Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/16/2003 8:32:20 PM EDT
[url]www.ops-se.com/Videos/Negligence.mpg[/url] Why do PD's have such lousy training programs? I worked as an RO on an indoor range for a year, and saw dozens and dozens of cops repeatedly break basic safety rules. Not to mention most of them cant shoot. Isnt this a huge liability?
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 1:50:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2003 1:52:30 AM EDT by Sparky315]
The vast majority of departments are run by beancounters who don't want to pay for really good training for their people. They do the minimum they think they can get away with to lessen the department's liability, but it's almost never enough. Also, many departments don't want to hire shooters, as they view them as 'too aggressive' and therefore a liability risk. So you end up with untrained people that you have no money to train properly.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 3:23:26 AM EDT
"Most of them can't shoot." I just love sweeping generalities.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 7:03:13 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 7:12:19 AM EDT
Wave, I guess he needs to qualify what percentage "most" is. I to, go to the range on my own time, and shoot my own ammo. I'm not sure what she's doing with her finger on the trigger in that circumstance. Not much excuse for that ND in my opinion....
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 8:03:05 AM EDT
In my Dept.(County Sheriff's Office), quals are quarterly, duty pistol, shotgun, off-duty and or back up, day and night) minimum standard is 80%, one chance to 'reshoot', then off street for one week while attending marksmanship training, no 80%? take a walk or transfer to detention side of the house, then try to requal next quarter, one year out of enforcement you loose your certification.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 8:18:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 8:58:39 AM EDT
We do firearms marksmanship qualifications quarterly. Passing is 85% and isn't always easy. I am a fairly good pistol shot, and I have had to refire the course more than once (lots of rounds fired at the 25 yard-line for time). If you don't get in three tries, you get relieved of duty and put on remeidal firearms training until you demonstrate proficiency, which isn't necessarily getting lucky and passing qualification once. There is also disciplinary action attached (to keep the avid shooters from BOLOing and taking a shooting "vacation"). In the near future, we are going to add a couple of tactical courses of fire. We give our folks as much free duty ammo for practice as they can reasonably shoot. In theory it about 100 rounds a month, but since many don't take advantage, you can realistically get much more than that. In addition, we have "tactical" qualifications/training twice a year that consist of a full day of tactics and Simunitions-based scenario training. All officers have to this, even lazy whining detectives.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 9:18:18 AM EDT
You want a percentage? Ok how about EVERY OFFICER that I shot with on the range has been less than profecient with his sidearm. I never once met an officer "to include members of 2 different SWAT teams" who could outshoot me when I was working for the range. It was the biggest joke between the range staff that if a cop was shooting at you to just stand still. This isnt a personel attack on every officer that there is, I work with PD all the time and I have no personal problems with the police. But time and time again I see this same widespread problem.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 10:39:55 AM EDT
"EVERY OFFICER" Less than proficient???!!!!You can out shoot all of them???!!!Boy, you must be a cross between Wild Bill Hickok and Wyatt Earp!!!!! You should really quit your job, spend 24 weeks at a police academy, then another several weeks at a firearms instructor class. Then you can straighten out all 500,000 of us, since I'm sure there are no proficient LEO's in the US.......(except you of course, providing you make it through the academy).
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 2:06:54 PM EDT
I'll bet Lou Chiodo from the CHP might give you a run for your money. As would most of his students...
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 3:51:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2003 3:52:55 PM EDT by tulsacmpshooter]
From what I could see on the video it looked like one person ie the female officer had her safety off. (finger in the trigger guard) I bet the perp and the other officer were probably glad she didn't have a 12ga with buck in it. I wouldn't want any one shooting at me. Period. Come shoot IDPA and you will get an idea of how well you shoot under stress. I could only imagine having someone shoot back. Many of the top shooters are police officers. I dare say that shooting a hundgun is a more perishable skill than rifle or shotgun. IMHO. No wide ranging stereo typing here. Unless I were to state that the majority of my generation of American's can't shoot as good as the generation or two before us.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 4:22:50 PM EDT
MMsig229 Since you want to get pissy lets take this to email. treepuncher@hotmail.com Your free to repost anything that I send you via email. And I hold the same right to defend anything you post. I think Sparky answered my question in his first post as to PD's are run by beancounters, so lets not get too off track. Now How is it that it is cheaper to pay out law suits than to just spend the money and train your people to begin with? Or is it?
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 5:01:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 7:07:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2003 7:08:44 PM EDT by mmsig229]
Hey FNG, I'm not getting pissy. what I dispute are your ridiculous generalities. anything I have to say, I can say here, and defend my position without name calling or profanity. I'm not disputing that some LEO's don't take shooting as seriously as they should. But to say that you've never seen a proficient shooting LEO, and that you can out shoot all of them, is a ridiculous statement. You've only met a handful of the 500,000 LEO's. Yes, management should spend more $$$ on training. But, when $$$ is tight, training is the first thing to go. Again, my dispute with your post is only regarding your generalizations...
Link Posted: 5/19/2003 6:24:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/19/2003 12:30:50 PM EDT by Sukebe]
Training is woefully inadequate especially in the area of marksmanship. Budgets prohibit training with firearms. Most Departments only provide the funding for annual state mandated firearms qualification. Most Departments only concern themselves with training and certifications that are required by law. I am ashamed to say that my Department has a U.S. Supreme Court case named after it related to training. You want better trained Cops you say? Stop bitching about your taxes. You don't want to pay more taxes? Stop bitching about poorly trained cops. You can't have it both ways. Most of the people on this board who bitch about what poor shots Cops are or what bad tactics Cops use in a given situation tend to see the firearm as the greatest attraction to the job. That's a somewhat immature view and I wouldn't want to work with anyone with that attitude. Believe me, I have and they usually don't last too long on the job. That is a power trip in the making. Fortunately, the vast majority of Cops find little attraction in the fact that the job requires that you carry a firearm. Most Cops have very little interest in firearms. FYI, there is much, much more to Police work than shooting. In fact that is a very small if not relatively insignificant part of the job. The gun is there if you need it. You rarely really need it. I use a pen and a radio and numerous other pieces of equipment far more often than I use a firearm. I can live with a Cop who is less than an expert shot. If you can hit the target you're O.K. with me. I can't stand a Cop who can't write a coherent report or one who has poor people skills.
Link Posted: 5/19/2003 2:37:39 PM EDT
We finally have a decent range to shoot at, and just ran quarterly firearms qualifications. I went on vacation and the Armory was full of ammo (around 50K duty rounds for the handgun). I came back this morning and my Amrory was almost totally out of pistol ammo, and we were out of targets. Some agencies shoot ALOT. Mine apparently just moved to the next level. I can't believe that they shot that much ammo. That was enough to run firearms qualification 3 times, and then some (including refires and giving the guys some practice ammo). I'm gonna need a much bigger budget for next year.
Link Posted: 5/19/2003 3:45:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TheFNG: You want a percentage? Ok how about EVERY OFFICER that I shot with on the range has been less than profecient with his sidearm. I never once met an officer "to include members of 2 different SWAT teams" who could outshoot me when I was working for the range. It was the biggest joke between the range staff that if a cop was shooting at you to just stand still. This isnt a personel attack on every officer that there is, I work with PD all the time and I have no personal problems with the police. But time and time again I see this same widespread problem.
View Quote
how many officer's did you shoot against, 2? [:d] Hey larry I can outshoot all [s]2 of these [/s] cops.
Link Posted: 5/19/2003 6:50:08 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sukebe: FYI, there is much, much more to Police work than shooting. In fact that is a very small if not relatively insignificant part of the job. The gun is there if you need it. You rarely really need it. I use a pen and a radio and numerous other pieces of equipment far more often than I use a firearm. I can live with a Cop who is less than an expert shot. If you can hit the target you're O.K. with me. I can't stand a Cop who can't write a coherent report or one who has poor people skills.
View Quote
Obviously, you're quite right in saying many cops will never need their guns, or only rarely. And yes, people/effective communication skills are part and parcel with the job. i don't ask for splitting paper lengthwise at 15yrds (which, btw, our rangemaster can do, very impressive), but you do need to be able to qualify better than "just barely" and show sound handling technique for me to be comfortable around you. The most serious thing that can happen to you as a police officer is be forced to decide if another human being needs to DIE..."right now". i think that's serious enough to warrant a little effort above quarterly training, even if you need do it on personal time. As the quote goes, when you need a gun, you tend to need one rather badly.
Link Posted: 5/19/2003 11:49:35 PM EDT
Sukebe I dont bitch about my taxes, I know that they are necessary. But when I see local law enforcment buying tanks and M2HB's, and then bitch that they cant pay for training. I have to stop and wonder. What are my dollars really buying?
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 2:24:47 AM EDT
That was a pretty good post Sukebe.. you hit the bullseye dead center.. I would wager that "firearms fascination" is the underlying cause for some of the cop bashing over in the GD.. we get to work with guns and they don't..however they believe all cops get to shoot/train/use/ etc their guns as much as the Cop Bashers would like to.. Sorry Guys it just don't work like that.. I would agree that the average officer has little interest in firearms; in my experience Officers all into three general types when it comes to Firearms Training/Shooting: 5% "I'm a gun nut- I have a life time subscription to Shooting News" 10% "Okay I have a gun and I know how to use it but no thanks I don't want to borrow your issue of Shooting News" 85% "Fuck you, your gun and your Shooting Times.. Now where's my Sporting News? Leave me alone" The last crew is always bitching being forced to shoot but the first and loudest to bitch when their need to use their firearm and it doesn't work or they couldn't hit what they were aiming at. IF they cause a jam, can't reload etc,--Then its the Firearms staff's fault. The same grouping could be applied to DT..but don't get me started [soapbox]
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 5:46:36 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 9:09:11 AM EDT
We just did our 6 month re-qual. I did my usual...... I shot sloppy. Good enough to pass, but not great. In the past, I always qualified rifle expert (in the Corps) and was distinguished pistol expert during my first academy. Since then I've been advised to not score so well during quals so it couldn't be used against me in court. So I don't.
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 1:48:47 PM EDT
Liability and its Effects on Training James Yeager www.OPS-SE.com Much has changed in Law Enforcement in the last 100 years. Some things have not. The average officer’s equipment in 1900 included a gun, nightstick, and a pair of handcuffs. In 2003 our duty belts resemble Batman’s utility belt with albeit much less interesting gear. We carry the tools of the Force Continuum around our waist. All departments worried about the safety of their officers issue or allow a minimum of: duty handgun, back-up gun, pepper spray, baton, cuffs, radio, flashlight(s), spare magazines, latex gloves and other misc. items. Not only does society want us to use these items correctly and within the limits if the law they expect it. It is also expected the officer will know how to make arrests using the minimum amount of force necessary. Officers need to develop a “survival level of proficiency” with the tools of their trade. The majority of officers are unable to perform to this level and causes a variety of liability issues. The public wants to know their police are properly trained. Unfortunately most departments fall short. Proper training has a variety of aspects. The state has a set of standards for police training. The U.S. Supreme court has made several rulings concerning police training. How does your department measure up? The Supreme Court’s ruling in “Popow v. City of Margate” (476 F. Supp. 1237 / D.N.J. 1979) concerned an officer chasing a kidnapping suspect through a residential neighborhood where Mr. Popow lived. It was nighttime and the officer was firing shots as he pursued the suspect. Mr. Popow was struck with a stray bullet as he stepped outside to see what was happening. The court said the City of Margate’s training was “grossly inadequate”. Their reasons were, the Officers firearm’s training (at the academy) was 10 years earlier, and his continuing training was only every 6 months and did NOT include low/no light training, moving targets, shoot/no-shoot decision making, shooting in populated areas, or firearms policy and procedures. The result was a “substantial financial settlement” paid by the City of Margate. Other areas that the Court has said needed attention in various cases are firearms safety, marksmanship, multiple targets, short time frames, realistic use of cover, verbally challenging the suspects, weapon retention, and others. Many departments call their yearly qualifications “firearms training”. Officers know when it is time to qualify and they will practice in order to be good enough to meet the minimum level of proficiency. They are not training to be better shooters, and they are not training to survive a lethal attack, they are merely trying to shoot the specified course and make a passing score. Qualification courses are NOT training and according to court rulings will be judged on frequency, content, relevance, standards as well as the qualifications and certifications of the Instructor. The “Three R’s” of training are Recent, Realistic, and Relevant. This applies to the Instructor’s Training (an often overlooked aspect) as well as the student’s. Practical shooting exercises, also known as combat courses, help meet Supreme Court standards. They do not require a great deal of ammunition or time to set up. I suggest your training officer go to a local International Defensive Pistol Association or I.D.P.A. matches in order to get good ideas to implement into their programs. The significance is that the Court will evaluate the mechanics of your departments training and if it is relevant to your particular duties. Different agencies will have different training needs. Tennessee’s governing body for Police training is the Police Officer Standards and Training Commission. P.O.S.T establishes a MINIMUM for our state’s Law Enforcement training. Many departments strive to meet the P.O.S.T. requirements. The sad fact is their standards do not even come close to what the Supreme Court has established in JUST Popow v. Margate. There are many other case precedents in addition to that one. Agencies should reconsider using lesser standards and try to surpass state mandates.
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 1:49:20 PM EDT
What type of liabilities are we talking about from a civil aspect? Suits from injured bystanders, injured suspects, your own officer or his estate, State and Federal Court under 1983 Civil Rights violations. There are suits being brought against Police Departments by it’s OWN officers for inferior training. The winds of change are blowing and you should consider being a leader in the training movement. While you are considering the “liabilities” of improper training don’t forget about the possibility of being charged criminally, being de-certified, higher insurance premiums, negative publicity, loss of time, loosing accreditation, and ruining your department’s reputation. Many Administrators use the word “liability” as a reason to hold the Department back. If they used some logic from time to time it would be a word to take the Department FORWARD. The bases for the liability accusations would come from NEGLIGENT selection, retention, assignment, supervision, direction, and discipline of your employees. Another area of concern is the selection and maintenance of firearms, ammunition, holsters, and other equipment, which is virtually never done. There is no way of preventing a lawsuit. I wish there were. The good news is you can keep from losing. Many departments cut the training budget, if they even have one, to a bare minimum. They only supply 50 rounds of ammunition to officers for the yearly substandard qualification. If you think it is too expensive to train how will you ever pay off the lawsuit? If you are not going to properly train your officers it is like gambling every single time they interact with the public. You will lose eventually. There is a term you should be familiar with called “Deliberate Indifference”. Basically it is the term used to describe the Departments who refuse to train. The Courts guidelines should be considered a MINIMUM regardless of what your state authority says. You will never be sued for “excessive training”. In addition to what I have already mentioned there are a few more areas of training that need attention. Every Department should have a comprehensive written firearm policy explained and issued to all officers. Classroom instruction should include: legal aspects, safety, innocent bystanders, and Use of Force policies among other things. Written testing to measure and document (if it isn’t documented it didn’t happen) the officer’s understanding of classroom and range instruction should be done periodically. Your program should also include progressive, realistic, job related shooting courses by qualified and certified instructors. Requalification at regular intervals, quarterly is preferred, including refresher training and liability. Proper maintenance of the firearms should be addressed as well as inspection by a certified armorer. Another aspect of Liability reduction is the issued gear, or lack of it. Some departments still don’t issue pepper spray. With the across the board acceptance of chemical weapons as a lesser force option I believe any agency who does not issue it is creating a potential chink in their armor. Flashlights are also often overlooked. Most lethal force confrontations happen at night according to the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report. Many forward thinking agencies put lights onto their long guns. It is virtually impossible to hold a flashlight securely and identify your adversary while manipulating a shotgun or carbine. Technology has made great advancements with tactical lights and I foresee departments issuing handguns with lights attached in the future. There is another issue I have talked around, but not about, it is the lives of your officers. Every time Officers receive proper training it makes them safer, safer from injuries or death but also from financial burdens from a civil suit. Every training program could be revised a little and some a lot. What are you going to do today to make yours better?
Link Posted: 5/20/2003 1:52:47 PM EDT
My department shoots every month. Thats rare.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 1:58:04 AM EDT
My Department qualifies twice yearly and trains twice yearly. I've been a firearms instructor for two years, recently took over as the Rangemaster, and am trying to implement some changes. The most recent being a requirement to actually "qualify" with personally owned "off duty" or auxilliary weapons. I am getting some resistance to using the standard qual course. In the past an officer was to qualify at least once per year with personally owned weapons and the only requirement was to put a few rounds on the paper from 10 yds. I am considering doing something from 3, 7, and 10 yds. as an off duty qual course. If anyone has any good ideas or wants to share what they are doing, send me an e-mail. msnider@police.ucsf.edu
Link Posted: 5/24/2003 6:11:43 AM EDT
The female in the video from what I understand resigned shortly after the discharge. We train 4 times a year. We keep trying to add new stuff but management keeps bitching about the time required and overtime used for training. The only way they will give you what you need for training is when something goes bad.
Link Posted: 5/24/2003 6:36:00 AM EDT
just saw the longer version of that video last week at the academy. That happened about five years ago and she is still with that department! I guess if you don't kill somebody, it's not that big of a deal[>:/]
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 1:32:29 AM EDT
She had her finger on the trigger, and had a "Sympathetic reflex." Comes from lack of training. She was lucky no one got killed, considering where the firearm was pointed just before the AD. We shoot three times a year, two day and one night. Still not enough.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 1:52:24 PM EDT
I am SURE she was taught not to put her finger on thr trigger unless she wanted to shoot something. It is more of a case of not being motivated enough to listen to instruction and take it to heart.
Top Top