Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 11/21/2018 12:30:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/21/2018 12:35:37 PM EST by R_S]
Anti-gunners criticize armed civilians as being less trained than the police

This article from the International Journal of Police Science & Management has a ton of eye opening info: The real risks during deadly police shootouts: Accuracy of the naive shooter

Statistics clearly show that the actual firearms training that Law Enforcement officers receive is short and ineffective:

The average amount of training time spent on firearms skills in the [law enforcement] academy is a mere 60 hours, with even less time spent on self-defense skills...Understandably, the amount of education and practice with firearms in which an officer may participate, external to the police academy and training, can greatly enhance their performance.
View Quote
The results of this study indicate that officers had no advantage over intermediate shooters and a small advantage over novices...experts were only 10% more accurate than novices between 3 and 15 ft. Recruits were placed into the novice category if they had no experience or minimal familiarity with firearms, such as only having fired a weapon once or twice in their life....As demonstrated, rounds fired by novice and intermediate shooters in close proximity encounters are more likely to result in immediately lethal hits, as they fire primarily at the head... Therefore, this study's results indicate an alarming need for improved firearms training for officers.
View Quote
The intermediate category consisted of recruits who had not received police academy training but did have previous experience in shooting a pistol or rifle, for example participating in regular hunting seasons or recreational shooting. The intermediate category also included recruits with military firearms training, which mostly addressed carbine, rifle and automatic weapons.
View Quote
Page 5, Table 1 has the actual hit percentages:

Trained Police academy graduates are averaging 14% accuracy on targets 60-75ft away (with unlimited time). They only achieved 49% accuracy overall.

Intermediate shooters with no police training but who had hunting, recreational, or non-pistol military firearms experience shot 48% accuracy overall, essentially the same as the police.

Compare that to US Army pistol experts who must score 90% accuracy with all shots fired at a distance of 25 meters (82.5ft), with time limits.
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 12:58:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/21/2018 1:00:41 PM EST by BGENE]
Most cops are not gun guys, again MOST, not all obviously. Many shoot enough to qualify (qtr/semi/annual) whatever is required.

Bored, time for a LEO story.

Once upon a time in the Armory.

LE guy, comes in, clears his weapon as follows;

Racks the slide (with a full mag in place duh), ejects a live round/chambers another round,

Drops the mag,

Why use a clearing barrel when you can use the floor

Pulls the trigger (dumb fuck)

Sends a round ricocheting around the room with others inside
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:24:18 PM EST
Looking more closely at the details:

Recruits were placed in the expert category if they had completed formal firearms training through a law enforcement academy or had formal handgun training or certification through the military.
View Quote
I am wondering if the military trained handgun shooters raised the "police" average up
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:26:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/21/2018 1:27:17 PM EST by rcav8r]
Son of a bitch.

I was trying to recall something about how some of our state politicians brag about how many hours our LEO's go through at the police academy. First thing I found was PDF with handgun training standards.
Scrolling through the PDF, the first images of the target, on page 9....

Resemble me.

I am SO fucked...

link
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:28:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R_S:
Looking more closely at the details:

I am wondering if the military trained handgun shooters raised the "police" average up
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R_S:
Looking more closely at the details:

Recruits were placed in the expert category if they had completed formal firearms training through a law enforcement academy or had formal handgun training or certification through the military.
I am wondering if the military trained handgun shooters raised the "police" average up
I would almost guarantee it, the guys I have shot with over the years with ex-military experience were always good shots.
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:38:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BGENE:
I would almost guarantee it, the guys I have shot with over the years with ex-military experience were always good shots.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BGENE:
Originally Posted By R_S:
Looking more closely at the details:

Recruits were placed in the expert category if they had completed formal firearms training through a law enforcement academy or had formal handgun training or certification through the military.
I am wondering if the military trained handgun shooters raised the "police" average up
I would almost guarantee it, the guys I have shot with over the years with ex-military experience were always good shots.
Yep, while there are several different Army pistol qualifications, 24/40 (60%) is required on the 25 Meter Pistol course.
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:43:23 PM EST
Numerous studies have observed that external focus promotes better performance through allowing more automatic and reflexive movements, rather than interfering with automatic motor responses ...This should be a goal in every department, to train the officer so the motor program becomes automatic, freeing cognitive resources for observation, cognitive processing and immediate decision making
View Quote
Starting on Page 8, the Implications section also has some good thoughts about what good firearms training should accomplish
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:43:24 PM EST
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 1:44:57 PM EST
Most departments have to qualify for POST once or twice a year. A great many use some variation of what is essentially a 1950s revolver course, shot on B27 or Q targets. The course, and the passing score are mandated by the states.
Some departments will shoot quarterly, some do more than just qualify.
But generally, it's a qualification to maintain POST certification. There is a fair bit of other stuff that has to be trained on also. But the department has to maintain it's patrolling duties 24/7, continue to conduct investigations, clear traffic accidents and make court appearances. It can't shut down for training.
My old dept qualified twice a year, devoting one training day to each session, and it takes over half the year to do that.
The point being, merely maintaining quals is challenging to a department.
Plus the fact that most cops feel about their pistol the way that they feel about their vest: it's a piece of equipment they have to lug around that's kind of a pain in the ass.
This is the first I've heard of military pistol training being any sort of standard to compare to anything. Maybe it's changed since I was in(I heard they went to cap and ball pistols after I got out)
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 2:23:40 PM EST
One of the ranges around here had a huge outdoor shoot house...simulated classrooms, offices and 3 (three!) school buses. LEOs used them for hostage training and such.

After I finished up the course I was talking with the range owner about all the extraneous bullet holes that had missed the bullet traps behind the targets in the buses. He just shook his head and said, "Cops."

He was a cop himself, but said he'd never had a civilian shooter torch a round through his buses.
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 2:32:55 PM EST
I was the head range officer for our SO for around 20 years. In the mid 80's my budget allowed me to have range days for the patrolmen/women every month. This lasted for several years until the budget was cut down in half. At the end of those years those were officers who were competent, with an average score of 200 out of 250. Course was from 3yd line to 50 yd line. Standing, kneeling, rt/lft barricades. This was a patrol division of around 55 sworn officers. When the budget was cut, and quals were twice a year, scores went down to around 185. Not bad, but not as good. Some of those guys would go out and shoot on their own and kept up their training. Others were satisfied to do the minimum with corresponding lower scores.
Link Posted: 11/21/2018 2:33:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/21/2018 2:33:48 PM EST by R_S]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By feudist:
This is the first I've heard of military pistol training being any sort of standard to compare to anything. Maybe it's changed since I was in(I heard they went to cap and ball pistols after I got out)
View Quote
FM23-35 has some details.

The Army Combat Pistol Qualification is fun and better than plugging away at a static B27 target: link
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 12:33:19 PM EST
The gun club I sit on the board of directors for stopped giving/renting range time to LE a long time ago.
'Fed up with the damage caused by errant rounds.
We still are approached by various LE/Govt wanting to use our facilities. All are given a polite "no".
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 12:53:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/23/2018 12:54:39 PM EST by Another-Bill]
My local sheriff's department, St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Department, recently had a "shoot house" built.
Nice news article on it. Looks like fun as well. Good to see some better training.

I shot IPSC/USPSA for some 20 years until 2007 when my 4th and last back surgery told me to quit.
We would often have LEOs shoot with us, 99% of the time they were embarrassed and never came back again.

I know people like to say shooting in a match is bad or useless training in "real life" situations but I disagree, and I've never been in a "real life" situation.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 12:57:01 PM EST
Some departments require next to no training, have no dedicated facilities, and do little more than rubber stamp a qual annually.

Others have multi-million dollar facilities and take it more seriously, doesn’t mean all the officers do.

Some guys shoot competitively, others have guns seized up with food grease and try to load chapstick during a shotgun qual.

You’re surfing Arfcom, congrats, you probably shoot better than most cops. Everyone shoots well at 5 yards.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 1:04:59 PM EST
Considering EVERY qualification I have ever been in always has a few failures that seem to finally struggle through to "pass", I will say they are only trained as good as they want to be.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 1:09:35 PM EST
My agency trains significantly more than most. Still not impressed at all with most of my coworkers. I say that after they dumbed down the state qualification test.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 2:08:51 PM EST
I used to be a Senior Firearms instructor at a State police training facility. I have no disagreement with the study. There are a number of factors to keep in mind...money is a big one. Sure, the public would love to have police officers who all have PHD level skill in defusing angry or mentally ill people. They public wants all police officers to be black belt proficient at unarmed combat so they can subdue people with hurting them too much, they want officers to be able to run an 8 minute mile with all the 20 pounds of gear they wear, jump fences like superman, and they want all officers who carry guns to be Brian Enos type shooters.

But it costs lots of money to pay salaries while officers are receiving that training, and the public doesn't want to pay for it all. So the agencies have to compromise on things. Departments realize that an officer will spend far less time actually shooting at people than they will writing reports, so agencies spend their training money where they think it will be the most productive and useful.

Plus, even though range time is paid for, many officers just aren't interested in becoming more skilled with firearms. My old agency would pay for range time, coaching, and ammo, yet only 20% of the officers would use this training time.

Most police officers just don't practice, and as a result would probably struggle to be a "C" class shooter in IPSC matches, yet many of those who are lousy shots think they are God's gift to the world of firearms.

This could all be changed if the tax paying public wanted to pay for it.

In one prefecture in Japan where I visited, new officers were required to become black belt level proficient in judo and kendo within about 2 years of being hired, or they were expected to resign. Judo is very helpful for making arrests. Kendo transfers over to the use of a baton, and if you give an asp bacon to someone with black belt level skill in kendo, they will be able to break you down quickly, and put lumps on you faster than you can rub 'em.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 2:19:56 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kennymc80:
Some departments require next to no training, have no dedicated facilities, and do little more than rubber stamp a qual annually.

Others have multi-million dollar facilities and take it more seriously, doesn't mean all the officers do.

Some guys shoot competitively, others have guns seized up with food grease and try to load chapstick during a shotgun qual.

You're surfing Arfcom, congrats, you probably shoot better than most cops. Everyone shoots well at 5 yards.
View Quote
About a third of my old department liked to shoot. They would absorb training and practice(in varying amounts) on their own.

Another third was pretty neutral on the subject. It was a requirement they knew they had to meet.

But the bottom third hated it. They would rather do anything else and all they-reluctantly- wanted to do was shoot the POST course and leave.

The simple fact is that police shootings are so rare that the bottom third function just fine as officers. Most shootings are at bad breath range anyhow.

I went 28 years in an active career working the most dangerous areas of Birmingham, a very dangerous city-and never had to shoot anyone.

I only knew of 2 guys who had more than one shooting in my time.

I trained heavily, and perhaps that accounted for some guys surrendering without forcing me to shoot them-who knows?

I captured plenty of armed, dangerous offenders at gunpoint. That's mostly what cops do-threat management.
Link Posted: 11/23/2018 2:24:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By R_S:
Anti-gunners criticize armed civilians as being less trained than the police

This article from the International Journal of Police Science & Management has a ton of eye opening info: The real risks during deadly police shootouts: Accuracy of the naive shooter

Statistics clearly show that the actual firearms training that Law Enforcement officers receive is short and ineffective:

The average amount of training time spent on firearms skills in the [law enforcement] academy is a mere 60 hours, with even less time spent on self-defense skills...Understandably, the amount of education and practice with firearms in which an officer may participate, external to the police academy and training, can greatly enhance their performance.
View Quote
The results of this study indicate that officers had no advantage over intermediate shooters and a small advantage over novices...experts were only 10% more accurate than novices between 3 and 15 ft. Recruits were placed into the novice category if they had no experience or minimal familiarity with firearms, such as only having fired a weapon once or twice in their life....As demonstrated, rounds fired by novice and intermediate shooters in close proximity encounters are more likely to result in immediately lethal hits, as they fire primarily at the head... Therefore, this study's results indicate an alarming need for improved firearms training for officers.
View Quote
The intermediate category consisted of recruits who had not received police academy training but did have previous experience in shooting a pistol or rifle, for example participating in regular hunting seasons or recreational shooting. The intermediate category also included recruits with military firearms training, which mostly addressed carbine, rifle and automatic weapons.
View Quote
Page 5, Table 1 has the actual hit percentages:

Trained Police academy graduates are averaging 14% accuracy on targets 60-75ft away (with unlimited time). They only achieved 49% accuracy overall.

Intermediate shooters with no police training but who had hunting, recreational, or non-pistol military firearms experience shot 48% accuracy overall, essentially the same as the police.

Compare that to US Army pistol experts who must score 90% accuracy with all shots fired at a distance of 25 meters (82.5ft), with time limits.
View Quote
The US Army pistol course is really, really easy compared to any of the LE qualifications I have shot. And it doesn't include any draw from holstered shooting or induced malfunctions or weak hand shooting.
Link Posted: 11/26/2018 11:55:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/26/2018 3:52:29 PM EST by R_S]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
The US Army pistol course is really, really easy compared to any of the LE qualifications I have shot. And it doesn't include any draw from holstered shooting or induced malfunctions or weak hand shooting.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
Originally Posted By R_S:
Anti-gunners criticize armed civilians as being less trained than the police

This article from the International Journal of Police Science & Management has a ton of eye opening info: The real risks during deadly police shootouts: Accuracy of the naive shooter

Statistics clearly show that the actual firearms training that Law Enforcement officers receive is short and ineffective:

The average amount of training time spent on firearms skills in the [law enforcement] academy is a mere 60 hours, with even less time spent on self-defense skills...Understandably, the amount of education and practice with firearms in which an officer may participate, external to the police academy and training, can greatly enhance their performance.
The results of this study indicate that officers had no advantage over intermediate shooters and a small advantage over novices...experts were only 10% more accurate than novices between 3 and 15 ft. Recruits were placed into the novice category if they had no experience or minimal familiarity with firearms, such as only having fired a weapon once or twice in their life....As demonstrated, rounds fired by novice and intermediate shooters in close proximity encounters are more likely to result in immediately lethal hits, as they fire primarily at the head... Therefore, this study's results indicate an alarming need for improved firearms training for officers.
The intermediate category consisted of recruits who had not received police academy training but did have previous experience in shooting a pistol or rifle, for example participating in regular hunting seasons or recreational shooting. The intermediate category also included recruits with military firearms training, which mostly addressed carbine, rifle and automatic weapons.
Page 5, Table 1 has the actual hit percentages:

Trained Police academy graduates are averaging 14% accuracy on targets 60-75ft away (with unlimited time). They only achieved 49% accuracy overall.

Intermediate shooters with no police training but who had hunting, recreational, or non-pistol military firearms experience shot 48% accuracy overall, essentially the same as the police.

Compare that to US Army pistol experts who must score 90% accuracy with all shots fired at a distance of 25 meters (82.5ft), with time limits.
The US Army pistol course is really, really easy compared to any of the LE qualifications I have shot. And it doesn't include any draw from holstered shooting or induced malfunctions or weak hand shooting.
The numbers show US Army pistol qualification is better than most, but Army pistol qualification is mostly fundamental marksmanship which is at best half the answer. Barricade shooting, headshots, point shooting, shooting on the move, and combatives all have their place.

From the original article:
examining officer reaction to a deadly threat presented during a roadside traffic stop, it was observed that, regardless of training, only 12 of 93 officers made an offensive attempt to control the suspect's weapon when it was within close proximity of ~ 1-2 ft.
This is another eye opening statistic that shows Law Enforcement open hand defense training is also deficient. Controlling weapons/disarms are common martial arts moves.

It is also recommended that the next innovative stage of training would be teaching officers 'pattern recognition' on how to read evolving threats and intervene or control them before they become deadly for the officer
Guys with plenty of experience like Craig Douglas have already developed this kind of training: Practical Unarmed Combat
Link Posted: 11/26/2018 12:05:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/26/2018 12:07:00 PM EST by R_S]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kennymc80:
Everyone shoots well at 5 yards.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kennymc80:
Everyone shoots well at 5 yards.
Yes, that is part of the point. "Novice" shooters who have no training and may have never shot a gun in their lives are hitting 75% of the time at distances 3-to-15ft.

And novice's are instinctively targeting the head, which is a more lethal shot than what Law Enforcement Center-Of-Mass targets are training officers to do. It goes without saying that headshots negate the advantage of body armor.

The untrained are MORE lethal than "trained" police officers inside 15ft. And it shows in gunfight statistics:

The NYPD SOP 9 report indicates:

From Sept 1854 to Dec 1979, 254 Officers died from wounds received in an armed encounter. The shooting distance in 90% of those cases was less than 15 feet.
Link Posted: 11/26/2018 8:45:57 PM EST
How much of the gun owning public have more than 60 hours of professional instruction?

The big fallacy I hear from most gun enthusiasts (not to be confused with gun owners) is that they assume that most of the gun owning public practices like they do which is simply not the case. I would argue that police on average are better pistol handlers than the average gun owning public. That's not to say police are good just that most gun owners are that bad (outside of enthusiasts who do it as a hobby).

FWIW, the only military guys I've seen that were good with a pistol were special operations types. The rest of the military guys I've seen didn't really have much pistol experience unless it was a personal hobby.
Link Posted: 11/26/2018 9:29:50 PM EST
Most people would be shocked at the low level of marksmanship of the average LEO both local and FEDs.

If you are a MEMBER of IDPA or USPSA you are a better marksman than 97% of all the LEO I've shot with.

The ones I know wouldn't carry a pistol if it wasn't part of the job.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 9:43:49 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By topgunpilot20:
How much of the gun owning public have more than 60 hours of professional instruction?

The big fallacy I hear from most gun enthusiasts (not to be confused with gun owners) is that they assume that most of the gun owning public practices like they do which is simply not the case. I would argue that police on average are better pistol handlers than the average gun owning public. That's not to say police are good just that most gun owners are that bad (outside of enthusiasts who do it as a hobby).

FWIW, the only military guys I've seen that were good with a pistol were special operations types. The rest of the military guys I've seen didn't really have much pistol experience unless it was a personal hobby.
View Quote
As far as 60 hours "professional instruction" I think the most shocking part of the study is that the professional instruction police receive is at likely shooting distances (under 15ft) making law enforcement less dangerous.

Not everyone in the military trains on pistols. The ones I know who are qualified tend towards Sharpshooter 29/40 (72.5%) or Expert 36/40 (90%) -- at range of 82.5ft. Of course this is Texas and shooting as a hobby is expected. Army pistol marksmanship is way, way above the 14% "police" accuracy at 60-75ft.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 12:16:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R_S:

As far as 60 hours "professional instruction" I think the most shocking part of the study is that the professional instruction police receive is at likely shooting distances (under 15ft) making law enforcement less dangerous.

Not everyone in the military trains on pistols. The ones I know who are qualified tend towards Sharpshooter 29/40 (72.5%) or Expert 36/40 (90%) -- at range of 82.5ft. Of course this is Texas and shooting as a hobby is expected. Army pistol marksmanship is way, way above the 14% "police" accuracy at 60-75ft.
View Quote
The fact that you are offering the Army pistol qualification course as an indicator of even a basic level of training or competence with a pistol shows that your whole argument is based on a thorough and complete ignorance of the subject. You might as well use Nintendo Duck Hunt scores as your baseline.

The Army pistol course is so easy that I have seen people with no class room training, no field training, who have never touched a handgun, pick up the pistol and shoot a perfect score. It’s ridiculously easy, you don’t even have to draw from a holster.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 4:53:46 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
The fact that you are offering the Army pistol qualification course as an indicator of even a basic level of training or competence with a pistol shows that your whole argument is based on a thorough and complete ignorance of the subject. You might as well use Nintendo Duck Hunt scores as your baseline.

The Army pistol course is so easy that I have seen people with no class room training, no field training, who have never touched a handgun, pick up the pistol and shoot a perfect score. It’s ridiculously easy, you don’t even have to draw from a holster.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
Originally Posted By R_S:

As far as 60 hours "professional instruction" I think the most shocking part of the study is that the professional instruction police receive is at likely shooting distances (under 15ft) making law enforcement less dangerous.

Not everyone in the military trains on pistols. The ones I know who are qualified tend towards Sharpshooter 29/40 (72.5%) or Expert 36/40 (90%) -- at range of 82.5ft. Of course this is Texas and shooting as a hobby is expected. Army pistol marksmanship is way, way above the 14% "police" accuracy at 60-75ft.
The fact that you are offering the Army pistol qualification course as an indicator of even a basic level of training or competence with a pistol shows that your whole argument is based on a thorough and complete ignorance of the subject. You might as well use Nintendo Duck Hunt scores as your baseline.

The Army pistol course is so easy that I have seen people with no class room training, no field training, who have never touched a handgun, pick up the pistol and shoot a perfect score. It’s ridiculously easy, you don’t even have to draw from a holster.
So you didn't actually read the report? And somehow in the report all those novice shooters only who had no experience only got 5.5% hits at 60-75ft, but on your range, unlike all the other Army ranges, novice shooters get 40/40 at 25 meters. Are you also a NAVY SEAL in your spare time? Or Space Shuttle door gunner this week?
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 5:28:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/29/2018 5:32:24 PM EST by FightingHellfish]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R_S:

So you didn't actually read the report? And somehow in the report all those novice shooters only who had no experience only got 5.5% hits at 60-75ft, but on your range, unlike all the other Army ranges, novice shooters get 40/40 at 25 meters. Are you also a NAVY SEAL in your spare time? Or Space Shuttle door gunner this week?
View Quote
Have you shot the standard or alternate courses? I’ve shot multiple types of military and LE pistol quals and the standard US Army qual is remarkably easy. You can miss multiple shots and still have a perfect score. Comparing all that stuff is apples and oranges, and comparing it to real world incidents is apples and sombreros. Functionally meaningless.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 6:03:52 PM EST
There's a ton more to it than shooting.

Start at recruiting...who are they hiring and why? This will determine what they are good at. It varies widely from city to city.

Then, training...what do they train to be good at and why?

Then, hours...what are they spending time on and why? Driving, PT, comms, medical, legal, tactics, more legal, more policy...and maybe some time for shooting. Then...how many guns...shotguns, rifles, pistol, BUG...magnified by the current kinder gentler "be a guardian" mindset being taught that tells cops to run away rather than shoot back.

Then on duty...court hours, admin time, caseloads...

So, shooting suffers badly. It's not as simple as people think, though.

Frankly, a lot of cops shoot really well considering the crappy amount of time and ammo they are given to train with.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 6:18:16 PM EST
Thanks OP !
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 7:40:16 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
Have you shot the standard or alternate courses? I’ve shot multiple types of military and LE pistol quals and the standard US Army qual is remarkably easy. You can miss multiple shots and still have a perfect score. Comparing all that stuff is apples and oranges, and comparing it to real world incidents is apples and sombreros. Functionally meaningless.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish:
Originally Posted By R_S:

So you didn't actually read the report? And somehow in the report all those novice shooters only who had no experience only got 5.5% hits at 60-75ft, but on your range, unlike all the other Army ranges, novice shooters get 40/40 at 25 meters. Are you also a NAVY SEAL in your spare time? Or Space Shuttle door gunner this week?
Have you shot the standard or alternate courses? I’ve shot multiple types of military and LE pistol quals and the standard US Army qual is remarkably easy. You can miss multiple shots and still have a perfect score. Comparing all that stuff is apples and oranges, and comparing it to real world incidents is apples and sombreros. Functionally meaningless.
I've shot all the courses (except the revolver, LOL)

The Combat Pistol Qual allows you to get a perfect score by hitting 30 out of 40 at a variety of distances, but the Alt Course is 25 Meters and requires 40 out of 40 for a perfect score. One version of the Alt Course requires 40 hits in the five zone to get a perfect score. Have never witnessed anyone do that. The Alt course is tougher than the Combat Pistol Qual.

Like every Texas LTC, I've shot the Texas DPS (State Police) test. Shot it many times and at it is a total snoozer to make the DPS required 90%. Anybody who knows what they are doing can get 100%.

I think the point I'm trying to make is that LE pistol training/quals are functionally questionable. I very much agree that the military pistol quals are only part of the answer.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 8:25:23 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R_S:
I think the point I'm trying to make is that LE pistol training/quals are functionally questionable.
View Quote
Questionable at what? All of the data you've posted cannot be directly compared and is therefore meaningless.

FWIW, Texas requires shots out to 15 yards for pistol qualifications, and many agencies go out to 25 yards. 50 yard pistol qualifications used to be common but started going away with the popularity of double action only and striker fired pistols.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 8:46:58 PM EST
I've seen cops shoot at IDPA matches. It usually takes a couple of months, if they stick with it, to stop shooting the no shoots. One of the good shooters brought his daughters BF with him. He was a 'big fish' in his little pond. He didn't do well at all.......and we dogged his ass mercilessly.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 8:49:44 PM EST
Most cops can't shoot for shit. Most only shoot once a year for the quals and they shoot up the range. I'm talking floors, ceiling, walls, everything. Not saying there aren't some good shooters who are cops and train often, but they are rare. Just like in the military. Most who join the military and police are looking for a paycheck and aren't gun people. Civilians who carry are about the same. Most probably don't practice enough, but there's some good shooters in there too who take it seriously and shoot often. But really all cops and military are all coming from the same civilian population. A uniform doesn't automatically make you an expert shot. They don't really train you enough unless you're SWAT or Special Forces or something where it's your job to shoot well.
Link Posted: 11/29/2018 11:02:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Spiffums:
I've seen cops shoot at IDPA matches. It usually takes a couple of months, if they stick with it, to stop shooting the no shoots. One of the good shooters brought his daughters BF with him. He was a 'big fish' in his little pond. He didn't do well at all.......and we dogged his ass mercilessly.
View Quote
Three officers showed up to shoot IDPA at my local club several years ago. The acted like they were hot shit.
Until we started shooting.
One was DQ'd on the second stage of the match. He dropped his pistol on the draw. He didn't stick around to learn anything either.
Took his gun and went home. Embarrassed I guess.
The other two shot really lousy and they weren't all puffed up at the end of the match.

Most of these guys have only ever shot standing in one place at a stationary target.
Moving and shooting is much different.

Now there are some LE who shoot USPSA and are excellent shots. I wouldnt say its the majority of LE though.
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 3:15:16 AM EST
When I went through the academy some 30+ years ago we didn't have much firearms training. As a reserve, the academy had 3 levels and all 3 took a full year to complete. During that time we only had 4 range days. 3 for pistol and 1 for shotgun.

Once I was on a dept we had one pistol training day and then another day for qualifying.

The ranges in our area allowed LEO to shoot free and the dept would provide free ammo and I'd take advantage every chance possible. Others, not so much...
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 4:50:56 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Genin:

But it costs lots of money to pay salaries while officers are receiving that training, and the public doesn't want to pay for it

This could all be changed if the tax paying public wanted to pay for it.
View Quote
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 5:13:38 AM EST
My Dept range is the only one I have worn body armor to. I have shot next to staff who should never ever have a pistol in their hands. We shoot AZ POST once a year, that's it. Admittedly, firearm usage here is very limited, and the chance of getting into any type of shootout is lower than getting mugged in a Walmart parking lot, but still...would be nice to have some better training. However, he's right - the public doesn't want to pay for it. Heck, we haven't even had a pay raise in over 12 years.
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 5:26:18 AM EST
I am a firearms instructor for my department and I am on the swat team. I also have shot USPSA and 3 gun for about 8 years now. At major 3 gun matches I usually finish in the top 10 to 20%.

In my career I have found that most cops are not gun people and don't shoot all that well. About 20% of cops are pretty decent, 60% are average, and 20% are just scary bad. We have a few military guys as officers and they are no different than the other officers.

As far as the cops who show up to competition and think they will do well, I get it. That was me once. The first time I tried USPSA I remember thinking that I had way more training and should be able to kick ass compared to the "untrained" people. After all, I shot great at skills (academy) and thought that would transfer over. I got my ass kicked at the first match I went to. Luckily I kept with it and I am a much better shot compared to when I started.

The main problems I see in training are a lack of funds, range time, and interest. Most cops are pretty good at other parts if their job, even if they are not good shots. The other problem is we end up having to rain to the lowest common denominator.
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 6:04:03 AM EST
When I first started, I would attend the ppc matches across the state and competed in the Police and Fire Games. There are some old guys out there that can do evil things with a 6” L frame at 50 yards. I do pretty good, for the average bear
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 6:05:04 AM EST
As an RO for the PRS I am fortunate to see the best shooters in the world at extremely close range. These guys and gals are committed to training, training, training. I'm truly amazed at how well they shoot. Fast forward to my local members only range on the rare occasion that I even bother to go,,,yuck. It is SUCH a let down to see the local "hunters" or "shooters". After reading this thread I can certainly see why the concern about shooting well is certainly NOT overblown. I can easily see why the "cops" get their butts handed to them at pistol competitions as well. To me , shooting is no different than golf or bowling or any other skill. You WILL shoot like you practice. I don't shoot NEAR as much as I should but due to 1000s' of rounds fired over the years my skillset remains above average due simply to repetition I suppose.

I do shoot around my home place and focus mainly on 2" "popper" targets while I mow the yard. At my age shooting competitively has no "juice" for me however I remain greatly concerned about the "civil" environment we all live in. You know,,,the parking lot at Walmart where the crazy people explode over a stolen parking spot. Hence the shooting practice I get while on the zero turn. IMHO most potentially dangerous situations for my wife and I will be at VERY close range and the "targets" will NOT be made of paper and static.
Link Posted: 12/15/2018 8:32:39 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BGENE:
Most cops are not gun guys, again MOST, not all obviously. Many shoot enough to qualify (qtr/semi/annual) whatever is required.

Bored, time for a LEO story.

Once upon a time in the Armory.

LE guy, comes in, clears his weapon as follows;

Racks the slide (with a full mag in place duh), ejects a live round/chambers another round,

Drops the mag,

Why use a clearing barrel when you can use the floor

Pulls the trigger (dumb fuck)

Sends a round ricocheting around the room with others inside
View Quote
Ever see a clearing barrel on a military base? They have bullet holes in them too. Random duty officers and MPs are the usual suspects because they were up all night.

Private clubs? The indoor range walls and ceiling baffles are littered with strikes.

It’s a universal thing the distribution of competence.
Top Top