Looking for some info on CRI, from people who've attended their courses.

Cheers

CRI is a great school. Keep in mind that you will be taught the Israeli method of PSD, shooting, surveillance, etc. I had a great time there, and learned a lot from the lead instructor.

Cassius

Center for advanced security studies?

Here is a recent video shoot on CRI, this is a great snap shot on what you will learn.

g4tv.com/attackofthesh...chool.html

Cassius

From what i see in the video:

1) His stance explanation is way off center. We use isosceles stance because it's more stable than the traditional weaver - especially in civilian environs where you may have panicking civvies running into you.

2) They have serious safety issues; the shooting from the table whilst someone is on the ground between you and the target
2.1) On the bike without helmets...

Small things, but i personally wasn't impressed. Nothing against the company, just from what i saw in the video. I am aware that there were probably hours of footage and we simply may not be shown the full stance explanation....


H

I believe he was talking about the weaver and how it isnt a good stance, not promoting it. As far as safety, realistic trsining is outside the box for most shooters, even people who do alot of tactical shooting. I was never in danger while training with Doron, and helmets, its Nevada.

Cassius

Cassius wrote:

I believe he was talking about the weaver and how it isnt a good stance, not promoting it. As far as safety, realistic trsining is outside the box for most shooters, even people who do alot of tactical shooting. I was never in danger while training with Doron, and helmets, its Nevada. Cassius

I understand what he was saying about the Weaver, it's just incorrect:
All the physiology mistakes about why standing square is better; the fact that you're a smaller target when in isosceles stance - all very incorrect, and the mistakes have nothing to do with shooting, but everything to do with anatomy and physics. He even says "when you're side facing the target you have all your important organs exposed, your heart and two lungs" ....

He mentions that an instructor of his is a surgeon and says that grouping is not good....c'mon guys, what surgeon would work at any other work but surgery? My initial thoughts are that this was said to try save face for a large grouping.

Regarding safety, and I'm writing as a student, instructor and company owner - more important than skills, more important than everything else, is safety of students. The law does not require that we wear knee protection, gum guards etc. but that does not mean we do not issue them to keep our students safe. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet whether legal or not is plain reckless and anyone asking a student to do that should rethink.

Whilst i am a huge advocate of realistic training, i am totally against endangering students or staff to achieve this. There needs to be a balance and safety must be a priority, no compromise on this. The falling off the chair with live rounds and people at the table was pointless and reckless and i do not see any value in that exercise. It was also incorrect, the shooter getting up and walking backwards whilst shooting??/ No point whatsoever.

Not impressed.

H

You can use your weaver, maybe everyone else has it wrong. I wanted to let you and everyone else know that the surgon works at a Las vegas hospitol and only teaches classes on call. He has a background in overseas trauma work and knows what he is talking about. Grouping is important to teach a shooter how to hit what they shoot at consistently, agreed. Combat shooting is not as neat, and more tramua over the body, the better. This kind of training isnt for everyone, if you want to keep the training wheels on, dont attend. There are plenty of lawn chair, lets all shoot online schools to attend out there.

Cassius