Perhaps I'm mistaken then regarding Mr. Hayes background. Possibly confusing him with another former LEO turned trainer in western WA.
My point was the requirement to have a CHL is a bit offputting to me. Perhaps its a nonissue for others,such as yourself. I've carried a pistol, both illegally and legally since I was 19. I didnt have "permission" to defend myself, I took that responsibilty on because it is my life. As the introduction page to FAS states, "At The Firearms Academy of Seattle, Inc. we believe safety begins with the individual." If thats the case then why the requirement that people seeking reputable self defense training be able to produce a criminal background sceen? Do these trainers do their own background check with the information provided or simply take the information provided by the customers at face value?
As to Insights page:
A letter of good character is also dubious, although I will admit I had over looked the requirement by Insights, although it appears its much less of a intrusion since there's simply the "letter of good character" option. Although it isn't clear who's "qualified" to write it ( but I did send an email inquiring about this). I'm sure my mother would say I'm a nice guy if I asked her to write me a letter.
Perhaps I'm overzealous when it comes to my privacy. If private companies want to perform background checks prior to selling their services thats fine by me, it's a free country. But that certainly doesnt mean I , and numerous others, are happily going along. Nor would I do business with them due to their requirements. The presumption that everyone is "guilty" until cleared by a background check is irritating to me personally.
Sean aka NWRed