If you're teaching the Basic Pistol Course, the key word is BASIC.
The NRA course is what it is - and it's what's approved by the MSP. Could there be more? Sure. But unless you have a ceratin level of integrated knowledge, additional details are wasted, IMO.
It makes little difference to a new shooter that most Smiths have a counter-clockwise cylinder rotation, and Colts clockwise; or that the intracasies of the 1911 are the epitome of pistol design.
The Three Rules, the basic nomencalture and the mechanics of safely loading and unloading are what the NRA course is desigend to teach. With all due respect, Crazy, how much additional time and material do your extra information points add?
As for the "W" word. I'm 100% in accord with the NRA....
as a firearm is NOT a weapon until it's used as such*. Shoes are not a weapon, nor is a beer bottle, but if one uses either in a fight....then it is. Yes, the
potential for "weaponization" is there....but that applies to many items.
The majority of the students in the Basic Pistol (transplants from out of state, that are just taking it to get their "ticket punched" notwithstanding) likely have their knowledge from popular media and video games. In other words, they're clueless, and we might as well get them using the right terms (It's a MAGAZINE, not a clip!
)
If they go to work on Monday, and say, "I got Weapons Training this weekend" it will likely be recieved a bit differently than, "I took a Firearms Safety Course this weekend." We need more ambassadors, and coming across as a sober, stable, safety-concious firearms user makes for a better image than an Level 1 Mall Ninja.
* I know that this may start a flame war, but "Framing the Debate" is an important step to winning the debate - If we allow the Antis to chose the terms, of if we use terms that can be used against our interests, we're not doing all we could!