I'd never rate a position like that.Only on the board of directors
I figure I should be OK with my Rhode Island Guido certified silk shirts.
I'd never rate a position like that.Only on the board of directors
Someone I know looked him up in the msp book, he was a trooper in 1998 at least. Nothing on rank or position at the timeJust a question, is Otwell a retired state trooper in fact? I have talked too a few retired troopers, who have never heard of him, and don’t recognize him.
He claims to have worked as a Trooper for twelve and a half years.Someone I know looked him up in the msp book, he was a trooper in 1998 at least. Nothing on rank or position at the time
Almost Never- unless the trainer promotes or suggests reckless or blatantly unlawful conduct.At what point should trainers be held liable in civil court for the actions of their trainees?
Most do not. Their primary liability exists during training, as they are responsible for supervising SAFETY at all times.I’m just wondering if trainers get to a position where the advice becomes a legal liability?
Ask a lawyer, get 3 different answers.Are they presenting legal advice?
If not, then what is the point of requiring this level of information?
Couldn’t this information all be presented in a state approved webinar for free,
then giving instructors more time to focus on practical skills?
I would imagine that trainers would need additional liability insurance just in case.
Carter is an idiot- but we already knew that. Otwell wasn't 'wrong' i providing training beyond the statute for HIS paying customers, but he was dead wrong pushing an absurd requirement on 400,000 'guards' who won't ever handle a handgun.
Millions of dollars will be wasted in the next two years on this 12 hr "Guard training" for UNARMED security workers. Companies across the state will lay-off thousands of people rather than comply with extra 'licensing' fees.
Unintended consequences- and I don't recall seeing a lesson plan from MSP Licensing- yet.
Fortunately this nonsense all died before sine die
He is both right and wrong at the same time. Post-Bruen there are four times as many instructors as there were pre-Bruen.I'm late to the party. But, my understanding is Otwell is not only partner/owner of ATFT but he also is a owner or partner in a security company.
I took a class with with them and he mentioned wanting the requirements to be raised and how other trainers in the area shouldn't be training people with just a NRA cert. It didn't really sit well with me. Supply and demand, less trainers means classes must cost more.
Eh stuff like this is always on the radar as long as you have people who feel differently than others about these topics.Agreed, but sadly it's now on their radar for future use.
He is both right and wrong at the same time. Post-Bruen there are four times as many instructors as there were pre-Bruen.
Instructors who have only taken the minimum training to acquire their certification are doing their students a disservice; but there should be no such general public training requirement whatsoever.
In my opinion, which is shared by many long time instructors, the NRA Basic Pistol Instructor cert teaches less than half of what a concealed carry instructor should learn (even if it were not an evil state required class). The good instructors know this, and most of them have been teaching since long before Bruen.
It’s a good thing it DFM, but people aren’t really getting the quality they think they are with 3 out of every 4 instructors being newbies who don’t know what they don’t know.
For sure, this side of the bay there aren't a ton of options and they gotta be the biggest. ATFT talks big about fighting Annapolis for our rights and all that jazz. I guess it's just disappointing to see this, and maybe a bit telling.Many reasons here to do some investigating and talking to the instructor before taking a course. Ask the questions.
TD
At what point should trainers be held liable in civil court for the actions of their trainees? I’m just wondering if trainers get to a position where the advice becomes a legal liability? Are they presenting legal advice? If not, then what is the point of requiring this level of information? Couldn’t this information all be presented in a state approved webinar for free, then giving instructors more time to focus on practical skills? I would imagine that trainers would need additional liability insurance just in case.
Precisely.So English as a second language teachers should be held liable if one of their students yells "Fire" in a theatre?
Driving instructors should be liable if a student of theirs kills someone while driving?
There should be no point at which an instructor should be held liable in civil court.