NW Training & Consulting

03/24/2026

A Tale of Two Headlines

(Involving vehicles and assault)

Out of Lexington Kentucky we have the story of 20-year-old Kaydence Carpenter.

Last Sunday morning (Saturday night after the bars closed, really) young Ms. Carpenter found herself with a considerable number of people milling about in the parking lot, apparently exchanged some words, got into her Tesla and after some preliminaries, drove through the crowd, striking multiples persons with her car.

In other news, celebrity star of “Reacher” and other TV and movies, Alan Ritchson was involved in an altercation with a neighbor while Mr. Ritchson was on his motorcycle. Mr. Ritchson was with his two sons on their own motorcycles during daylight when confronted by the neighbor, and subsequently a fistfight broke out between the two men.

So let’s discuss road rage for a moment. Links to articles will be in comments on the original post- click through to this page).

I have said before on numerous occasions that being trapped in your vehicle in an aggressive crowd of pedestrians is a dangerous situation that can, in some circumstances justify using your vehicle as a weapon to force your way free of danger. It’s not a light decision and we certainly want to avoid it if at all possible.

Witness testimony and video from Ms. Carpenter’s incident is pretty clear. There was a crowd of unruly people. Very likely most of them had been drinking. There may have been a racial and or sexual component to comments tossed about towards Ms. Carpenter. What we don’t see on the video is any attempt to physically accost her or damage her car. There is some disrespectful and unjustified contact with her vehicle. A guy plops his rear on her hood and slides down it. Not particularly showing intent to damage it; just disrespect and disdain- ‘coup-counting’.

Carpenter backs her car up into the ‘lane’ of the parking lot. She then moves her car back into the parking stall. One might opine it is abruptly, in a threatening manner. She backs up again. She does not turn her wheels during these maneuvers as if she will exit the parking lot via the designated exit. After backing up the second time, she guns the vehicle forward into the parking stall, over the concrete curb stop, over the sidewalk, and over the curb into the street.

She strikes several people and risks striking several more. A narrator of cell phone video captured makes it clear her intentions were obvious; the narrator warns people repeatedly that Carpenter is about to ram them.

Police pull Carpenter over soon after, not far away, going the wrong direction down the street. Officers assessed her as impaired due to drinking (refused breath test, smelled of alcohol, slurred speech, eyes showed signs of intoxication, failed field sobriety test at the station.) She was also in possession of a fake ID. They charged her with multiple assaults and DUII.

Some people are holding this girl up like a poster child… I can only because she is white and most of the crowd were black. They cite a “rowdy mob”. This young lady is no hero, and she is not a victim. Yes, there was a rowdy crowd of drunk people there. She was part of it. No matter what anybody said, there is no visible justification for a claim of self defense or need to escape. She made multiple threatening gestures with her car, but never tried to simply drive it to the exit and leave before ramming pedestrians. She used her car to punish people for disrespect (to stretch the point in her favor) not to defend herself or even avoid damage to property. In fact, driving over the curb stop almost certainly caused more damage to her car than anything else.

On to Mr. Ritchson.

The neighbor involved claims Ritchson has made a habit of riding his motorcycle at high speed through the neighborhood, revving loudly, and making a nuisance/danger of himself. The altercation was first published as a view from inside a house with no audio, showing Ritchson off his motorcycle bike laid down) and punching Mr. Taylor. Subsequent video posted by Mr. Taylor himself admits to pushing Ritchson while the latter was on his bike, and attempts to justify it. A body or helmet cam from Mr. Ritchson shows a more complete view from the beginning and includes some audio.

Mr. Taylor steps into the street to confront Mr. Ritchson. Whatever may have happened earlier, Mr. Ritchson’s video shows his speed as under 25 MPH which is consistent with neighborhood streets. Mr. Ritchson’s sons are on minibikes behind him and do not take part in the confrontation, but it is significant to note that a parent with their children in tow are more likely to feed a reasonable need to respond defensively.

Mr. Taylor physically blocks the road with his body while haranguing Ritchson. Video is less than perfectly clear, but witness statements, video, and Mr. Taylor’s statements all seem to agree Taylor pushed or struck Ritchson hard enough to knock him over and drop his bike at least twice. The video shows Mr. Taylor being pretty aggressive from the beginning, no attempt to wave down for a civil discussion, not preliminary conversation, just yelling and pushing. Ritchson gets off the bike (apparently still idling while laid down). At this point the men struggle and Ritchson punches Taylor several times. At least some of the punching is while Taylor is standing fully upright, and perhaps even while he is on the ground. Ritchson gives multiple directions to “stay down”. This may give a shallow impression being a dominance move, but remember that “violence often comes with instructions on how to avoid it.”

Taylor started the physical aggression and participated in it with more shoving and possibly punching while being punched by Ritchson, despite the fight seeming to go mostly one way (Ritchson is a very large, physically fit man, and Taylor appears to be older, smaller, and less fit- the whole incident is pretty questionable wisdom on his part) Ritchson doesn’t kick Taylor or hit him more than seems necessary to make him stop returning to engagement. Once Taylor stays put for a few seconds, Ritchson retreats to his bike and puts his helmet back on to leave. Taylor then approaches once again, but wisely stays just out of punching range. Reasonable interpretation: Ritchson uses enough force to gain compliance and stop the threat, and retreats when it is safe and feasible. The interaction counts as road rage because Taylor initiated an interaction with a driver based on his perception of the driver’s behavior, blocking traffic and battering the driver (assault and battery- the assault is the threat or risk of physical damage, the laying on of hands is the battery part. Specifics of how this plays out vary slightly in legal language from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.) Mr. Taylor has a British accent, perhaps he hasn’t fully grasped American jurisprudence on assault and self-defense.

I would not be surprised to see charges filed on Mr. Taylor. Potentially a civil suit as well. Pushing a person over on a motorcycle could quite easily result in a serious bodily injury such as a broken leg. That bike weighs several hundred pounds. It undoubtedly resulted in damages to the bike itself.

03/08/2026

I made a comment on a post in a group and thought it worthwhile to expand upon the idea here.

You know, people look for all kinds of reasons for things going wrong that don't reflect on our choices. There is also a ton of wrong, even outright bad advice on these here interwebs.

Here goes:

As an instructor, I always caution people against topping off their pistol mag after clambering a round.

"X+1" is marketing hype, not best practice. A significant number of failures to feed during range training come down to failing to feed the next round after topping off the mag. (Lots of instructors see this, and it's a common discussion from instructors with national reputation and high volumes of students).

FtF also includes any variation of not coming back into battery due to *feeding problems*, not just failing to get the round out of the mag. So action jamming open, round not chambered/not fully chambered, chamber not locking up, whatever. Even a failure to extract if it is due to slide not freely traversing to the rear due to friction from top round.

The additional tension/friction from it makes feeding the top round just too unpredictable. I'm not going to opine as to whether any specific gun brand is better or worse. It's a problem common across many brands.

When you manually cycle the action the first time to chamber the top round, your mechanical force pulling the slide to the rear is much greater (and slower) than the blowback action.

The additional round in a topped-off mag is not worth sacrificing reliable feeding. After all, if you have to tap/rack you're losing both time and probably a cartridge too.

Lots of magazines are really *expletive deleted* hard to fill to rated capacity anyway. 17 rd mags get really stiff at the top. We often recommend running them "downloaded" a round or two until the firearm has several hundred to a couple thousand rounds through it, just so it is "broken in" and any microscopic mfg variations are worn off. The magazine follower spring gets softer (or breaks, this is "metal fatigue") from duty cycles, not from being in a compressed state, but over-stretching or over-compressing a spring can also damage it.

Many casual shooters will literally take years to achieve 2000 rounds through their gun, much less all their magazines.

I'd far rather see people focus on shot placement than shot volume, this is one area the Fudds aren't completely wrong. I'd like to see you have both available to you, skill AND capacity.

But risk management is a game of trade-offs. Nothing comes for free. It's okay to spend more money for "insurance" but sometimes we take actions *assuming they improve our risk posture* that actually *make our exposure worse*, and if we don't test them until the hazard manifests, we don't know the problems that can occur.

So, how would you test for this problem?

You're going to need SEVERAL magazines. These should be the standard capacity mags designed for your firearm (i.e. if you have low cap mags designed for compliance with some benighted and unconstitutional state law, this is less of an issue). If you have two different capacity mags (15rd and 17rd) you would want to test them with other, like magazines, 15s with 15s, 17s with 17s.

Fill the all the way. Chamber a round and back-fill your first mag.

Now your drill is controlled pairs and mag switch. Two shots back-to-back as quickly as you can reliably put them center mass, drop the mag and insert fresh fully-topped off mag, 2 shots, repeat.

When you get to the last of your mags, you can move on to other drills. But start your range time with this drill until you have a reasonable sample set. For example, you have 5 mags, you might do this drill the next 20 times you hit the range and have z sample set of 100 shots from topped off x+1 state.

Take note of ANY failures. One failure in 100 is 1%. This is still a small sample, and you may not produce the problem, but if you get a handful of failures out of 100 test shots, you know you have a problem to address.

You should also STRONGLY consider numbering your mags. Magazines are a semi-expendable. Sometimes a specific magazine is damaged and cannot be repaired, but they all look pretty much the same, so numbering allows you to get a sense of one that is consistently associated with problems. (Thanks to a reader for reminding me to include this.)

We're going to presume that you have an adequate grip and are not limp-wristing, but be aware a minor tendency to limp wrist at the same time as this could become a "stacking" failure mode that otherwise would not be an issue. Just like other issues could stack: feed ramp polish/geometry of feedramp/bullet nose interface, recoil spring weight vs. specific bullet weight and powder charge etc.

As always, stay safe out there.

02/27/2026

Available at a discount today:

Do you get anxiety when you think about traveling to a foreign country? Do you want to see the world and have epic adventures while simultaneously avoiding the risk of death or dismemberment? If you want to do dangerous things in a safe manner, this book is for you. Career police officer and v...

02/26/2026

Interesting how poor some organizations' support can be.

I've been a CPR instructor for several years. I started with PADI's (professional Association of Dive Instructors) Emergency First Response instructor.

I had an absolutely outstanding master instructor in that program, Nicolle Pratt, who is a PADI Course Director. But the instructor support website and procedures were always a bit lacking. The EFR program is treated separately from the Dive Professional Instructor website, even though it's part of their instructor development to become an EFR instructor.

So renewals and student registration and stuff like that was never really strongly and smoothly supported while I was in that program. The marketing materials for getting courses posted online was basically non-existent, so reaching students depended very strongly on being associated with a specific dive shop driving students your way as part of another program leading toward advanced divers, dive master or dive instructor. Outside of dive shops, the EFR program was poorly recognized as meeting OSHA/workplace certification requirements, so it was a constant matter of explaining to potential non-diving students that it would cover their professional workplace needs.

When I started, there was a bridge program (reciprocal recognition plus a nominal administrative training and some specifics of course materials) from EFR instructor to American Red Cross (ARC) instructor and possibly some other programs, but this no longer exists I carried both Red Cross and EFR certifications for several years but eventually dropped EFR due to low student interest and lack of openness to affiliation with dive shops. There are a couple shops around that offer EFR, but they like to keep all their courses to in-house employees, not an independent training business like mine.

Red cross has a LOT of support materials in the instructor site. I can get all digital materials, or order course materials and training aids from the Red Cross store pretty easily. It does get a little confusing (and expensive) when trying to register courses on their website for advertising, and to get student course completion registered.

Also, despite public name recognition, there seems to be a strong preference in this region for American Heart Association courses, and pretty much every professional medical organization that requires CPR training for their employees and associates, doesn't accept Red Cross to fulfill BLS for healthcare providers.

I've been looking into adding AHA (w/o dropping ARC). The problem is their website and email support have been abysmal about finding criteria for Training Center/Training Site other than becoming an instructor under someone else's organization. I've been given multiple pointers to website resources (pages) that don't exist or have automatic re-direct configured to the splash page. 3 responses repeating useless advice I specifically pointed out in the previous email. Very frustrating.

Nevertheless, I shall persevere, and expect to be offering AHA courses by summertime.

02/25/2026

The explosion of AI-generated images and video has really reached critical mass in the last few months. Everybody is using it. Heck- I've used it, it simply means getting left in the dust to not use it.

But it comes with lots of problems of accuracy. Once particularly relevant issue to my passion for safety, is depicting poor fi****ms handling practices. To do my tiny part in stemming the flood of images depicting unsafe practices, I present some AI prompt generation cues her (copy the whole thing into a document format for easier understanding and modification).

Introduction: AI image generation is now providing tools to everybody that are super easy and cheaper than ever before. But it does come with some learning curve and frustration, and some inherent sloppiness due to the AI being non-determinative (it’s not precise, it just emulates examples in a general way.)
To build a high-quality set of prompts and rules generating images for fi****ms instruction purposes, you can use the JSONL (JSON Lines) format. Each line in the file represents a single training "example" consisting of a system instruction, a user prompt, and the ideal model response. Use the content between the asterisks:

***********************************************************************

{"contents": [{"role": "user", "parts": [{"text": "How should a person hold a firearm while walking to a firing line?"}]}, {"role": "model", "parts": [{"text": "The firearm must be pointed in a safe direction (usually downrange or holstered). Crucially, the finger must remain outside the trigger guard and indexed along the frame. The finger only touches the trigger when the shooter is on target and has made the conscious decision to fire."}]}]}
{"contents": [{"role": "user", "parts": [{"text": "Describe the correct way to hand a pistol to another person."}]}, {"role": "model", "parts": [{"text": "First, ensure the action is open and the chamber is empty. Point the muzzle in a safe direction. As you hand it over, your finger must be straight and away from the trigger. The recipient must also keep their finger off the trigger until they are ready to engage a target."}]}]}
{"contents": [{"role": "user", "parts": [{"text": "What is the rule regarding the trigger during the loading process?"}]}, {"role": "model", "parts": [{"text": "While loading or unloading a firearm, the finger must never be on the trigger. It should be placed flat against the receiver or frame. You only move your finger to the trigger once the gun is aimed at a identified target and you are prepared to shoot."}]}]}
{"contents": [{"role": "user", "parts": [{"text": "Is it acceptable to rest your finger on the trigger if the safety is on?"}]}, {"role": "model", "parts": [{"text": "No. Mechanical safeties can fail. A primary rule of gun safety is to keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until you have identified a safe target and are about to fire. The safety is a supplement to, not a substitute for, proper finger discipline."}]}]}

***********************************************************************
Alternatively, if the above is too confusing or intimidating, you can keep it in descriptive English and set up permanent instructions. Add these preferences to your 'Your instructions for Gemini' setting at https://gemini-dot-google-dot-com/saved-info. Other AI agents will have similar options.
Safety Alignment: When deploying this, you can set "System Instructions" that force the model to reject generating any images or text where a character is casually "resting" a finger on a trigger.
Validation: Use a separate "Golden Set" of questions to test if the model correctly identifies safety errors in provided text. For example, "is the finger position in accordance with NRA's rules for safe gun handling?"

Proposed System Prompt for Firearm Safety Compliance
You can paste the following block into a new chat or your "Instructions" setting to lock in these behaviors:
System Instruction: You are an expert advisor on firearm safety, strictly adhering to NRA fundamental rules. For every response involving fi****ms, you must:
Enforce Finger Discipline: In any text-based description or hypothetical image generation/analysis, the finger must remain indexed along the frame/receiver and off the trigger unless the character has identified a target, is in a safe environment to shoot, and is actively in the process of firing.
Contextual Policing: Explicitly flag and correct any scenario where a finger is on the trigger during:
Loading or unloading.
Handing a firearm to another person.
Cleaning or displaying a firearm.
Holding a firearm in a neutral, "low ready," or "high ready" position.
The Three Rules: Always prioritize (1) Safe Direction, (2) Finger off the trigger until ready to fire, and (3) Keep the gun unloaded until ready for use.

Verification Example
To ensure the "training" is working, we can run a test. If I were to describe a scene under these rules, it would look like this:
User: "Describe a soldier standing guard with a rifle."
Model: "The soldier stands at a high-port position. Their muzzle is pointed upward in a safe direction. Their trigger finger is straight and pressed firmly against the side of the rifle's receiver, well away from the trigger guard, as they are not currently engaging a target."

02/20/2026

Good commentary

01/30/2026

FYI, I am now required to collect sales tax for "Live Presentations" and classroom-based training in Washington state. CPR training, concealed carry training, all has to have sales tax added and remitted.

1-on-1 coaching is exempted from this. So if you need handgun or other marksmanship coaching, I do not have to collect sales tax on that. It does require more coordination for scheduling. Send email to [email protected] to arrange that sort of thing.

12/18/2025

Seattle Times editor experienced a crime. Here's what happened next.

1) The editor realized that crime is not something conservatives made up or are exaggerating but that it's a real thing that affects ordinary people like him.

2) He realized that being the victim of a crime really sucks.

3) He realized that theft (particularly bike theft) is a thing that is often done by criminal vagrants living in "encampments." (Note that he does not use the word "homeless" even once.)

4) He realized that the bike infrastructure cheerleaders are clueless about the problem of bike theft..

5) He realized that accountability is a thing, and that it might actually work to discourage thugs from stealing bikes. (Note that he does not use the word "jail.")

What he did NOT seem to realize is that the newspaper he works for has been denying that vagrant-related crime is a huge problem in Seattle. Or if he DID realize that, he didn't say so.

https://archive.ph/VFfjZ

12/02/2025

Mexico Says THEY’RE Protecting the World From Gun Violence? Let’s Break This Down…”

Alright y’all… buckle up.
Because this latest article claiming “Mexico is protecting the world from gun violence starting with the U.S,” is one of the wildest mental gymnastics routines I’ve seen all year.

Let’s break this down in simple, reality-based terms, because a lot of people are getting fed half a story and a whole lot of propaganda.

1️⃣ Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws on Earth… and some of the highest cartel violence.

Mexico has:
• ONE legal gun store in the entire country
• Extremely strict ownership rules
• Heavy civilian restrictions

And yet?

Cartels run full-blown arsenals, RPGs, belt-fed machine guns, armored vehicles, and militarized equipment.

So before anyone lectures Americans, maybe explain how criminals in a total gun-control environment are better armed than most third-world armies.

2️⃣ Blaming U.S. gun stores for cartel violence is a convenient distraction.

The article claims:

“The U.S. is the known supplier of illegal guns trafficked abroad.”

Let’s add context:

Cartels have:
• Unlimited drug money
• Corrupt military access
• Black-market international connections
• Direct pipelines to Central & South American arms dealers
• Access to U.S. military gear stolen or sold illegally

This ain’t “Joe the FFL in Arizona” causing Mexico’s cartel crisis.

This is corruption and organized crime period.

3️⃣ The lawsuits Mexico filed were political PR stunts, not real solutions.

Mexico sued U.S. manufacturers claiming:

“Gun makers sell through bad dealers who arm traffickers.”

Here’s the truth:
• FFLs already follow federal law.
• Every sale requires a background check.
• Trafficking is already a felony.
• Manufacturers cannot control what a criminal does AFTER a legal sale.

If someone buys a Ford and drives drunk, you don’t sue Ford.
Same logic applies here.

SCOTUS shut their main lawsuit down because it violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act a.k.a. you can’t blame lawful businesses for criminal misuse.

4️⃣ Mexico seizing 17,000 guns doesn’t mean they’re “protecting the world.”

What it ACTUALLY means:
• Cartels are still heavily armed.
• Corruption still fuels trafficking.
• U.S.-Mexico border enforcement fails on BOTH sides.
• Seized guns = symptom, not solution.

Seizing guns AFTER they’re in criminal hands is like trying to stop flooding by emptying buckets of water.

5️⃣ The article ignores the biggest factor: CARTELS ARE THE ISSUE, NOT AMERICAN CITIZENS.

America’s legal gun owners are not running guns to the cartel.
The people doing it are:
• Traffickers
• Smugglers
• Cartel-linked operatives
• Corrupt officials

You know… actual criminals.
Not the dude buying a G***k for self-defense.

6️⃣ Gun trafficking is already illegal enforcing existing law solves the issue, not blaming the 2A.

Trafficking = already a federal felony.
Export violations = already a felony.
Straw purchases = already a felony.

We don’t need new laws.
We need current laws enforced and corruption rooted out on BOTH sides of the border.

7️⃣ And let’s be brutally honest… Mexico’s government created this problem long before the U.S. ever entered the conversation.

Cartels didn’t magically appear.
They:
• Built billion-dollar drug empires
• Bought politicians
• Outgunned police
• Took over regions
• Controlled supply chains

The idea that a few American gun shops are responsible for a multibillion-dollar cartel war is laughable.

🔚 FINAL THOUGHT

Mexico blaming American manufacturers is like:
a house catching fire and blaming the store that sold the matches instead of the arsonist.

Cartels create the violence.
Cartels acquire the weapons.
Cartels do the killing.

Blaming American law-abiding businesses and citizens is not a solution it’s a distraction.

2A

11/25/2025

I had a student years ago who was given in-school suspension for defending herself. The story was simple:

A boy pushed her.
She told him to stop.
He grabbed her wrists.
She told him to stop.
He didn’t.
So she dropped him with a clean, sharp kick that ended the discussion.

I wrote about it then because it mattered, and here I am again, because it’s happened again, with another young girl who did everything right and still paid the price for it.

Different year. Different school. Same broken system.

She didn’t escalate. She didn’t provoke. She didn’t act out of anger. She defended her boundaries when the adults tasked with protecting her refused to.

And what’s her reward? Suspension.

So what’s her takeaway supposed to be? What are other girls supposed to learn? What about kids who freeze because they’ve spent their whole lives being told to wait for help that isn’t coming?

Zero tolerance is the abdication of responsibility masquerading as policy.

It’s a shortcut for people who don’t want to think, don’t want to lead, and don’t want to apply nuance. It creates victims and emboldens the very behavior it claims to deter.

Telling a child they’re wrong for defending their own body is one of the fastest ways to create an adult who second-guesses themselves when it matters most.

Not here.

Here, we teach kids to fight when the moment calls for a fight.

Sometimes that means working harder to get into a trade school or college. Sometimes it means asking for a raise. Sometimes it means confronting depression. Sometimes it means stepping in for someone weaker. And sometimes, like in this case, it means slapping the kid who didn’t understand the word stop.

Self-defense isn’t violence. Self-defense is agency.
Agency is something we will never punish.

By the way, I’m picking up something for her this week: a gift card, a note, something simple. Not as a reward for fighting, but as a reminder of this:

She wasn’t wrong.
She wasn’t the problem.
And she damn sure isn’t alone.

11/22/2025

Bondi's DOJ claims the NFA challenge isn't about the Second Amendment. Their 48-page brief says otherwise, packed with gun control justifications.

11/12/2025

Grammar and Rhetoric test:

A well tailored suit, being necessary to the appearance of a sharp-dressed man, the right of the people to wear clothing, shall not be infringed.

Quiz:

1. Who has the right to wear clothing?

A. The Military
B. The Police
C. The Emperor
D. Sharp Dressed Men
E. Anybody

2. What kind of clothing is allowed?

A. Well-tailored suits
B. Blaze Orange Hunting Vests
C. Modest clothing that doesn't offend anyone
D. None
E. Whatever you want

3. What does 'shall not be infringed' mean?

A. Only licensed tailors can make, sell, or modify clothing. Clothing may not enhance your performance in any way.
B. You can have clothing, but you're only allowed to wear it at home
C. You must wear the uniform you are issued when and only when you are on duty for the government
D. You can only buy one article of clothing at a time
E. No clothing with over-sized pockets
F. You can wear anything you want

4. What is the purpose of wearing clothing?

A. Hunting
B. Protecting yourself and your community
C. Whatever you want that doesn't harm others.
D. Sharp appearance
E. All of the above.