You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant...........

..sceptin' Alice.

And, the onslaught continues..............is it just me or does anyone else notice anything missing from this discussion? Yep, you're right....................Joe Penaz is missing. I wonder how many of his bashers have even met him, but yet here they are attacking this guy because of his yard...........or wait.........I almost forgot about his less-than-formidable website.

I find it amazing that throughout this onslaught of unprovoked attacks that the person being attacked has not once.............that's right............not one time attacked his attackers or provoked anyone in this thread. What's really amazing........and what I believe is at the core of this attack................is that throughout all the bashing and attacks, Joe Penaz continues to fill his classes.

If this isn't bad enough, some of you start tromping on newcomer, Nitro because he misspells a couple of words and may not use perfect grammar.

Some instructors on this forum have expressed frustration from permit holders that took PTC classes from "outside" instructors, then join this forum to ask questions. Well then, what exactly is the purpose of this message forum? Is this forum just here for instructors to compare notes? I've personally witnessed more than a few new members come here for help, get squashed and made out to be a idiot..............then leave.........never to be heard from again. Who knows..............maybe Nitro will just vanish too after the thrashing he just received.

2 important things in this Coconut Charlie thread are apparent to me. 1) The 11 pages of attacks on this instructor named Joe Penaz who has the same basic wants concerning 2A and gun ownership as the people attacking him. 2) The silence from the instructor being attacked, but still instructing many, many students.

Like I said, maybe it's just me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only thing I want from Alice's is a waffle, hash browns an order of bacon and a chance to run Skyline blvd and Hwy 84 a couple more times. One of the few things that make me envious of Californians is the roads and how incredibly perfect they are for motorcycling.


PS I should have read the rest of the thread, oops.

Ok, I'm getting grumpy. Nitro did NOT get slammed, trust me. If you knew Andrew, you'd know just how light Nitro got off.

Why did we take issue with his post?



BECAUSE THIS IS OUTRIGHT WRONG, AND IF HE WAS TAUGHT THIS THEN HIS INSTRUCTOR IS DOING A SHITTY JOB.

I don't give a damn about the guy's grammar, although I do tend to pay more attention to those who speak and write with a degree of elegance.

I know the MADFI curriculum pretty damn well (shit, I can quote most of it verbatim), and let me tell you, it's very low on "feeling" and very heavy on the law. Why? Because the law dictates what you can and cannot do. It's that simple.

And I'll bet that Joel, Cobb, Kimberman, David Gross, BPR, and a plethora of other instructors (who, by the way, aren't all part of the same group...not by a long shot) all spend far more time on the law in their classes than they do on feelings.

I have two goals if I ever have a DGU:

1) Stay alive, and keep my loved ones alive
2) Keep my ass out of prison

That's it. If I need to talk about feelings, I'll go see my pastor.

-Mark

It was asked and commented thusly:

Why did we take issue with his post? (that said...)

Ultimately, it does not matter what the law says, because a jury will end up decieding if a shooting is justified or not, and YOU will have to live with your decision to use deadly force. I actually think this is more important, because face it, if you are in a situation where you use dealy force, obviosly you were in fear for your life.

BECAUSE THIS IS OUTRIGHT WRONG, AND IF HE WAS TAUGHT THIS THEN HIS INSTRUCTOR IS DOING A SHITTY JOB.----

No it is not wrong. It is actually not that far off.

I did not read the post at all the way others here have read it. I interpret the post to mean that going to court is a crap shoot. Although 'tis true that the jury must stay within the bounds of the law, their decisions are very often based upon emotion and feeling. Some jury consultants opine that in a criminal trial, it is not unusual for a juror to make an initital decision on guilt/innocence within a few minutes of seeing the defendant...even before any evidence is given. Then, that juror cherry picks evidence ...accepting as true that which supports that decision, and rejecting that which does not. Juries have great latitude in accepting and weighing evidence. It is indeed a crap shoot. "Feelings" and "emotion" ceertainly can play a significant part in criminal jury trials.

Everyone here knows that given the exact same facts, different juries might well render completely different results. Jury consultants also will opine that it is very possible to lose a case in the jury selection process. Why? Because feelings, emotion, personal backgrounds, attitude, religion, philosophy etc etc all play into a juror's deliberation process.

Of course the LAW is important. It acts as an ultimate rein on juror's feelings. But, to suggest that an instructor does a shitty job because he or she emphasizes the reality of trials is, in my opinion, wrong.

The poster may have inarticulately expressed his opinion, or used hyperbole to suggest that "Ultimately, it does not matter what the law says"; but that is no more hyperbole based than saying that instructors do a shitty job if that is emphasized. I guess I am shitty then.

Do a few trials and see for yourself how jurors and juries think. If you think that fairness, truth and justice prevail because the law is clearly on your side, well.....that might happen, and it might not. It is often a crap shoot that has many, many variables in addition to the black/white letter of the law.

(Oh, I am getting seasick from the thread drift! Have a great holiday folks!)

I'll disagree with a caveat (which perhaps I should have originally stated). It means the instructor does a shitty job if they gloss over the law in favor of other things.

Nitro said that the required material was gone through quickly in favor of the things that mattered to him, and I have an issue with that. If you want to cover more, please, by all means do so. I agree that its a good concept to discuss the aftermath and the realities of what is going to happen to you if you end up using your gun. But drill the law into folks. Over. And over. And over.

-Mark

[site owner hat on]No, I haven't, and don't say that I have. It's wrong of you to do so. Stop it. You won't say that twice again here. You've been cautioned about this misrepresentation privately; you're now being publicly admonished. At this point, it's mattering less and less whether you're simply being obtuse or are deliberately misrepresenting what I've repeatedly written. I won't put up with it anymore. You're on probation here. Stop it.[site owner hat off]

I like it when people come here to ask questions, generally. That's part of the fun of the Forum for me, and for a lot of folks.

There are exceptions. One of those exceptions is when inadequate instructors rush through or skimp on the important stuff in their carry classes -- presumably there's bowling balls to be drilled, or lubricants to sell, or maybe they don't really know <s>some</s> a whole lot of the important stuff -- and then point their students to the Forum (or to my cell phone, dammit) as their aftermarket support.

I think that's wrong, and I know that's an imposition. And I don't like it.

Joel, to be clear, you are stating that some instructors (and I use that term loosely) literally send their students to this site, and to you personally to get clarification on questions that were either not covered, or not satisfactorily addressed during their own class? I believe this is what you are saying...and if so, after nearly 12 pages of back-and-forth, what more is there to say?

This whole thread reminds me of my days practicing martial arts - the fights and arguments about who was the true master and who had the blessing of who to pass on what secrets will go on forever, entertaining to watch, but important to only those directly affected. The difference here is that that the subject at hand is life-and-death, right-and-wrong - there is no room for error and there are no "UNDO's" - dead is dead.

Were I an instructor, I would likely use Joel and his peers as a reference of information and technique - however, were I an instructor who sent my own students to Joel and his peers for reference and technique, I think it would be time for me to either get myself up-to speed, or get out of the game. The former is required, the latter is just plain responsible -

Yes. "Some" is at least one, and I believe that it's been at least several, in the past. That said, the worst offender, Joe Penaz, has explicitly promised that he won't do it any more. That said, Joe hasn't kept his explicit promises to me on other matters -- I'm sure he's got long and twisty little explanations -- so I don't believe him.

But, yup.

Again, since some folks don't get it (I'm not talking about you): I think it's great if instructors send their carry permit students here to supplement a good class. I know a lot of great instructors who do that. (Those of you here who do, feel free to say so. I think you are doing your students a favor, and it's good for all concerned.)

There's a lot of very smart, informed folks, who post here, after all. Where else do you get folks like kimberman and Dick Unger and Jeff and -- well, if I go on, I'll leave some smart, informed folks out, so I won't -- writing at length and in depth on these issues every day? If you know of one, point it out; I wanna take advantage of that, too.

I don't think it's okay to use the Forum as a supplement for inadequate instruction.

Some do, and that's fine. Encouraged, even -- and it's great when the instructors (as is true for many) participate in the discussions here, as there's a lot to learn. I think I'm pretty familiar with many of the issues and the details around them, but I learn a lot, here; maybe others can, too.

That said: there are a very small number of instructors among the not much larger number of people who have been and remain banned from the Forum for misbehavior. Those folks -- who don't include Penaz; we've had that discussion before, and I'll go through it again, if necessary -- are still welcome to send their students here as a supplement to a good class, if they teach a good class. Honest. Off the top of my head, people who I think are both certified instructors and who I know are banned here include Gary Shade and Andy Shapero. I think that's it, although it's possible that Pat Couteaux and Dallas Laurents and Ken Jones are certified instructors somewhere, although I doubt it, and hope not. They certainly are banned here. Permanently.

Lots and lots of instructor participate here. The Instructors user group runs more than a page, and I'm pretty sure not all of the instructors who have accounts here have been added to it. (If you're an instructor, haven't been added to that usergroup, and want to, please contact any admin. Preferably not me; I'm lazy.)

There's plenty of other instructors who don't participate here, of course; that's fine. Free country.

Point taken, hence I edited the said post to better portray my opinion.

Most forums I belong to (and there many) were designed to be informative and helpful to any AND all newcomers.............making the newcomers feel welcome and comfortable asking questions. I'm sure you've heard it said: "There's no such thing as a stupid question". Well, I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that's not always the case on this forum.......as stated earlier.

If in fact this forum exists to help and inform permit holders, then it only makes sense (IMO) that instructors that frequent this forum would get satisfaction from helping others to insure their safety while protecting themselves. As far as a named instructor passing out cell numbers of other instructors for follow-up questions............I find that hard to believe. I know my instructor didn't encourage any students in our class to go elsewhere for any questions. Maybe some instructors her would like to prove me wrong with names or documents of said students.

Regarding probation.............honestly, I'm surprised this site's owner hasn't given me the boot along time ago. Seems like the norm around here...........with "Rule Zero" and all. I belong to at least 20 motorcycle and gun forums and have never been threatened with probation for expressing my opinion.

Lastly, it appears that "Coconut Charlie" offers assistance 24/7...........see for yourself: http://www.joepenaz.me/ [Edited by word filter: I'm getting pretty damn tired of you pimping for him, Mikie. JR]

I give my students a web resources list of the sites I get my information from and sites I frequent to stay updated. This site is on that list and I encourage every student to become a forum member.

It's really, really far off.

Of course the jury's emotions matter. But the emotions of the shooter -- particularly "fear" -- have no legal relevance. I believe that Nitro walked away thinking that "reasonably in fear of death or great bodily harm" referred to an emotional state, not a legal one.

That's the hole we're driving a semi through.

Well, but there are. The first time you drive up to the takeout window at Mickey D's and ask, "Instead of chicken nuggets, can I get Trumpeter Swan?" it may not be a stupid question. The fiftieth time, it is. Yup. And I think we do. I'm not sure what exact mechanism Penaz used to tell his students to call me with questions. I think part of it was what he's now taken down from his website; part of it was probably (because that's what the folks who called me said) something like, "Oh, just call my buddy Joel about that. He knows a lot about that stuff." I doubt he printed out cards and handed them out, though; that would have both cost him money and left a paper trail. Oh, grow up. You've already played that game -- and when one of Penaz's students said, clearly, that his experience with Penaz's class was just like what was portrayed at that ripoffreport.com critique, you dismissed it. You can't keep playing that card. Honest. Yup. It is. To quote from the rules: I think there's probably a dozen or so folks (maybe two dozen; not three dozen) who have been Rule Zeroed out of here, after almost four years, more than seventeen hundred registered users, and closing in on 150,000 posts. Yup -- that's the norm when people insist on playing that game. Over and over again. It's my fault; I think I attract them, unintentionally. Wish I knew what it was that I was doing -- I'd rather apply those skills to hot, open-minded supermodels whose fathers own gun shops.

Mikie, I really think you'd be happier over at the day care site. That's what it's good for.