Hell in a Handbasket

Both you gentlemen make excellent points.In a litigation arena that is anti-gun the courts would have a field day with an affidavit mentioning "guns","shooting","teaching" should something adverse occur.The problem is resolved by sending new or inexperienced shooters to the professionals(the instructors with lawyers) and taking friends,family or other known safe shooters to the range for practice-not instruction.

I hardly know how to begin to form a response to this. First, I do not "advertise". Advertising implies selling. Second, I do not claim to be an expert on personal safety or firearms, and aside from basic safety and firearm handling, I am not teaching anyone how to shoot. I require everyone I take to the range to know the 4 Rules, I have taken a man to the range (and have another male friend who is going to try shooting soon), and would never EVER go to the range with anyone that made me feel even the tiniest bit uncomfortable. (and believe me, I tend to be uncomfortable around strangers. It would take many, many exchanged emails before I'd take someone I've never met in person to the range.)

That said, I will not continue to waste my time defending myself because I am guilty of nothing.

First, I do not "advertise". Advertising implies selling.

No, you're wrong. Advertising can simply be informing, and that is exactly what you are doing with the invitation on your blog. Money changing hands isn't necessary.

Second, I do not claim to be an expert on personal safety or firearms, and aside from basic safety and firearm handling, I am not teaching anyone how to shoot.

You are wrong again, because no one would think you meant anything else when you say "... I will provide the arms, ammunition, targets, safety equipment, range fees and instruction." Certainly sounds to me like you are claiming that you know what you are doing.

That said, I will not continue to waste my time defending myself because I am guilty of nothing.

This statement seems rather odd to me. I'm offering you some sound advice in an attempt to help you and others head off some potentially serious trouble, and you are offended???

Okay, forget anything I said. Give loaded guns to random strangers on the street for all I care.

James

You advice sounds like a way to be safe and sane. Too bad Breda didn't take it in the spirit it was intended.

I think that since Breda and Armed Canadian are not offering anything of value, making no claims of value, or charging any fees, they have little liability except for injury(maybe).

I think that since Breda and Armed Canadian are not offering anything of value, making no claims of value, or charging any fees, they have little liability except for injury(maybe).

That is a very good point, vinnie, and it goes a long way towards proving my point.

What happens if someone who visited the range with either one has an "accident" when they get home? They could claim that their instructor was negligent in explaining safe gun handling procedures.

So how does Breda or Armed Canadian defend themselves against such a charge? Are they following a lesson plan that they could introduce in court?

Look, I've been teaching armed self defense techniques for close to 18 years. It is just good sense to think of these things before there is trouble. You certainly can't do much if you haven't prepared in advance.

James

James,

You are a very nice man and I understand that you probably wrote the two posts out of concern. But they very specifically singled me out for scrutiny, even when there are plenty of other bloggers that offer the same opportunity to newbie shooters. If you had addressed me personally (my email address is on my site, as you know) before you publicly criticized my "methods" and used me as an example on your blog, I might not have felt so offended.

Misunderstandings are common when using the internet for communication, and I apologize for any that might have occurred.

I think the middle ground is that if you intend to have an open offer to take people to the range you need to understand the parameters of what is happening. If you are setting yourself up to be an "instructor" then you are buying some liability.

You can remove a lot of liability by going to a public range, and having the range master explain the basics and safety rules to the new shooter.

I believe that the sprit of the offer is to provide a way for people who have never shot to go shooting, rather than offer of free 'training.' I completely support this idea, as many people wouldn't know how to begin the process.

But they very specifically singled me out for scrutiny, even when there are plenty of other bloggers that offer the same opportunity to newbie shooters. If you had addressed me personally (my email address is on my site, as you know) before you publicly criticized my "methods" and used me as an example on your blog, I might not have felt so offended.

Fair enough. But I did mention in the post where I started to discuss the subject that I was using you as an example because it seems that a lot of bloggers in my blogroll had deleted their own invitations over the past few years. "There used to be more, but Breda was the only one I could find." was what I said.

So far as sending you a cautionary Email in private, then it would have defeated the purpose of this blog, which is to help as many people as I can. It would have been okay for you, but what about anyone else who hasn't considered the liability or discrimination angle, yet they still offer to introduce strangers to the shooting sports? My hope is that they will read this post and give the issues raised here some thought.

MostlyGenius proves that his name is spot on in the comment directly above this one, where he states "If you are setting yourself up to be an "instructor" then you are buying some liability." It is important for people to realize that there are sometimes bad consequences for innocent actions, even when they are trying to do right.

As a final note, the last paragraph of the post is still in force.

James

James:

What happens if someone she doesn't know, never met, calls her up out of the blue and says "I read your blog and want to learn how to shoot?" Because a reasonable person could assume that this is exactly what she wants just by the wording of the invitation on her sidebar.

That's because that's almost exactly what she wants. Me, too. I make the same offer with almost the same wording, though I don't limit myself to only one gender. It's near the top of my sidebar, and I'm considering moving it to the top of the page like Armed Canadian has done. It's been there pretty much since I started blogging five years ago, and this page of others offering similar opportunities is still active (if slow to load.) How accurate that list is after a few years is open to question.

I make it apparent to anyone who contacts me that I am offering an introduction to firearms and shooting only, and that I am not a professional instructor. If they want professional training, they'll need to find an NRA certified instructor. I've had a couple back out because of that, and that's fine.

But I'm also not getting too many hits. Four people have carried through since I began the offer, and two were females - one, a 63 year-old librarian preparing to retire who loved my full-sized Kimber .45, but ended up getting a revolver, and the other a twenty-something self-described Libertarian who was tired of being the only one in her clique who was afraid of guns but embarrassed to admit it. I think I helped her overcome her fear (but she didn't like the .45!)

Do we assume some risk in taking people out shooting? Yes, obviously. Is it worth it? I think so. So does Breda, obviously, and so does Armed Canadian.

Finally, I appreciate the fact that you do this as a profession - but bear in mind that people have been learning to shoot ever since the gun was invented. Professionals have their place, but so do "amateurs."