Given that you don't know the level of training of many (most or all) of the people posting here, you're making a fairly broad assumption. You're assuming that some of us consider the CFSC to be training - personally I'm not sure what it is, part propaganda and part bureaucratic hurdle, which to me was a pretty pointless waste of the hour that it took me to challenge it (I started shooting at age 8 and had an FAC - which required exactly zero training as soon as I was old enough). That's why I've taken courses (real courses-ones taught by professionals), and spent hours upon hours practicing what I've learned on those courses. I think it's funny actually that the best trained people here (to my knowledge) are the ones pushing for less BS.
Perhaps you should have actually read my post - I said "so many people here think that because they have been trained on basic firearm safety (ACTS and PROVE) that it means they have been trained on ALL proper and safe usage techniques". I am specifically talking about those people that think because they have an RPAL that training qualifies them to use a holster. I am not making an assumption at all. I am addressing specific comments to this attitude.
That's great that you have spent hours learning proper holster usage technique. Clearly you DON"T believe advanced training is BS.
Did you even read what you wrote before posting it???