Quoted:
Hopefully, I'll not offend anyone here, but the only people I have ever seen/heard of that shot below 250 were were admin/coop hires that probably wouldn't have been there had they gone through the "normal" hire process.
View Quote
True, but:
That 210 wasn’t always that easy. “Gradeflation” has occurred with firearms qualification. While the 210 or 70% minimum score has pretty much stayed the same, the course and firearms have changed.
When I started with the Federal Government, long ago, the required qualification was slow, timed and rapid fire with bullseye targets, wadcutter bullets, using one hand and cocking the revolver each time. This was pretty tough.
I’ll even admit to personally spending a few evenings in the basement range of the Treasury Building (next to the White House) doing remedials (FLETC being in DC at the time).
Treasury then went to the combat PPC, which I felt was easier. However, it had a 50-yard phase, which was still pretty tough with a 2” Colt Detective Special or a 5-shot S&W.
A few years later the 50-yard requirement was dropped (and the PPC became the MPPC, or Modified PPC).
Also, more and more, the issued firearm became a K-frame S&W. And the amount of required weak hand shooting was reduced. Things were getting much easier.
Further, many agencies went from semi-annual to quarterly qualification, which definitely raised most LEO’s skill level.
And then semi’s were adopted. I was a range officer during this time and it was like someone had hit a light switch – suddenly everyone qualified the first time!
Certainly nowadays a 210 minimum score is ridiculous. I think the major thing holding it down now is the possibility of EEO complaints - women are almost certainly going to be disproportionately impacted by any minimum score increase.