This page collects my blog posts on the private citizen (i.e., civilian) gun training industry (or community). These posts offer my initial reflections on the topic as part of my ongoing research. Therefore, I welcome readers’ reactions, responses, references, elaborations, and corrections.

I begin with my most recent posts, followed by posts on the rise and organization of the civilian gun training industry as a whole, followed by links to collected posts on particular gun trainers, and concluding with miscellaneous other posts about gun trainers/training.

My most recent posts on gun training are:

• Kyle Rittenhouse is a Poster Child for Civilian Gun Training
• Shooter Ready? Beeeeep. Fail.
• Re-Taking the NC Concealed Handgun Permit Course at Apache Solutions
• Shooting Lessons During and From COVID Times (with The Tactical Professor Claude Werner)
• John Johnston Teaches “Stupid Human Tricks” with Guns
• The Work Never Ends by John Johnston

On the civilian gun training (cottage) industry as a whole (in reverse chronological order, most recent first):

• On the Shoulders of Giants – Again
• Subject Matter Experts and Expertise in the Firearms Training Industry
• Branding in the Firearms Training Industry
• Credentialism and the Do-It-Yourself Approach to the Firearms Training Industry
• The Apprentice – Private Citizen Firearms Instructor Edition
• Contemporary Private Ctiizen Gun Trainers – Like Dwarfs on the Shoulders of Giants?
• How Rangemaster Puts the “Certification” in the Instructor Development and Certification Course
• Observing Tom Givens’s Rangemaster Instructor Development and Certification Course
• Certifying Civilian Firearms Instructors – A Non-Governmental Approach
• Occupational Licensing of Civlian Firearms Instructors?
• The Association of Defensive Shooting Instructors: Semi-Professionalization of Civilian Gun Trainers?
• What is a “Professional Civilian Firearms Trainer”?
• The Viability of the “Full Time” Firearms Instructor Job by Karl Rehn
• The Rise of the Private Citizen Gun Training (Cottage) Industry

My multiple posts on Col. Jeff Cooper and Gunsite Academy.

My interest in firearms training for private citizens is as longstanding as my interest in gun culture. Some of my earliest posts (see below) were about my experience at Massad Ayoob’s MAG-40 course back in 2012!

• Massad Ayoob on Guns, Early 1980s Edition
• Shooting the MAG-40 Qualification Course
• Massad Ayoob’s MAG-40 Course – A Humanitarian Approach to Armed Citizenship
• Massad Ayoob Checks the Accuracy of My Handgun

Collected posts on John Correia of Active Self-Protection.

Collected posts on Craig Douglas of Shivworks.

Collected posts on Tom Givens and Rangemaster, including the (formerly Polite Society) Tactical Conference.

Collected posts on Travis Haley of Haley Strategic Partners.

Collected posts on Brian Hill of The Complete Combatant.

Collected posts on Paul Howe of Combat Shooting and Tactics (CSAT).

Collected posts on John Murphy of F.P.F. Training.

Collected posts on Rob Pincus of I.C.E. Training.

Collected posts on Gabe Suarez of Suarez International.

Collected posts on Joe Weyer and Alliance Police Training shoothouse course.

And, last but not least, here are my miscellaneous posts by and about civilian gun trainers and training (newest first):

• What a Study Military Small Arms Innovation Has to Teach Us About Civilian Defensive Firearms: Defining End Users (3 of 3)
• Science-y $#!^ as a Red Flag in Gun Training (Bob Keller and Lee Williams)
• Show Me The Money – Pitfalls of Gun Training as a Commercial Product (Bob Keller and Lee Williams)
• Post-9/11 Gun Training Doctrine According to Bob Keller and Lee Williams
• Two Gun Trainers, Three Opinions; or, One Gun Trainer, Two Schools?
• Distinguishing Responsibly Armed Citizens from Mere Gun Owners (Erik Utrecht, Michigan Defensive Firearms Institute on Ballistic Radio)
• Talking with Karl Rehn on the Handgun World Podcast
• Gun Guys: Legend Bill Wilson Interviews Legend Ken Hackathorn
• Jiu-Jitsu is the Answer. What was the Question?
• Firearms Training and Gun Safety: What is Actually Taught?
• Back to Basics: Taking the NRA Basics of Pistol Shooting Course
• From the Lucky Gunner Lounge: Five Reasons Firearms Training Fails
• Gun Trainer Drama (fake Recoil magazine cover)
• The Tactical Professor Claude Werner on Negative Outcomes, Standards, and Gun Culture 3.0
• Ken Hackathorn on the American Warrior Show
• NRA Carry Guard “Insurance” and “Training” Program Launched
• Mike Seeklander: “The Way is Training”
• From Armed Self-Defense to PreFense While Armed (Steve Tarani)
• Defining Problems and Offering Solutions in the Private Citizen Gun Training Industry
• Civilized Violence: Lessons from Gun Schools (sociologist Harel Shapira)
• Bridging the Gap by Greg Ellifritz
• Someone is in your home. Can you shoot him? Should you? by Grant Cunningham
• The Cornered Cat Kathy Jackson on What Women Want
• Lt. Col Dave Grossman on Sheepdogs and Violence

First, prior to the verdict, a reporter for The Associated Press invited me to talk to her about what the events tell us about American gun culture today. In the interview, I tried to add some complexity to the simplistic narratives I see often in media accounts.

Among other thoughts, the AP story included the following: “while Rittenhouse’s core supporters believe he did nothing wrong from start to finish, a much larger group of gun owners ‘are somewhere in between,’ Yamane said. While they support Rittenhouse’s right to defend himself in the moment, they also think he had no business being there.”

Second, thinking about my conversation with the AP reporter, I decided to try to articulate more fully my thoughts on why Kyle Rittenhouse is not “the face of gun culture today.” Those thoughts were published recently in The Hill.

Looking at both his actions in taking up the role of an armed civilian patrolling the streets during a riot and his demographics, I conclude that “Kyle Rittenhouse does not represent gun owners today.”

Obviously he represents some gun owners today. But my point was to dispute those who want to argue that Rittenhouse is synonymous with gun owners today. And to challenge the idea that conservative politics/politicians like the Donald Trumps (Sr. and Jr.) who valorize Rittenhouse are synonymous with contemporary gun culture, as many believe. And to suggest that organizations promoting Rittenhouse as a folk hero like the NRA and Gun Owners of America are not synonymous with gun owners or gun culture, as has been asserted to me.

Third, I also believe, based on my decade wandering around Gun Culture 2.0, that Kyle Rittenhouse is a cautionary tale. As I wrote in a recent blog post here, if he is a poster child for anything, it is for the civilian gun training industry. Rather than offering to give him a new AR, as some organizations and businesses have, give him some high level training in applied violence (beyond the gun) like those I mention in my post.

I will continue to add short summaries of my thoughts on what we can learn from the events surrounding Kyle Rittenhouse as they come to me. I am working up some thoughts regarding Gaige Grosskreutz and Dominick Black, for example.

Much like the case of George Zimmerman, some people in the defensive gun culture are reluctant to say anything that might be perceived as critical of Kyle Rittenhouse because his prosecution is seen as a threat the right to use lethal force in self-defense.

Although I recognize the need to see the broader legal implications of particular cases, for me the critical silence is unfortunate because there are some clear lessons to be learned from both Zimmerman and Rittenhouse for the average armed citizen – people like me and my audience. Perhaps now that the case is decided, people will feel more at liberty to consider these lessons publicly.

Additionally, the critical silence allows Rittenhouse to be co-opted by the usual suspects on the right who are valorizing him for political purposes. Organizations like the Gun Owners of America, which thanked Rittenhouse for being a “warrior for gun owners,” and talking heads like Ann Coulter, who tweeted an image of comic book superheros bowing in reverence to Rittenhouse.

But Kyle Rittenhouse isn’t a Gun Culture 2.0 hero. He’s a cautionary tale. If he is a poster child for anything, it is for the civilian gun training industry.

Rather than the Gun Owners of America and other political opportunists offering to give Kyle Rittenhouse a new AR-15 style rifle, I would rather see proponents of responsibly armed citizenship offer to give him the kinds of training courses that I have taken over the years. Courses that focus as much on thinking as on shooting. As Rittenhouse himself and mass public shooters routinely demonstrate, the shooting is the easy (or easier) part of the equation, especially if you’re using a rifle.

Among the courses I have participated in or observed over the years that I would recommend for Rittenhouse or those who want to avoid his mistakes are:

*Massad Ayoob’s MAG-40, “Armed Armed Citizens’ Rules of Engagement,” which I characterized almost 10 years ago as “A Humanitarian Approach to Armed Citizenship.”

*John Murphy’s “Concealed Carry: Advanced Skills and Tactics” course (now subtitled “Street Encounter Skills and Tactics”). Among other lessons, students in this course learn how to carry and deploy pepper spray.

*Brian Hill’s “Force Readiness” course, if he offers it again through his Complete Combatant training company. The course focuses on the power of choice.

*Craig Douglas’s Extreme Close Quarters Concepts (ECQC), which offers an interdisciplinary approach to self-defense designed to “give every student the empty-hand skills of an MMA fighter, the firearm skills of a USPSA grand master, and the verbal agility of a stand-up comic.” This last ability is probably the most important one for most people on most days and falls under the broader rubric of managing unknown contacts (MUC). As Douglas says, “A good self-defense course should begin with not letting it get shitty.”

*Joe Weyer’s Carbine/Handgun Shoothouse course at Alliance Police Training. The course title is a bit misleading, as I have noted. It ought to be called “Decision-Making with a Gun.” In Weyer’s estimation, the firearms part of the gunfight is only 10% of the equation; 90% is decision-making. As the old saw goes, if you only have a hammer (gun), everything looks like a nail (someone who needs shooting). In our case, the hammer is the least important tool we have.

There are many other great courses and trainers out there, so this list is just a start based on courses I have actually participated in. You can learn more on my gun training industry collected posts page.

This includes the paperback with free 2-day Prime shipping for $12.95 and the Kindle edition for $0.00 with a Kindle Unlimited subscription or $6.99 otherwise.

If you buy a copy of the book, please consider leaving a review on Amazon (or Goodreads or Google books) because that helps others outside my social networks find the book.

If you bought a copy of the first edition, there’s nothing to prevent you from leaving a review of the Updated Edition.

For those who bought the original edition and want to know why there is a new edition out so soon, please read the back story here.

Of course, you can also get an ePub or paperback version of the book by supporting me on my Buy Me A Coffee page (like Patreon, only better).

$5 monthly members get a “free” ePub version of the book and $60 annual members receive a signed paperback directly from me.

Links below are in reverse chronological order (newest to oldest) (up to date through 11 April 2020).

• Thoughts on Broadening the Gun Culture Tent
• Taking Gabe White’s Tactical Success with Technical Skills Class at 2018 Tactical Conference
• Exploring the Frontiers of Defensive Gun Culture at the 2018 Tactical Conference
• 20th Anniversary Rangemaster Polite Society Tactical Conference, 2018
• Stalking William Aprill – In a Totally Non-Threatening Way
• Tom Givens on Designing Training Programs for Reality
• Rangemaster Polite Society Tactical Confernece (Lost Reflection on 2014 Edition)
• 20th Anniversary edition of the Rangemaster Polite Society Tactical Conference
• Contemporary Private Citizen Gun Trainers – Like Dwarfs on the Shoulders of Giants?
• How Rangemaster Put the “Certification” in the Instructor Development and Certification Course
• Observing Tom Givens’s Rangemaster Instructor Development and Certification Course
• Tom Givens on Training Parameters for Civilian Gun Carry
• Tom Givens: “Where is the gun in your car?”

When I think of this problem, one of the reasons that comes immediately to mind is the cost of higher level gun training. I can relate to this as I have gone thousands of dollars in debt traveling to observe gun training events over the past 5 years. And I only infrequently actually participate in those events and therefore rarely have tuition costs (and in Craig Douglas’s case, he waived my tuition).

Although they recognize the cost barrier to training, Rehn and Daub downplay its significance. As they note, many gun people have no trouble finding money when it comes to buying another gun or more gun-related accessories. They quote a maxim of John Holschen of Insights Training:

Amateurs think equipment,

Students think techniques,

Experts think tactics.

So, some of getting beyond the one percent has to do with resource allocation.

Most of us allocate a certain amount of our resources — time, treasure, talent — to helping others. How great would it be to support a worthy charity AND have the chance to rise above amateur status at the same time? It is possible.

A nationwide training raffle is being held again this year In conjunction with and in support of “The Mingle”, an event hosted by The Complete Combatant (Brian and Shelley Luehder Hill) that brings together women in the firearms/self-defense industry for networking and education.

A number of the best defensive trainers in the country have donated to the raffle. You can read the complete rules on the raffle site, but basically you donate money and get entered into the raffle for a slot in a training course, a gift certificate, or some other prize.

50% of the proceeds from the raffle go to help with The Mingle’s operating expenses for the following year and 50% goes to support Racheal’s Rest., a 501c3 nonprofit that helps women and children who have experienced sexual abuse or acts of violence regain their balance in lives. (The spelling of Racheal is correct, read the moving story of its origin.)

I don’t want to offend any of the great trainers who donated, some of whose classes I could not attend just because of timing or distance, but I have my eye on a few raffle items in particular:

• Caleb Causey of Lone Star Medics has donated 1 LIFETIME invite to attend as many LSM classes as the winner can attend (as long as you meet any prerequisites) free of charge ($50 raffle ticket). My medical knowledge and ability is bad.
  
• William Aprill of Aprill Risk Consulting has donated a seat in his “Unthinkable” course ($25 raffle ticket). Readers of this blog may recall that I have been low-key stalking Aprill for a while now and want to attend this class more than any class currently available. No kidding.
• The red-dot Jedi, Scott Jedlinski of Modern Samurai Project ($25 raffle ticket). I have only shot a red-dot pistol on one occasion and it was intriguing. Would like to learn more.
• Jacks and Saps with Larry Lindenman of Point Driven Training at Annette Evans’s Race Street Range ($25 raffle ticket). I am really increasingly interested in less-than-lethal options for self-defense. Class is ideal, timing is tough, though!

So, that’s where my $100-$125 in donations is going. Where are you throwing your support?

The complete list of donors is: Lee Weems of First Person Safety, Dodd & Associates Training, Tom and Lynn Givens of Rangemaster, Karl Rehn of KR Training, Chuck Haggard of Agile Training and Consulting, Lone Star Medics with Caleb Causey, Scott Jedlinksi of Modern Samurai Project, The Complete Combatant and Fusion Fitness and MMA (Brian Hill), John Correia of Active Self Protection, Larry Lindenmen of Point Driven Training, William Aprill of Aprill Risk Consulting, Beth Alcazar of Pacifiers & Peacemakers, Massad Ayoob of Massad Ayoob Group, Citizens Safety Academy with Aqil Qadir and Tiffany Johnson, Paul Sharp of Sharp Defense, Spencer Keepers of Keepers Concealment, TDR Training with Tim Reedy, Hirt’s Defensive Solutions with Carl Hirt, Civilian Defender with Sherman House, Archetype of the Gun with Erik Tweedt, and Bill Rogers of Rogers Shooting School.

I discovered their “Think Aim Fire” podcast recently, and sent a list of questions their discussions raised for me, which they were good enough to answer my questions in a recent episode. Among the questions I asked Williams and Keller was about the role of science in gun training:

[I]n one show you and Bob were down on those who try to bring science into their training (e.g., kinesiology). Are there trainers in particular you would cite as guilty? In my own experience I guess I would think of Rob Pincus and (again) Travis Haley. But I regularly hear trainers talk about myelination and other sciency sorts of things.

As background, I wrote about Haley’s employment of experts in areas such as neurofeedback, brain mapping, cognitive science, biomechanics, and visual eye tracking to teach people to be better shooters (and, more fundamentally, “thinkers before shooters”).

And Pincus is well-known – either famous or infamous – for teaching students to bring the gun up in a “kinesthetically aligned position” (citing Schmidt and Lee’s Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis as the scientific basis for this method).

Although they address the issue I bring up in my question, Williams goes out of his way not to name names. Indeed, he goes so far as to redact Pincus and Haley when he reads my question on the podcast.

Williams summarizes his perspective simply: “If you hear somebody talking about science, you have picked the wrong instructor, folks.”

Keller offers a somewhat more nuanced position, but also connects the critique of scientific approaches to shooting to the previously noted corrupting influence of the profit motive in the gun training industry:

Some people might actually be able to relate to that because they need that terminology, they need that science to make it make sense. So I’m not saying it wouldn’t work for everyone, but again I think that is just to woo the customer. If you can say those fancy words and those big words that [make them] so confused that you must be bad-ass if you can say all that stuff, I think that’s why most people frickin’ say all those big words.

Williams reiterates the fundamental tenet of their doctrine: “Get the gun up, get sight picture, and pull the trigger.”

Keller: “Yeah, it really is that easy.”

Williams: “So that’s another one on our red flag list: Monkey bars, zip lines, or science-y shit.”

As a reminder, Keller argues for a combat proven approach to training that focuses on the constants of gunfighting. The post-9/11 essence of gun training is spending time on a square range mastering the basic techniques that apply in every gunfight: getting the gun up, getting sight picture, and pulling the trigger.

And yet, he and Williams are pessimistic that the gun training industry as a whole will make this shift with them. Williams maintains that, on the civilian side, “the biggest problems is a lot of instructors feel they need to be entertainers.” This is a constant, before and after 9/11, according to Keller. Trainers ask themselves: “What can I do cool to get students to enroll in my class?” Why? Because they “are doing it pretty much just for the money and not for the training.”

Consequently, Keller doesn’t think there will be a post-9/11 shift in civilian gun training because “most of them [trainers] are in it for the money, and they’re going to do whatever it takes to entertain you.”

Keller’s back-to-basics approach is based in experience in actual gunfights and yet, he observes, many of his peers who have the same operational experience do not train in this manner. Instead, they are “getting wrapped up in the whole wooing the customer thing, with the fancy drills and the running around doing the GI Joe stuff. Some of the guys that do have experience are teaching that stuff but it’s because they know that’s what sells.”

Why does scenario-based and other wasteful forms of training sell? According to Keller, because many gun training consumers WANT edu-trainment. “A lot of people that are paying money, that’s what they want to do,” he recognizes. “Yeah they want to get better at shooting, but when it really comes down to it they are doing it for an entertaining weekend. They want to play GI Joe for a weekend.”

In the end, Keller adopts a nonjudgmental posture toward his fellow gun trainers and those who buy their services:

“I get it. For someone’s that never been in the military and always wanted to, I get why they want to go get kit-ed up and do an exciting weekend. I don’t fault them for that at all. I just don’t do that. I want to make money, yes, but my biggest thing and what I’ve always said and I won’t go back on is I do it to help people be better shooters and save their lives someday if that situation ever happens.”

Podcast host Williams doesn’t reserve judgement, though, when he concludes, “Let that be a warning to you listeners. If you go to a training class and there’s monkey bars and a zip line, you’ve picked the wrong instructor.”

Doing his best Seinfeld “not that there’s anything wrong with that” impression, Keller adds: “Unless that’s what you want to do for the weekend.”

One attraction of the podcast was that many episodes focused critical attention on gun training:

• 20: “Combat proven vs. theory based training”
• 32: “Calling bullshit on dangerous training doctrine”
• 35: “Scenario-based and so-called ‘scientific’ shooting methods”
• 36: “CQB for civilians… really?”
• 42: “So called ‘advanced classes’ – are they worth the money?”

Commonalities and differences in the defensive firearms training community is something I have been interested in for some time now.

Another attraction of the podcast was the fact that, although I knew Lee Williams’s writing, I had never heard of Bob Keller before. This surprised me because I have spent a good part of my time studying gun culture looking at the gun training (cottage) industry, especially the past couple of years.

I don’t think of this as a criticism as Keller as much as of my own limited perspective.

A few episodes in, some common themes began to emerge in the way that Williams and Keller spoke of how civilian firearms training is done and how it should be done. After about 10 episodes, I had heard enough to want to ask Williams and Keller to clarify some points, which I did in an email to Williams.

The following summarizes what I heard on their podcast, their specific responses to my questions (on Episode 46 of the Think, Aim, Fire podcast, 27 September 2018), and an interview with Keller I found on Arik Levy’s Firearms Nation Podcast (#059, 21 April 2018). I imagine more could be gathered also from Keller’s Pantaeo Productions DVD, but I have not watched that yet.

(1) First, Keller distinguishes between firearms training pre- and post-9/11. I had never heard anyone make this distinction before so was interested in learning more about it.

Especially in his interview with Arik Levy, Keller explains that he bases this distinction on his experience training as an Army Ranger before and after 9/11. He suggests that his training underwent a fundamental shift after 9/11, and that this shift needs to be integrated into civilian gun training as well.

The reason I had not heard of this shift before, Williams said in answer to my question, is because “there hasn’t been a big post-9/11 shift in civilian training. Bob is on the cutting edge here, leading the way, trying to get other instructors to stop using bad theory[-based] technique.”

I am not expert in military combat training, but I find Keller’s description of the change in his own training pre- and post-9/11 very interesting. After all, plenty of people had engaged in combat prior to 9/11. The notion of “combat shooting” is certainly not new. But perhaps it is the case that the way our military trained for combat after 9/11 changed in a fundamental way? And in a way that has implications of civilian firearms training?

(2) Which leads to their second major point: the distinction between combat proven and theory-based training. Keller argues that his pre-9/11 training incorporated theory-based techniques, and that post-9/11 training centers on combat proven techniques.

Theory-based techniques refer to those that are taught but have not been proven in combat. According to Keller, “Until you’ve been in a bunch of [actual combat] situations, you only know what you know, right? So you’re trying to come up with things you think are going to work in a gunfight.”

After you’ve been in a bunch of gunfights, you know what is going to work – these are the combat proven techniques. Again, Keller suggests that civilian gun training needs to incorporate this shift from theory-based to combat proven techniques.

(3) The implication of the two preceding points is that proper civilian gun training should be based in post-9/11, combat proven techniques, which Williams and Keller refer to as “current doctrine.”

In response to my request for clarification of this doctrine, Williams referred to a book-in-progress that will outline its tenets. But in listening to the podcast, the basic teachings seem to be:

(A) The central importance of mastery of the basics. “Fast forward to post-9/11, having been in a lot of situations,” Keller observes, “the one thing that was always the constant was bringing the gun up, getting sight picture, and pulling the trigger.”

(B) Training, therefore, must be oriented to mastery of these basics. “There’s not much to it other than getting rid of all the fluff,” Keller insists. “The only thing that really mattered was being able to shoot. So it’s not like there’s any frickin’ secret to it. It’s just getting rid of all the crap that really isn’t needed in a range session, and doing the stuff that is the constant, which is shooting. Being able to get the gun up, get sight picture, and pull the trigger. That never goes away. That has to happen.”

Consequently, the centerpiece of Keller’s training courses are basic “ready, up” drills on a square range. He contrasts his boring, back-to-basics approach to training to “so-called ‘advanced classes,’” scenario-based training, CQB for civilians, and other forms of edu-trainment that are largely designed to get students to enroll in courses and make money for the instructors.

Hearing Keller describe the importance of static range training designed to ingrain the ability to get the gun up, get sight picture, and pull the trigger, reminded me of the week I spent at Gunsite Academy observing the venerable 250 Defensive Pistol Course. Students in that course spent hours practicing the basics of gunhandling and marksmanship, including showing up at the range at 0700 (an hour earlier than normal due to the excessive June heat) to dry practice their presentations from the holster for 10 or 15 minutes, and then spending six hours at the range shooting disciplined drills as the ground temperature rose to 140 degrees.

So I wonder to what extent Keller’s “current doctrine” represents a re-branding of the old doctrine known as the Modern Technique of the Pistol, codified by Col. Jeff Cooper decades ago?

Admittedly, I have not seen Keller teach so I don’t know if there are ways in which his “current doctrine” represents a fundamental break from old doctrines. But it does seem to me that, like many current instructors and Gunsite Academy itself, he is standing on the shoulders of giants.

Of course, DISAGREEMENT can be a good or a bad thing for a community. From my time as a sociologist of religion, I am reminded of two different lessons from Jewish folk wisdom.

First is the quip, “Ask two Jews, get three opinions.” The positive interpretation of this highlights the creative potential of being open to different points of view and embracing civil debate. This stance may apply to gun trainers as well as they consider different approaches, test equipment and techniques through trial and error, and push themselves and others to advance the field. It’s an anti-dogmatic approach reminiscent of Rob Pincus’s “Respectful Irreverence.” or the Civilian Gunfighter blog’s recent warning to “Beware the Echo Chamber.”

But today we seem to be all about the Echo Chambers, reinforced by our homophilous social networks, old media narrowcasting, and new (social) media bubbles.

Which leads to the second bit of Jewish folk wisdom, an anecdote about a Jew discovered living alone on a desert island who has built two synagogues. Asked why, he says, “In one I pray, in the other I would never set foot.” It is not hard to imagine a gun trainer on a deserted island building two gun schools for this same reason. Here the difference emphasized is more contentious than creative. It suggests a dogmatic closing off to other points of view rather than an opening up to them. And because the gun training industry is an industry (that is, an economic enterprise), the specter of a financial incentive to create differentiation (even without difference) between one’s own products and another’s is always looming.

Of course, one of the lessons from these two bits of folk wisdom is that both of these tendencies exist within the same Jewish community. So too can they both be found in the defensive firearms community.

The question I can’t answer is whether one or the other predominates.