Validity of requiring credentials for training courses?

[phillyd2]

Admin Note: This discussion was cut out of a thread in the Events > Training forum, I liked the discussion but wanted it to move it to its own thread. - danp

The original thread referenced in this thread can be found here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

•Proof of good character from a licensed, practicing attorney

huh?

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by phillyd2

•Proof of good character from a licensed, practicing attorney

huh?

I won't speak for Mike but providing one or the other is a requirement in the vetting process. We require similar credentials to enroll in our courses.

I'd be surprised if he requires both.

[Rule10b5]

•Proof of good character from a licensed, practicing attorney

Can I write my own letter?



Edit to add: And why can't I bring a .44 Special snub revolver (my S&W 696 or 296)? I hardly ever carry my .38/.357 snubs anymore.

[Whiskey Delta]

Why an attorney?

Why not a doctor, Minister or an accountant?

How about a letter from my automobile mechanic, who is as honest as the day is long, probably more honest than *some* of the practicing attornies one might encounter...He extends me credit for car repairs because (Guess what) I too am an honest person.

Sounds like these guys are masters of 'snubbing' more than revolvers.

You know what? I am a paramedic. If I can be trusted to save your life or get your unconscious mother to the hospital without stealing her teeth, and if I can qualify for a CCW why on earth should I either pay extra for, or lean on an attorney friend to write a letter that is both redundant and of dubious value.

If they are holding to that so-called standard, they can forget my interest.

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Delta

Why an attorney?

Because they have legal standing, are held to ethical standards by the BAR association and are held accountable by the fact that they carry malpractice insurance. To misrepresent a public record such as a letter of good character is a serious infraction.

I sense a great deal of hostility in your reply. Care to share?

[Mtbkski]

I don't know a lawyer (personally). Don't have one on retainer. What would I do if I wanted to go? A good lawyer isn't going to give a good recomendation for someone he don't know. So, does this mean that I'll never be able to attend a class like this?

[MarcS]

it's a ridiculously high standard to be held to. The reason I've trained almost exclusively with Tactical Response is because when i started training at 19, they were the only group out there who wasn't flat out denying me because of my age or asking me to go to extreme lengths to prove my innocence. If you can own a gun legally, you should be good to go. There's two ways to turn me off of a course, 1) don't respect my prior training as fulfilling their prerequisites, 2) Make me go to ridiculous lengths to prove I'm a responsible citizen.

Granted, it's easy to get a permit here in PA, but what if someone from jersey wants to come out and train? They have to go find an attorney to write them a letter What if they don't know any attorneys personally? An attorney you just met or hired isn't going to write you a letter of character. As you said, tony, lawyers are held to ethical standards and can be sued for malpractice. How ethical and legally risky is is to lay claim on the character of someone you don't know?

[JustinM]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Delta

Why an attorney?

Why not a doctor, Minister or an accountant?

You know what? I am a paramedic. If I can be trusted to save your life or get your unconscious mother to the hospital without stealing her teeth, and if I can qualify for a CCW why on earth should I either pay extra for, or lean on an attorney friend to write a letter that is both redundant and of dubious value.

If they are holding to that so-called standard, they can forget my interest.

What he said.

[Whiskey Delta]

Originally Posted by TonyF

Because they have legal standing, are held to ethical standards by the BAR association and are held accountable by the fact that they carry malpractice insurance. To misrepresent a public record such as a letter of good character is a serious infraction.

I sense a great deal of hostility in your reply. Care to share?

Love to.

First of all, let me state for the record that I have no axe to grind with attorneys, but I reserve the right to throw the "Bullshit" flag when I see their handiwork.

I also have a heightened sense of the absurd, and a prickly exterior that becomes more pronounced when I am confronted with pretentious behavior. I don't like wine snobs and I don't care much for people who think that the knowledge they are imparting is soooo sensitive they require a note from my mommy to show that I am a good boy and eat all my vegetables. Actually I haven't had to obtain a note from my parents in a long time, and I guess I just bristle when someone tries to thrust me back into the crib. You know, for the children.

You seem to have no problem with this so-called 'standard'. Good for you.

I guess you would similarly have no problem providing a school with a note from your doctor stating that you don't have a mental illness, a note from your Minister that you are of good moral fiber, and a backup note from your local computer whiz attesting to the complete lack of porn on your computer.

All of which is worth the paper it is written on. Many 'practicing attorneys' run on the ethical fringe, but this guy would be happy to accept a letter of dubious value from one as long as it was written prior to that attorney's disbarment.

I qualify for a CCW in my state. My gov.org is sufficiently pleased with my lack of a criminal record to issue me the 'priveledge' of carrying lethal force.

This guy, for whatever reason, feels this is insufficient. Perhaps he is afraid of lawsuit. Perhaps he is looking to make his school appear that it has high 'standards' and therefore is worthy of attending.

Whatever. That is the pleasure of a free society. He has the right to create what I believe to be ludicrous barrier to his school doing business and I will reserve the right to shake my head sadly and go on my way.

To my thinking, if a school can't accept prima facie evidence of my suitability for instruction based on my CCW, then I am free to assume that an inane requirement on their part prior to instruction is an indictment of the quality of their instruction, all bona fides aside. Need assurances that you are not training a domestic terrorist? As an instructor of 20 years myself, I can't fathom that such a necessary value judgement can't be made in person. I would rather do that than place any faith in a letter which a high school student could generate on his computer in about 20 minutes.

So, to summarize?

Redundant, insulting, worthless and pretentious.


No hostility intended.

No lawyers were harmed in the creation of this post.

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Delta

Love to.

First of all, let me state for the record that I have no axe to grind with attorneys, but I reserve the right to throw the "Bullshit" flag when I see their handiwork.

So, to summarize?

Redundant, insulting, worthless and pretentious.

No hostility intended.

No lawyers were harmed in the creation of this post.

You just don't waltz in to a law office, pay a fee and a letter is sent. They will (or should) conduct a background check.

The problem I have with those of you that feel offended by this standard is that inquiries such as this should be made directly to the instructor or school and not on a public forum specifically due to the tone of some of the comments.

Like it or not instructors and schools do have to be concerned with their reputations and liability issues. It's a business decision and some of you seem to be taking it personal. Last thing we need is the criminal element attending classes and it gets splashed all over the headlines.

FWIW, the F.I.R.E. Institute requirements are LE and .mil credentials or CCW permit for civilians. We've had inquiries about our minimum age of 18 and the reason is that we require students to sign hold harmless agreements and anyone under the age of 18 cannot enter into a legal contract. The parent or guardian cannot sign a legal contract on behalf of a child.