Why I Will NOT Study With TRAVIS HALEY.


Article submitted by Mark Hatfield

Why I Will NOT Study With TRAVIS HALEY.


I learned that he will be teaching in my area, I have the time and the opportunity to attend.  I want to attend but I’m not.  I asked for and received the application.  The problem is, I read it.


Haley seems like a great guy.  I have read about him. I have read interviews of him.  I have seen portions of some of his videos.  He seems to know what he is doing and more important, why he does as he does.  Seems like someone I would really like to study under, however, there’s a catch, the waiver.


Now days everybody wants waivers in case something bad happens, shooting classes, martial arts seminars, parachuting, rafting, hot air ballooning, everybody wants waivers and that’s ok, I sign them, but not this one.


I’ve signed many waivers.  I understand this in our ‘sue anyone for anything’ society.  But this one has two words which makes this waiver different, ‘including negligence’.


Every reasonable person knows that ‘stuff happens’.  Equipment can break, the unexpected can occur, malfunctions happen, even something as a persons feet slipping and their hand reflexively grips tighter on the gun in their hand leading to a shot being fired while they fall and the gun points any which way.  Things can happen.


There’s also the ‘DUH’ moments, the mental slip, the ‘Oh, That’s what you meant’, and sometimes just what some people refer to as ‘brain farts’.


Perhaps an injury or accident is caused because a person did the wrong thing, could be due to lack of needed skill or knowledge, or it was the first response they could think of while under stress in a bad situation.  Could even be due to a reflex movement without any conscious thought.




The ‘Reasonable Man’.


There is a concept in law known as the ‘Reasonable Man’, sometimes as the ‘Reasonable and Prudent Man’.  This is a standard by which ones actions can be judged.  The example is: Suppose you were in some situation and ‘really screwed it up’.  The court would consider: What would a ‘reasonable’ person have done if they were in the same situation.  If a person is injured because someone else did something which a reasonable person would not have done, that can be grounds for negligence.  The waiver for class specifically includes that if you are injured due to negligence, you will take no legal action and hold Mister Haley and his agents harmless.


Think about it!  This includes if some instructor or assistant willfully, knowingly, or even deliberately does or fails to do something which leads to a student being injured, you agree to do nothing and just accept it.


I have seen people get hurt in classes.  I have been hurt in classes.  I have hurt other people in classes.  Luckily never anything serious.  Accidents happen, especially in the various fighting skills.  It is a risk which we understand and accept.  However, the waiver for the Haley Strategic classes changes things so that even if an injury was not an accident, you will just accept it.  Is this also a statement about their own level of care?  Their forms do state that they will use their ‘…best efforts to provide a reasonably safe…’ and we students know and accept that there can be serious risks in classes of this type.  But to demand that students must agree that if an instructor or staff screws up and you are hurt because of it, and it’s NOT an accident, you just accept it, that is not acceptable.


Is it possible this says something about what they consider to be an acceptable level of risk or quality of the instructors?  Or did Haley just let his lawyers get carried away with the paperwork?


  1. This reminds me of the most recent incident I have read of, this was with sonny puzikas who neglected to do numerous things including doing a head count to verify all students, and conducting a low light shoot house with no lights to verify targets. In this instance you would jut have to accept the consequences of someone negligence.

    I agree, there is no way I would attend that class.

  2. I guess it depends on whether it HIS negligence under consideration. If some nimrod shows up in the parking lot before class starts and ND’s into your pinky toe, should you be able to sue Haley? (I wouldn’t). If the instructor fails to use due diligence in safety procedures, then I would consider it.

  3. Kind of pointless to put that language in a contract.

    As I was told by by my first SCUBA diving instructor, despite the same stuff being in the PADI diving waiver, THE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW FOR YOU TO SIGN AWAY NEGLIGENCE.

    Even if that language was in a contract you signed, it’s absolutely meaningless in a tort action, because the law does not recognize contracts that try to have someone sign away negligence. Period.

    Any court case would proceed like the part where you agreed to allow him to be negligent didn’t exist.

  4. The problem itself is not that hard to solve like John Smith mentioned above. Its really a pretty low hurdle with a little bit of effort. Which leads me to believe that is more of an emotional problem you have with this policy. This also leads me to believe you you were just venting, which I can understand.

  5. He means the student’s own negligence, not the instructor’s or anyone else’s negligence. Ie you shoot your foot off it’s your problem if someone else shoots your foot off they are responsible.

  6. Okay, don’t sign the waiver and don’t go to the class. Most companies have waivers for such things. You are operating well within dangerous territory. Consider what you are about to take part in. At a gun range doing live fire drills, with individuals that have varied backgrounds and skillset. It is assumed that accidents may occur. Mr. Hayley doesn’t want some jerk-off going sue crazy. It has taken a very long time to build what he has, so some retard comes along blows his own foot off and Sue’s Haley Strategic. You would do the same if you had a company like this. It’s merely for protection. The ATF agent who shot himself in the foot in a classroom was trying to sue because the video was damaging to his career. The ATF never asked him to do this class, the ATF wasn’t handling the firearm when it was discharged and the ATF did not record and release the footage. It was a parent filming in the class. How does this fall on the ATF? Laws suits are easily obtained. How does one file a claim against a fast food joint for making their kids fat from the unhealthy food? When did we lose accountability for our own stupid actions? The reasons these waivers get crazy is due to those trying to sue everyone they can.

  7. It certainly is something to ponder and even then, a good lawyer could have that waiver thrown out if there is enough evidence that they were being grossly negligent as opposed to “shit happens.”
    Yeager having the cameraman down range comes to mind in this scenario.
    Now, if a student happened to ND into somebody, Should Haley be responsible? No, assuming they weren’t advocating pointing guns at people. This waiver is what I bet this is more directed at. However, I haven’t read his waiver so I have no idea what it says.

  8. His classes also require US citizenship, which seems fairly unique among the civilian open courses I have seen. I suspect that there is some more behind the scenes here, between the lawyers drafting this shit and the insurance parasites who have their hands in everything its really hard to say.

  9. I would bet if something did happen, it would not be Travis or one of his employees that shot somebody. So why do you feel the need to be able to sue Travis? You should be sueing the person that shot you. A classmate shoots you and you want to sue Travis? That sounds like a person I wouldn’t want in my class if I was an instructor.

  10. As earlier posters mentioned, the law does not allow you to sign away your right to seek damages for negligence where there is a preexisting duty under tort law. I’m sure you’ve signed very similar waivers at your local shooting range without giving a second thought. However, there is the general concept of an ‘Assumption of Risk’ when signing up for a live-fire class like this – much as there is when you sit in foul-ball territory at the ballpark. The legal complaint you have is irrelevant. The concern you have about safety is valid, but if you’re so concerned about a well-trained professional’s potential negligence, you definitely don’t belong in a live-fire environment with brain-fart prone students.

  11. If you don’t like something about someone’s training school whether it be the curriculum or legal requirements to attend who gives a fuck! It’s not like we’re running out of places to train or instructors for that matter! We’re grown ass men why the fuck are we even replying to this bullshit the entire country is fucked up right now and if we’re not careful Hillary might get in office! So please everybody VOTE!!!!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here