no 1911's - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-19-2017, 02:35 AM
bluedodger bluedodger is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 178
no 1911's

According to several gun blogs ,(Truth About Guns, The Firearms Blog, etc.) the NRA won't allow 1911's or revolvers as primary weapons in their new training class.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-19-2017, 03:03 AM
L84CABO L84CABO is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Orcas Island, WA & San Diego
Posts: 2,767
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ining-classes/
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-19-2017, 03:54 AM
Cracked Brass Cracked Brass is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: The hills of Tennessee
Posts: 3
1911s are dangerous, someone could get there eye shot out. Next the NRA will be making Michael Bloomberg it's president.

Last edited by Cracked Brass; 06-19-2017 at 03:56 AM. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
 
  #4  
Old 06-19-2017, 04:04 AM
MG1912 MG1912 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 285
Sounds like a simple matter of standardizing training. I would guess that they just want to train people on one type of platform: modern DA or DA/SA semi-autos with high-capacity magazines and no external safeties. That streamlines training for a group and therefore eliminates having to deal with 1911 and wheel gun guys, who need to manipulate a different battery of arms, reload more frequently, etc. Still, lots of excellent programs have no problem teaching people with different guns, so I don't see what the big deal is.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-19-2017, 04:31 AM
combat auto combat auto is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,325
I feel this is a biased "assault" on 1911 owners. Certainly a candidate for a Civil-Rights suite. I mean what are they saying (?), are the vast majority of folks in the shooting-community not self-aware enough to change springs and apply lube on a regular basis to keep their guns running?
__________________
"To be born free is an accident. To live free is a responsibility. To die free is an obligation."-General Halley, USMC
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." –Ulysses
Ekeibolon - Jeff Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-19-2017, 05:04 AM
Riverpigusmc Riverpigusmc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: North Central Florida
Age: 60
Posts: 1,941
Scroom. I won't take the class. Solves the problem
__________________
" All civilians are either dependants or targets". Drill Instructor Boone, Parris Island
Wilson CQB, Kimber Tactical Pro II , ect. NRA Life Member
There's a gator in the bushes, and it's calling my name...
COTEP #0523
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-19-2017, 05:50 AM
drail drail is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,153
It is done to simplify and speed up the class. I also think that a significant number of people today are just not willing to apply the necessary discipline required for the 1911 manual of arms. Much like the majority of drivers today cannot drive a manual transmission and see no reason to learn. The majority of people today cannot even maintain their car or their lawnmower. It is what it is.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-19-2017, 06:08 AM
Grandpas50AE's Avatar
Grandpas50AE Grandpas50AE is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Waxahachie, Tx.
Posts: 8,256
I had considered signing up for the trainers class, but this kills that idea. Perhaps they are trying to "standardize" the training and make it uniform, but situations requiring that kind of training are dynamic, as are people and their choices of firearms, so I don't see them doing the people signing up for the training much benefit for their money paid if they choose a wheel gun or 1911. This almost seems like the attempt to transition to the "blended" course for Basic Pistol Shooting - how'd that work for them? IMO, shot themselves in the foot again.
__________________
NRA Benefactor - Certs -Chief RSO; Instructor - Basic Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun
Army M.P. 1971 - 1972
Wilsons: CQB BB, Pro TB, TSG Pro, CQBE, XTAC Pro, XTAC Elite Pro
Kimbers: 10mm (Wilsonized), .38S (Wilson barrel)
Dillon RL550B
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-19-2017, 06:36 AM
scw2 scw2 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,844
I can see a smidgin of logic about 45 pistols in a basic class, because they require a higher level of initial training. But revolvers? Pure stupidity.

Worse comes to worse, the course could easily involve talking about revolvers, 1911s, and newer pistol designs. Would not hurt the students.

Could this be driven by product line ups of large gun manufacturers?

In my opinion, some of the decisions like this, including some of the past fund raising tactics for members, are hurting the cause.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-19-2017, 06:56 AM
JB6464 JB6464 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: O H I O
Posts: 548
$850.00 for a 3 day class and you can't train with the weapon you will be carrying , fail .
Would'nt waste my time and money on that , there is plenty of other training classes you can take that will benefit you just as good imo .
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-19-2017, 09:23 AM
dred dred is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Texas Gulf Coast
Age: 49
Posts: 152
First, I'm the only person I know with the issue I'm going to describe. I truly wanted to advance my skills with a bit of IDPA fun. It did not work out for me. The advice to drop my hammer then holster gets repeated for every course of fire. I cannot get over the cringe that is induced every time I'm asked to holster without an engaged safety. I wonder how the rest of the folks running 1911s in IDPA can stand this procedural instruction - I simply won't.

I understand why this works for other firearms. I understand why a national organization might standardize to routine that works for the majority. The alternative is relying on the folks on scene to decide wisely - and this only works most of the time.

Standardizing limits liability. I'm simply not interested in buying the compromises. Others will feel differently.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-19-2017, 09:25 AM
AZ Desertrat AZ Desertrat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,672
Kind of an embarrassment for the NRA, no? Seems strange to me.
__________________
USCG Veteran
NRA Patron Member
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-19-2017, 09:27 AM
retrieverman retrieverman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 48
Posts: 1,146
My wife has been an English teacher for 20 years, and she has to typically teach to the lowest level student in the class. The NRA classes are no different. They are gearing the curriculum to the "clip" students and not the "magazine" students.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-19-2017, 10:29 AM
Striker2237 Striker2237 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 737
Someone take the class with a 2011 or the EDC X9 and see if they call it a 1911
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-19-2017, 10:47 AM
AtlasFired AtlasFired is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,562
Here's a gem of a comment, down below the story... there are several....

Quote:
Madcapp says:
June 18, 2017 at 18:18
1911s are obsolete crap, the smart people all know that. But all the Archie Bunkers in the gun community are going to get severely butthurt because they have gun safes full of 1911s, and they belligerently refuse to accept reality. But here it is, the writing is on the wall for all to see. Even the NRA isn’t interested in 1911s anymore. Just come into the light, sell off your 1911s (all your .45 caliber guns for that matter) to some unknowledgeable idiot. Let them be someone else’s mistake.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-19-2017, 11:14 AM
Javelina Javelina is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Tucson, AZ area
Posts: 350
Just another reason i refuse to contribute money to the NRA when they call. I do maintain a membership, but that's as far as I'll go and I struggle every
time I renew it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-19-2017, 11:38 AM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 58,424
So it's okay to take a Glockleg™, but not a 1911? That's one of the dumbest things I've heard all year.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1946 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-19-2017, 11:44 AM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 7,557
At first, I thought this was a joke of some kind.

One must wonder ... sounds like a decision by the type of person who might think that, in baseball, runners go around the diamond in clockwise direction, just like a clock ...

In the big picture, let's not condemn the NRA for the foolishness and misguidedness of a small number of individuals, perhaps just one or two. The vast majority of us "know better" ... and "we" are the NRA.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 06-19-2017 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-19-2017, 12:04 PM
John Joseph John Joseph is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 659
I see the point.
New shooters buy the fantastic plastic in droves.
They need training.
The NRA course is geared towards them.

There's plenty of other more advanced training opportunities for the rest of us.
If the NRA was truly anti 1911 we wouldn't still have Bullseye
__________________
Canere canticum 'quod sit vita est vita ludere ludum-Vita-provocatus faceret Vita est somnium illud relize-Vita-offerre sacrificium est vita dilectio-
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-19-2017, 12:07 PM
LostintheOzone LostintheOzone is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 49th parallel
Posts: 4,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZ Desertrat View Post
Kind of an embarrassment for the NRA, no? Seems strange to me.
The NRA gets stranger every year. I've been trying to get into a class for 2 years and just keep getting the run around from the NRA affiliate in our club. He gets paid by the head and isn't willing to do a class with less than 10 people. The guy won't even return my calls.

Making money seems to be the motivation for everything the NRA does these days.
__________________
When asked by a passerby what sort of government the constitutional convention had formulated for the new nation, Benjamin Franklin memorably replied, “A republic, if you can keep it”
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-19-2017, 01:05 PM
Matquig Matquig is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,633
I assisted a CCW class here in Ohio for several years, and the head organizer routinely had classroom classes of 60-100 at one time, and then took 20-25 per range session (two hour block), with 12-14 on the firing line at one time. 1911's were common, as was everything else under the sun. We had zero injuries or deaths, no negligent discharges during my participation (and I do not believe they have had any since), and the NRA course was the standard instruction. This CCW class has instructed well over 2000 in the last 10 years. I do not understand the NRA's logic.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-19-2017, 01:30 PM
mortre mortre is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostintheOzone View Post
The NRA gets stranger every year. I've been trying to get into a class for 2 years and just keep getting the run around from the NRA affiliate in our club. He gets paid by the head and isn't willing to do a class with less than 10 people. The guy won't even return my calls.

Making money seems to be the motivation for everything the NRA does these days.
I inquired with a local range that required NRA membership if they would accept other organizations etc for membership. I was told that they have to required NRA membership. If even one member lets their membership to the NRA lapse, the NRA would revoke the grants that help keep the range open.

That sort of cancerous policy is exactly why I am no longer a member. The NRA is strictly money driven now. I wouldn't be surprised to here they are taking bribes for NRA ratings and which legislation to back or oppose these days.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
__________________
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-19-2017, 02:00 PM
buckhorn_cortez buckhorn_cortez is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,385
The part I don't understand is that people should be urged to use the gun they've chosen to carry. That's the gun they're going to use and they should be most familiar with its operation, and not a gun chosen by the NRA or its minions.

If a 1911 is viewed as slowing the class down because of malfunctions, then my response is that clearing malfunctions should be part of the training so that people are familiar with their chosen equipment, and confident in its operation - regardless of the type of gun. You should understand how to clear a malfunction in the gun you've chosen to carry regardless of the manufacturer or its type of operation.

Should you be in a situation where you need to use your gun and have a malfunction, wouldn't it be beneficial to understand how to clear the problem as rapidly and effectively as possible? Isn't that a valuable topic to be covered in an alleged self-defense training class?

Eliminating two types of handguns is counterproductive to training people on self defense with the handgun they've chosen to carry.

Makes even less sense than the "blended learning" foray, which made me abandon NRA-based pistol instruction.

As for the endorsement by Dana Loesch and the class being "Life changing..." - I'm naturally skeptical, and I'm betting that the only thing that was "life changing" was the deposit balance in her bank account after her endorsement...

Last edited by buckhorn_cortez; 06-19-2017 at 02:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-19-2017, 02:25 PM
retrieverman retrieverman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 48
Posts: 1,146
Quote:
Sources tell us the gun rights group developed their training program outside of the NRA’s training division, under the supervision of their longtime PR firm. Carry Guard’s website claims the instruction was developed by [unnamed] “elite military veterans in conjunction with law enforcement experts.”
After reading the article, I now understand the ruling. The class was developed by people whose only real gun knowledge is with polymer guns, and who wants to have to tell a class they don't know something about a gun when THEY are supposedly the "expert"....
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-19-2017, 02:34 PM
CherryRiver CherryRiver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southwest Chicagoland
Posts: 77
What would we ever do without experts?
When I first ran across this, I was hoping it was the usual Truth About Guns puffery. They lack cred with many nowadays, too, including myself. Clickbait doth not a meal make.
But, good heavens, could it be real?
Little wonder that we, my partner and I, run our full-time firearms instruction business exclusively with class designs and curricula that we developed ourselves.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:19 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved