• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

AITA for not training folks for free?

I made a comment a while back, stating that I don't train folks for free, and that I guess I'm an ass for stating so. Apparently, it pissed at least a few folks off.

It COSTS me money to train someone. Costs me money just to take a friend to the range to plink around. Costs me money to take myself to range and just train MYSELF, all by my lonesome.

As a professional Instructor with an LLC, I maintain over $3 million in professional liability insurance, which I pay a yearly fee for. Goes everywhere I go.

I train on a piece of private property that isn't open to the public. I pay to use that.

My paper/cardboard/steel/moving targets, 1x2's, spray paint, batteries, timers, and target frames are all paid for by me. They get shot up/wore out/used up, they have to be replaced. Fuel to get to the range and back, and whatever ammo I shoot while demonstrating.

By far, the biggest expense to me is the time that I expend. Now that I'm "retired", I have 4 jobs. I'm at my full-time job 5 days a week. I try and take care of what I need to do for my other 3 jobs on the 2 days that I am "off".

My go-to plan for my 2 days off per week is to spend as much of that time as possible with my family. If I'm going to do anything for anyone for free on those 2 days, it will be my family, not a stranger I met on the internet. Folks that want me to take time away from my family will have to pay for that time. To do otherwise would mean that I value time spent with strangers as much as the time I spend with my family. Not even close.

I never ask anyone to do anything with compensation. To do otherwise means that I do not value their time, which is an insult.

Semper Fi!
Screw the whiny free loaders.
 
Reading this I see nothing wrong. But I do have a question. Unless I, as a working 20-something get a lucky, sudden windfall like a lottery win or inheritance or whatever, if we're being realistic, there's virtually no chance I'm owning land right now. Everything costs something, and as cmshoot said, time is the most valuable thing. Got other **** to do outside of training. That said, I'd still like to train when I can. In more ways than just going to the range, or going to the gym. Those things independently are great. But it's also very, very valuable to put yourself "in the field," so to speak, and ruck around, approach target positions and train your shooting fundamentals from a position as if you were in a combat zone or whatever. If we wanna save time, we can just call it LARPing lol. So, aside from just already knowing someone with land who is willing to allow that sort of training, what can someone like me, or someone in my position do to prove that we are trustworthy to perform that kind of training on someone else's property? Unsupervised or even alongside the owner if they feel like attending and taking part (training with people is always welcome.) Because on one hand, yes, you should do as you please with your land. On another hand, I think in the current world climate, it's valuable to have people who are training in these disciplines as much as possible. Again, that's not to say you owe anyone else the land, but it'd be nice to build a community of people who are capable of respecting another's property while being allowed to use it. Because not everything is about business, and one day our dollar will likely amount to nothing, but training and being an appropriately prepared and skilled citizen amounts to a whoooooooole lot. Oh and as a barrier against sue-happy morons out there, I would even encourage a landowner to draw up a detailed release of liability form and review it with anyone they deem worthy of using their property, just as a little extra security.

Anyway sorry for the essay. This is something I'd like to see seriously discussed a little more. I think it'd be okay to allow others on someone's property with appropriate vetting and precautions, and a system of building trust, and ultimately understanding that the property owner has the final say when all is said and done.
I’m retired and we enjoy a quiet, peaceful existence.
I don’t want anyone on my property period.
Paramilitary or any other similar training is flypaper for wannbe Rambos, Feds and I don’t want my dog shot.
I have just enough of friends and don’t desire to make anymore.
Not trying to be an asshole but that’s the way it is.
 
...people that have land are just expected to allow anyone to come on their property and shoot because “they don’t have anywhere to shoot”..

Reading this I see nothing wrong. But I do have a question. Unless I, as a working 20-something get a lucky, sudden windfall like a lottery win or inheritance or whatever, if we're being realistic, there's virtually no chance I'm owning land right now. Everything costs something, and as cmshoot said, time is the most valuable thing. ...Again, that's not to say you owe anyone else the land, but it'd be nice to build a community of people who are capable of respecting another's property while being allowed to use it.

Part of the problem with affording enough land to make an outdoor shooting range is residential overdevelopment and the civil law of nuisance. Noise, mostly, but also complaints about stray bullets because a HUGE PERCENTAGE of shooters are ignorant of how to safely place targets in a way that the bullets will end up in the backstop reliably. And others are slob shooters who just don't give a flying fornication. They do what they want and what pleases them for that day, without regard to the consequences to them, to the land owners, the gun club's management, or the neighbors.

To some extent, having a full time range officer for each firing line can eliminate most stray bullets, except those from a Negligent Discharge (plenty of those happen, too. Just inspect the ceiling of any indoor range, a few yards in front of the firing line. And the floor, too.)

But to some degree, the high cost of land AND the high legal liability risk is due to the legal system that the government set up. And the government can address that buy buying land and making a public range out of it. A taxpayer-funded outdoor rifle and shotgun range to do things that the current plethora of 25-yard indoor pistol ranges just can't do (even if they have some lanes where rifles and slug-shotguns are allowed).
 
I am not a personal injury lawyer with much experience in premises liability, but from what I learned in law school and bar exam prep, I think the actual risk of getting sued is substantial, but the risk of LOSING the suit and being ordered to pay damages, is pretty darn small if you (as the trainer) or you (as the landowner who had a deal with a firearms trainer to bring students to your land) if you were not negligent.

A properly worded document that serves three roles will give you a lot of protection:

1-- Assumption of Risk, with broadly-worded descriptions of what kind of hazards a person at an outdoor shooting area may face.
2-- Waiver of Right to Sue, for any negligence or gross negligence.
3-- Indemnification and Hold Harmless agreement, where the student and/or trainer promises to defend, and pay for the costs of defending, the landowner for any costs associated with some accident that happens during the use of the land.

Aside from the document, the other part of what you can do is simply DO THE RIGHT THING.
Don't be lazy, sloppy, selfish, or stupid. Know the difference between what is safe and unsafe and do things the safe way. Don't do unsafe things just because you've always gotten away with it so far.
Know what the current "prevailing in the firearms industry" standards are and follow them, even if you aren't convinced they're necessary and even if that's not how you learned from your coaches years ago, and it's not how your daddy learned to do things or how Dad taught you. Keep up on what is the "new normal" for safety expectations and just make them your new standards.
 
I do not want to sound harsh but if you were to invest your life’s savings in a plot of land, and you are familiar with liability practices in the US, you would never let anyone else run around and shoot on your property unless it means nothing to you.
Even if the owner spends hundreds or thousands of dollars on an air tight user liability acceptance policy. There is no guarantee it will protect the owner. The only safety net would be to hold a several million dollar insurance policy so someone could come shoot on your property. That may not even be enough, the policy will have exclusions. The insurance company will probably try to get out of paying after everything else.
 
Back
Top Bottom