your coverage (I got that language from an insurance guy).

So yeah, I'm kind of on the fence with what I think of them. If they are, as part of their curriculum, teaching new shooters to point shoot, then I'll write them off as a sham and something to stay away from. If you find out whether it was just that one guy, or if it's actually their curriculum, let me know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shooter115]

I agree. The whole "you won't see your sights" might be true, but it also might not be. It depends entirely how proficient and well trained you are.

This exactly. There is going to be a huge discrepancy in shooting skills under duress when you compare the casual shooter vs. someone that constantly trains and competes in the action shooting sports.

[jshuberg]

Yeah, many of the popular beliefs on how a persons performance under stress will diminish were from studies that were done on people who were not very proficient with a firearm on average - police officers. While training has gotten better, 20 years ago your average cop was minimally competent with a firearm, and even today many can barely qualify with a firearm. It's not an accurate sample for gauging performance under stress to study people who are barely proficient under ideal conditions, so a lot of errors were introduced into the conclusions.

The basic idea is that under high stress, a chemical cocktail is introduced into the blood supply, adrenaline being the main hormone. It causes both psychological and physiological effects in the body in order to escape danger. From a biological standpoint, we are still cavemen. The chemical cocktail released into our bloodstream under the extreme stress of a life or death encounter is so that we can more easily survive in a cavemans world. We sacrifice fine motor skills in favor of an increase in strength of large muscle groups. We experience tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, and a host of other effects. The purpose, is so the caveman can more effectively escape the saber toothed tiger.

Running though a forest takes a lot of dexterity. It takes a complex orchestration of muscles, both gross and fine, to run at full speed, avoiding obstacles, and being able to adjust to stepping on things or slipping on things without falling. The cave man (well some of them anyway) was fully capable of running through a forest to escape whatever was chasing him, without falling. Running under those conditions was considerably more complex that shifting focus to a front site, or flipping off a safety, or operating the trigger while staying on target. The reason that a caveman can run, and can employ fine grained muscles for balance and stability during a cocktail dump is that he was proficient at running before he was chased by the cat. The act of running was developed into an entirely subconscious action, very deep in the subconscious. The caveman didn't have to think at all about how to run, or what to do if he started to slip. His subconscious already knew how to run, and took over the job of running. Meanwhile, the caveman was more concerned with staying ahead of the cat, and where he could run to than how his legs, knees, ankles and feet were moving at any given instant. Most people call this muscle memory, but the actual correct term is procedural memory.

The same is true of shooting. If you train to the point where you no longer think about how to shoot, where it is entirely instinctual, like walking or driving a car, in a lethal force encounter you will likely perform very close to your normal level of performance. The more ingrained shooting is for you, the better you will perform under stress. There have been incidents where well trained competition shooters have found themselves in lethal force encounters. They report having seen their sights perfectly, a few even commented to the effect that shooting the actual bad guy in a life threatening situation was actually one of the easier "stages" that they've shot. They were not supermen, they simply trained enough that their subconscious took over weapons handling, so that their conscious mind could focus on the bad guy and the tactical situation.

If all we ever did was study toddlers, or small children that were minimally proficient at walking, and how they fared when being chased by saber tooth tigers, we might come to the conclusion that it's impossible to run at full speed under stress without falling down. We might therefore conclude that running isn't a viable option, and train people not to attempt to run in favor of other techniques to try to stay alive. And we would be dead wrong in our conclusions.

The best way to survive a lethal force encounter isn't to train extensively to master methods that minimally competent shooters were able to do under stress, it's to train using the most modern, proper techniques to the point where they become instinctive, just like running is. Instructors who emphasize point shooting are using outdated theories and methodologies, and encouraging their students to train on vastly inferior techniques. It really sucks to hear that people are still emphasizing this technique, they may as well be teaching people the weaver stance or to always shoot from the hip...

If an emphasis on point shooting is any part of an instructor orgs official curriculum, stay away from them. They'll just set you down the path of extremely bad habits.

[cobb]

Even their membership promo, it is over 30 minutes long.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/uscca- ... ctive&kmi=

Getting like these other scam ads, you have to sit through a long, long, long video ad just to get 2 or 3 minutes of information. Don't get it, I think that would lose more members than it would gain because most do not want to watch 30 minutes of BS promo.

[PhilaBOR]

I joined USCCA maybe 5 years ago and lapsed a year or two later. Their marketing was all kinds of BS. I plan to rejoin just for the insurance, although there's probably some value to the magazine as well.

[Jackpine Savage]

I always thought the founder sounded like he belonged on an infomercial. Is anyone a member of http://armedcitizensnetwork.org/home-page ? I know Farnam and Ayoob were involved when it started up. They did go to bat for a guy down in Arizona and he ended up getting off.

[Ironbear]

Getting like these other scam ads, you have to sit through a long, long, long video ad just to get 2 or 3 minutes of information. Don't get it, I think that would lose more members than it would gain because most do not want to watch 30 minutes of BS promo.

Well I didn't watch video, but in general my interest is inversely proportional to the similarity to the shopping network!

[MNblockhead]

I subscribe to USCCA's newsletter and enjoy many of the free articles, though you have to deal with lots of spammy deal-of-the-day e-mail as well. That said, I have to deal with lots of spammy NRA e-mail as well. The new Google Inbox help keep these out of my main inbox, so they are not overly disruptive.

I know that they have provided legal services for some members and have posted interviews with those members, but the one I remember watching was a gun owner who was arrested in New York when his plane was rerouted for bad weather. The article on this is here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/uscca- ... y-airport/ My google-fu isn't good enough to quickly find the video, but I remember that it was with the man who was arrested and the lawyer the USCCA arranged to help him.

The USCCA also started Armed American Radio (http://armedamericanradio.org/). I occasionally listen to the podcasts, but I get tired of the angry-man style of talk radio.

I do really enjoy Kevin Micholawski's Into the Fray series of videos (https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/catego ... -the-fray/).

As a new gun owner and permit holder I bought their Concealed Carry and Home Defense Fundamentals book. It was a well written and well laid-out book that was a good buy for someone new to the scene. I quickly graduated to books by Massad Ayoob and Jeff Cooper.

My impression is that the USCCA provides great resources for people new to concealed carry and handguns, but those with more experience may not find the content very compelling (Micholawski's videos may be the exception).

I've been considering getting the insurance, but I'm finding the cost high for a very low risk.

[UnaStamus]

The notion that you won't use your sights is false and based on hyperbole that has been propagated over the years. Instructors who push this notion show how little they actually know and how bad of an instructor they are for not sourcing accurate information. Force Science Research Institute has provided empirical data to prove it is a false assertion over a decade ago. It's also been confirmed through other sources like the FBI. Instructors like that pass that crap on because they heard it from some guy that heard it from some guy...

The problem with memberships is that they don't usually vet people who join. It's like the NRA- nobody really knows who is joining and claiming membership, and they really can't control it. If that instructor is taping over the sights (which I've heard of being done before by other instructors), he's a moron and negligent. USCCA probably has no involvement with that and likely wouldn't do anything since they're not a "certifying" group like NRA instructor certs (which are also pretty questionable).

[PhilaBOR]

I always thought the founder sounded like he belonged on an infomercial. Is anyone a member of http://armedcitizensnetwork.org/home-page ? I know Farnam and Ayoob were involved when it started up. They did go to bat for a guy down in Arizona and he ended up getting off.

I'm a member and think it's worthwhile. Watch the videos and sign/date them.
I expect they have a good network of lawyers across the states. They have a legal fund and rules as to what you can draw. USCCA is straight up insurance.
I've been listening to USCCA's radio/podcast Armed American Radio for years. It's the red meat national show, and there's a pretty low signal to noise ratio but they have great guests on. Tom Gresham's Gun Talk is a lot classier and covers hunting and reloading as well as self defense and gun rights.

[cobb]

But if USCCA instructors are taping over a first time shooters handgun sights because they are teaching some sort of defensive combat shooting, I have a problem with that.

A first time handgun shooter has to be taught the basics, sight picture, trigger press, etc., then advance to acquiring and presenting a handgun from or under a concealment garment for defense. To take a new shooter, someone that has never fired a handgun before and drill the use of not using their sights for self defense is pure BS in my opinion. Don't give me that what if BS, if you are concerned about a what if then take more training, advanced training and then deal with the what if. Until then, a new shooter, either a true defensive shooter or an IDPA, USPSA, IPSC player has to learn the basics of sights an trigger.

[UnaStamus]

But if USCCA instructors are taping over a first time shooters handgun sights because they are teaching some sort of defensive combat shooting, I have a problem with that.

A first time handgun shooter has to be taught the basics, sight picture, trigger press, etc., then advance to acquiring and presenting a handgun from or under a concealment garment for defense. To take a new shooter, someone that has never fired a handgun before and drill the use of not using their sights for self defense is pure BS in my opinion. Don't give me that what if BS, if you are concerned about a what if then take more training, advanced training and then deal with the what if. Until then, a new shooter, either a true defensive shooter or an IDPA, USPSA, IPSC player has to learn the basics of sights an trigger.

Not to mention that if a person takes that training and accidentally shoots the wrong person, or shoots at someone and misses and hits a bystander, that can open the door to a claim of negligent training that could result in a massive payday for a zealous lawyer. If it were to happen, I would absolutely expect the student/shooter to immediately sell the instructor down the river for teaching that just to save their own bacon.

[Randygmn]

Is anyone up to speed with USCCA? I have been a member off and on over the past several years, but as of late it seems that they are taking on the image of a corporate used car salesman. So much of their membership stuff seems to be about BS fluff and advertising, not serious carry information other than to sucker in the uninformed.

Another question, is anyone here a certified USCCA instructor? The local instructor in my area is taking new shooters, people that have never fired a handgun and taping their sights and teaching what they call defensive combat shooting or something of that sort. This USCCA instructor supposedly claims that a person will not use their sights in a defensive situation, so they are training new shooters to shoot without using their sights. I have to say that I have not seen this instructor do this, but have been told about this practice by people that have witnessed this, one a competition shooter that I have known for years and took their class. I believe the basics should be taught first, focus on the front sight and trigger press, then progress from there.

So what is up with USCCA?

You didn't mention specifically which sight was being taped up. If it's the back sight only, it's easily understandable. No different than a blacked out rear sight. It is true that in a defensive gun fight, most shooters will only focus on the fron sight anyway. That is being taught, on a macro scale, in defensive fighting pistol classes across the country. Only an idiot would black out the front sight.

[UnaStamus]

You didn't mention specifically which sight was being taped up. If it's the back sight only, it's easily understandable. No different than a blacked out rear sight. It is true that in a defensive gun fight, most shooters will only focus on the fron sight anyway. That is being taught, on a macro scale, in defensive fighting pistol classes across the country. Only an idiot would black out the front sight.

There's a difference between blacking out the rear sights and taping them over. You still need the rear notch to be present to line up the front sight.