Better shot than law enforcement?

[Metellus]

Who here gets warm fuzzies at the range when you shoot better than the federal agent, local police, or sheriff in the lane next to you? Not sure if I should be proud or worried! ;)

The following not meant to disrespect law enforcement.

I was at the range one day out shooting an agent (maybe a cadet?) armed with a M4 with my glock. Then i switched to my AR-15 and shot the center out of a target while she missed man sized targets at 15 yards... with her rifle.

The next day i was shooting my glocks and 1911s and blowing center of the targets out at 7 yards while a LEO (maybe a cadet?) was occasionally missing a man sized at 7 yards. He said he needed to get good in a month because he already failed qualification.

Yet another day a girl with a police cadet shirt and a guy with a police instructor were shooting. They looked very serious and she seemed stressed out and shot horribly. The funny thing is that he was giving her all this instruction yet... he wasn't that great.

I'm glad I learned to shoot over time for fun. Having your job on the line based on how well you shoot must be stressful.

I guess the bottom line is nobody is a born shot no matter what their profession is.

[FrankDrebin]

...delete....

[Limeyfellow]

Probrobly due to most members of the police not being related to Rambo or Braddock. There is quite a good variation of skill between officers. Further down there are some stats and so on discussing studies down on police shooting skills and so on and they are not too hard to believe.

[buffalo_bore]

Maybe you could give them some friendly tips?

[JollyRoger]

Most law enforcement officers carry a gun because it comes with the job, not because they like to shoot. A fair amount of those who don't really care about shooting learn to shoot well and never have a problem, but there are always those few who come out and always slip by with barely passing scores. Otherwise they might be exemplary officers. You have to remember that most people (thank God) who come into law enforcement are not looking to shoot anybody, and won't in a 20 or 30 year career. Even if you are working one of the high speed/low drag areas (drugs, robberies, car theft task forces, etc.) you do a lot more pointing, yelling and threatening than shooting at people.

A lot of smaller PD's and SO's also have miniscule firearms training budgets. I have seen some that get only 50 or 100 rounds per year to qualify officers, and that's it. Even if you're good, you have to practice.

[Steve in PA]

I get worried when I see joe blow pumping round after round at the target and can barely hit it, or they have more hits in the 2x4 target supports. Or they empty a mag as fast as they can pull the trigger and are lucky if they hit the ground.

So you've come across a few people that have no firearm sense. I see lots of them everytime I go to the range.

[chris in va]

From talking with many LEO's, I'd say range time/practice is pretty far down the ladder of importance. They have a lot of paperwork to do and various other responsibilities that eat up their time. Many just want to head straight home after work.

[RWK]

What follows is a true story. The DC area is overrun with law enforcement personnel (I do not mean this critically or negatively, but there are many LEOs and innumerable local, state and Federal agencies). My local ranges has quite a few LEO members, but it also gets lots of “one month members” who practice before formal handgun qualification.

About two years ago, a young, female Capitol Police officer was practicing next to me with her issued autoloader (as I recall, it was a .40 Smith of some sort) and she couldn’t hit squat. Further, she expressed her concerns to the Range Master and to me because her periodic (semiannual, I believe) qualification was scheduled for the next week. I tried to help her with the very basics, and it was clear she was really “pulling” the trigger, causing numerous “seven o’clock” misses. I was practicing with my Ruger GP100 (KGP-141 with a gold dot front sight).

After several minutes of help, she was doing somewhat better and she started watching my slow, deliberate SA revolver target practice. She then asked about my Ruger, and I explained it was a revolver. She said, “Oh, I’ve heard about them, but I’ve never seen one”. Obviously, I showed her the revolver, let her shoot it, etc.

I was astonished, however, that a Capitol officer would be such firearms novice that she had never even handled a revolver, no less fired one, or having marginally proficiency with one.

[Duxman]

Went to a 3 gun shoot in MD a couple months back - 2 DC SWAT members were in attendance. One of them had an M4 with a 100 rd Beta, he emptyed the Beta shooting at targets in the 50 yard range, missing all of them. The other SWAT member did much better, 2 - 30 round mags and he didnt even go dry on the first one before he took out the 5 - 50 yard targets.

Meanwhile in a recent IPSC tournament, there was a either a military or policeman - who scored 2 hits in the "A" range on 9 targets (including a combat reload) in under 11 seconds. Bad Ass!

[tlm225]

Boy, this is a subject I could talk about for a while. First my observation is that police officers are much better shots than the AVERAGE citizen, they received training on proper techniques and have to meet a minimum standard to stay on the job. While I consider our course of fire to be a low standard I have been present at a few concealed carry classes and the AVERAGE CCW holder doesn't hold a candle to our officer's. I also shoot on public ranges occasionally and am rarely impressed.

Now with that being said, I believe the typical gun enthusiast especially an IDPA/IPSC competitor is a much better shot than the AVERAGE OFFICER. I have been the top shooter in my department of 66 officers for the past 8-9 years, yet I know of many non-police who can out shoot me at the drop of a hat.

There are many reasons on why police don't shoot better, among them is the fact stated above that for most, the gun is another tool, like mace, handcuffs and the ink pen, they are not gun enthusiasts. They will shoot their qualification course and, if they pass, probably won't shoot at all until the next qualification. If they are a weak shooter they may shoot 100-200 rounds prior to qualification to "sharpen up".

I would love for all officers to be +90% shooters but that isn't going to happen. The constraints of budgeting and interest (for both the officer and the department) probably won't ever allow it. While we are passionate about our hobby, they (the typical officer) do not share that passion.

There are many attributes that are desired of an officer that are prized above marksmanship. Courage, integrity, the ability to deal with the public, to thoroughly investigate an incident and write a report that conveys all the key information all take priority. They need to use good judgement on the street and if they make an arrest, to be able to gather evidence and information and see the case through trial and give honest, unbiased testimony. An officer will catch much more heat for low performance in these areas than for shooting a low qualification score.

[tjhands]

There are many attributes that are desired of an officer that are prized above marksmanship. Courage, integrity, the ability to deal with the public, to thoroughly investigate an incident and write a report that conveys all the key information all take priority. They need to use good judgement on the street

I agree in principal, but when the sh*t hits the fan and I have to count on an officer to save my life, all the courtesy, judgment, and integrity isn't going to be my main concern. They better be able to shoot well.

[Limeyfellow]

The ability to deal with the public is generally more important in my opinion. It would cut down on alot of shootings and taser actions in the first place and seems to be something that have been missing that was present in the past. The authorative figure (of course it didn't work too well during the 50s-70s at times). Of course the more and more complex paperwork they been seeing doesn't help, especially when they have to fill out 2 hours of it for an arrest.

[MidKnight]

The ability to deal with the public is generally more important in my opinion. It would cut down on alot of shootings and taser actions in the first place

I have to take issue with this. Following this logic... all the police would have to do is deal with the public better to cut down on shootings. Well, if a police officer shot somebody and all he had to do was talk to him to solve the situation... it would be an un-justified shooting. They only shoot when there is grave danger. Not when a PR agent is needed. The PR agent is needed after a good cop shoots a bad guy because people are too over sensative.

[tlm225]

Perhaps I didn't express myself very well in my original post. The need for shooting skills is critical for surviving a lethal threat encounter and I believe that the record reflects that police win far more than they lose. However the police administrators tend to place marksmanship way down the priority chart.

In dealing with the public I was talking about police/community relations and treating people with as much dignity and respect as they will allow you to. That type of conduct does not apply to those who would kill an officer or citizen.

But to keep this on topic let me summarize my comments. 1. I believe a typical officer is a better shot than a typical non-officer. 2. A firearms enthusiast, especially one who shoots in competition, is going to be better, perhaps much better than the average officer. What will it take to change that? More mandatory range time and higher standards, neither of which I see coming because of who holds the purse strings (the elected officials and the administrators).

[MK11]

I took a class at Sig Arms Academy the same time a group of SEALs was doing some training there. Obviously we had no interaction with them but when someone inevitably asked the instructor how the SEALs' shooting skills were, he said there was nothing superhuman about it and they actually see a lot of civilians who are better marksmen.

Of course, he went on to say the SEALs have a totally different mindset and popping off a few hundred rounds during a weekend class is a lot different than what they're training to do....

[jcoiii]

We had everyone pass qualification....at least in my range group. We had 20 in my group and I'd say that the breakdown was probably something like this:

90%+ 8
80-90% 8
75-80% 2

75% was the lowest qualification level. It was nice to see one of the officers (a female) go from shooting in the 40's on day one, to qualifying at 79 (i think). Granted that's not a great score, but loads of improvement in her in TWO days. (we only did the range mon-wed). If anyone cares what I shot, check the sig,and guess. :D

[FrankDrebin]

If you want to save more officers' lives with the least amount of resources, you should increase driver training and decision-making skills. Given the distances that most shootings take place, being a "good" marksman isn't very high on the list of police survival skills. Nor should it be very high on the list of "saving someone else's life" skills. I can't think of many situations where a cop realistically saved someone's life because they were a superior, or even average shooter. On TV maybe, but that's about it....

[MK11]

I dunno, not so long ago an LAPD officer sniped a hostage taker using a .45 ACP. Pretty long shot for a handgun too, if I recall. If I was the hostage, I'd certainly hope the officer has better than average skills.

However, I tend to agree with your point about a priority being placed on additional skills.

[Runsalone]

Been shooting offhand blindfolded again have you??? :eek:

Sorry!
Sorry!
Sorry!



"Flame retardant suit donned..."

[Mannlicher]

well, I don't have any empirical knowledge of how well cops shoot. I do know that with almost every reported story , the police seem to hit an average of 10% or so of shots fired. NYC paid about 3 million to the family of Amadou Diallo. Four Undercover Cops emptied their Glock's at him, and "only" hit him about 14 times. Lets see, 4 cops, each with a 17 round Glock, means they connected with about 20% of their shots from point blank range.
No, cops dont really shoot well at all. If I was carrying as part of the job, and knew that I could well be involved in a life or death situation, I would darn sure practice more then they seem to.

[FrankDrebin]

But they shot him 14 more times than YOU did.....

[Blackhawk6]

Mannlicher,

First, they fired 41 shots striking Diallo nineteen times, not fourteen. They did not empty four 17-round magazines. That puts their hit percentage at about 46%.

Second, how many rounds have you fired in defense of yourself or others and what percentage connected? How many were fired while you were backing down a stairway one-handed?

[tINY]

I think I have more of an issue with the fact that they all emptied their magazines. It doesn't seem like one *possibly* armed guy is a big threat after being hit multiple times. Just firing until you are out of quarters is an arcade-game attitude, not the halmark of disciplined officers.



-tINY

[FrankDrebin]

How long does it take to tell whether someone is still a threat?

[D.S. Brown]

I'd be the first, and usually am, to disparage your average law enforcement officers shooting skills because I've been on both sides of the fence.

I would say that in a safe and static environment most gun enthusiasts could shoot much better than most average LEO's. However if those targets ever started shooting back my money is with the LEO.

He/she may not shoot any better but they are generally better prepared through training and mindset to keep their cool under fire and to take the fight to the bad guy. Most citizens don't have that level of training, and thus even with superior marksmanship skills than police, they may not prevail in the same scenario. As someone said before the police win more gunfights than they lose.

My thoughts.

Best,
Dave

[Bo Hunter]

How long does it take to catch a fish?

[nug_38]

If you need to reload, then you should have enough time to analyse the situation. If I remember correctly, each of the officers involved had to reload. I believe in the few seconds it takes to reload the officers could have assessed the situation. I can understand that in armed confrontations with high adrenaline levels, we are bound to be nervous. However when no shots are returned one must re-evaluate the dangers. One is supposed to use sufficient force to stop the attack, not more than necessary. These officers clearly used more force than was needed.

Its all past tense now, but maybe these officers could have benifited from more training in shoot/don't shoot scenarios. Also, using flashlights in low light situations could have been helpfull too. This was a regrettable tragedy.

[FrankDrebin]

These officers clearly used more force than was needed.

Well, if it was so obvious to you, why do you suppose it wasn't as obvious to the jury? Was it a case of jury nullification? By a NY jury supporting a bunch of white cops who shot an unarmed black guy numerous times? Or was it a bench trial and the judge was corrupt? Or could it be that when all the evidence was in, their actions were not so obviously unreasonable after all given the totality of the circumstances?

[BreacherUp!]

Second, how many rounds have you fired in defense of yourself or others and what percentage connected? How many were fired while you were backing down a stairway one-handed?

This one time, in band camp...........

[tINY]

That they were justified in what they did in the situation is not the only consideration. The factors that put them in that situation (especially since he turned out not to be a bad guy) are important.

I'm sure that the NYPD reviewed it's tactics and training after that. If they didn't, they are worse than I imagined.



-tINY

[SamD]

"He/she may not shoot any better but they are generally better prepared through training and mindset to keep their cool under fire and to take the fight to the bad guy. Most citizens don't have that level of training, and thus even with superior marksmanship skills than police, they may not prevail in the same scenario. As someone said before the police win more gunfights than they lose."

Most cops are not better prepared either through mindset or training. Police win more gunfights than they loose because most Bad Guys are really lousey shots. Cops seldom take the fight to the bad guy as most police shootings are spur of the moment affairs. In standup gunfights, they fare poorly being trained as armed social workers, rather than as expert purveyors of violence. "Get behind the squad and get on the horn, S.W.A.T. will be here soon". :o The trend is only now changing with some officers being trained in so called "active shooter response". :cool:

Cops who are shooters are rare, but they do exist.

The average citizen who is a shooter as opposed to a gun owner, can usually make enough cash hustling the local force to keep himself well supplied with victuals. I spent the late 70's working my way through the bars and resturants of DC/Maryland/Virginia on the proceeds of "shooting lessons" given to all and sundry cops from Baltimore to Richmond :D
At the time I was LE but the ammo money and range time came on my dime not the deptments.

Sam

[FrankDrebin]

Most cops are not better prepared either through mindset or training. Police win more gunfights than they loose because most Bad Guys are really lousey shots. Cops seldom take the fight to the bad guy as most police shootings are spur of the moment affairs. In standup gunfights, they fare poorly being trained as armed social workers, rather than as expert purveyors of violence. "Get behind the squad and get on the horn, S.W.A.T. will be here soon". The trend is only now changing with some officers being trained in so called "active shooter response".

I GENERALLY trust cops with guns more than I trust the typical gun nut, self-proclaimed shooting instructor, homeowner who anwers the door with a gun in his hand every time, gun shop groupie, person who spends more time rationalizing a "reasonable fear of great bodily harm" when someone looks at him cross-eyed instead of just getting up and leaving, guy who carries a gun because he lives in the suburbs and is afraid of the government taking his guns away, or other various and sundry gun people because I know that most cops deal with jerks every day, and they must learn to control their temper and deal with potentially violent people in a detached, objective way without pulling their guns out at the drop of a hat. They realize that even if they're right, the "bad guy" may not be charged, and while frustrated with this, it isn't something they dwell on. They realize a gun is only one of many tools they have to control a situation.

The reason I trust cops more with guns than I do the other types of people I mentioned, not that some cops aren't also included in those groups, has very little to do with their shooting ability, training or the type of gun they carry. It has more to do with a whole bunch of other intangibles, the least of which is their commando SWAT guy abilities.

[SamD]

Frank is a bright guy.

Sam

[D.S. Brown]

Of course perhaps comparing LEO shooting skills with civilian shooting skills is fallacious on my part since the responsibilities of both groups are different. Usually when the balloon goes up your typical cop, even if his situational awareness detects danger, doesn't have the luxury of leaving. They generally have to "run to the danger," or at least hold it at bay until S.W.A.T. arrives.

When I said "take the fight to the enemy" I wasn't really being literal.

Sam D are you going to tell me that a police officer with 40 hours of firearms training (usually, and btw not nearly enough time), supplemented by use of force training and being able to respond appropriately to a violent situation through the use of force continuum, not to mention his/her carrying a gun everyday, and being required to qualify annually, and by the necessity of the job is in condition yellow/orange for at least their shift, is less trained and less prepared to deal with a violent encounter than your average non leo shooter/concealed handgun licensee. The latter of whom, at least in Texas, are required to take just 10 hours of state mandated minimum instruction and pass a background test to acquire said license. The latter licensee by the way is unlikely to pick up a handgun again to shoot it until he has to re-qualify to retain said license 4-5 years later. Similarly you might get 1 out of 100 that seek additional practical training such as a 2 day training class or something longer like Ayoobs LFI 1. It's just not happening. I think it's ludicrous to intimate that your average citizen is better trained to deal with confrontational violence than a police officer. I'm not saying cops are end all be all, but as many of my instructors have said you will default to your lowest level of training. As lowly and pathetic the training is for most police officers it still exceeds what joe citizen shooter is likely to have and that small margin is likely the key to going home at the end of the day vs. going to the morgue.

Now let me reiterate something in case I wasn't clear. I think that in a static, non violent range scenario your average gun enthusiast/nerd will prevail handily over the shooting skills of your average police officer. However once again when you add violence to the mix my money is on the cop. Is it a 100% guarantee? Nope, but it is a safer bet.

Best,
Dave

[Nnobby45]

. First my observation is that police officers are much better shots than the AVERAGE citizen, they received training on proper techniques

No need to be astonished if you understand that a typical recruit is a college grad with NO firearms experience and that that the academy firearms program is a compromise between reasonable cost vs. good training. That, and the 70% National LE scoring standard isn't condusive to turning out 1st class pistoleros.

TLM225 points out that "police officers are much better shots than the AVERAGE citizen, they received training on proper techniques...."
Well, the average citizen doesn't have any practical experience with a handgun and may have no firearms experience at all. The average citizen who does shoot (handguns) does it voluntarily and is likely, in my opinion to be better than the average Police Officer.

Of course there are LE Officers for whom the issue of saving their life with a handgun is a lot more than just qualifying periodically to keep their job, and consequently, they become very proficient--but that comes with xtra, non mandatory training. There are lot's of LE and Civialians in firearms training and competition that goes beyond anything mandatory.

[Jeff22]

Most cops don't shoot very well because they aren't that interested in guns or shooting and they don't practice. Period.

In my state new recruits get 40 hours of firearms training and shoot 750-1000 rounds in entry level training. The basic training cirriculum that we use is pretty good, but it's BASIC. There is no state standard here on how often officers have to qualify or requalify once they're on the job, although many/most states have some kind of modified PPC that all officers shoot on once a year to measure marksmanship skills. My department shoots handgun quarterly, about 150 rounds per session. That's about enough to keep officer's skills at the same level they graduated recruit school with, in most cases. We don't have the time or the money or the staffing to do much more firearms training than that.

I've got about 3 cops (out of 40) that always have trouble qualifying. They're all smaller females with limited grip strength, limited upper body strength and small hands. Going to a weapons platform with a thinner grip and a shorter reach to the trigger helps somewhat, but they still struggle. I had to do coaching and requal on a couple of these individuals two weeks ago. I think these women came to the range hoping that I could coach them and give them the "secret" that would magically transform them into competent shooters. Well, I did. As we all know, the secret is PRACTICE. I told them to buy 50 or 100 rounds of .40 practice ammo every payday and go shoot. I gave them a list of simple drills to do. I promised that if they followed that program, when our next session of inservice training starts in September, they would qualify with no problem.

Of course, I did some remedial instruction with these same individuals last summer and again this last spring, and told them the EXACT same thing and gave them the EXACT set of practice drills to shoot, and they didn't follow through on it. Not that I was surprised or anything . . .

I've been a cop since 1980 and a firearms instructor since 1982, and I shoot occassionally in PPC, IPSC and IDPA (usually about 4 matches a year).( I'm a "marksman" in PPC, upper C class in IPSC in "production" class and high edge of "sharpshooter" in stock service pistol in IDPA. So, competent but not outstanding or exceptional or anything.)(I personally shoot about 250 rounds a month in practice with my primary duty gun.) All of my non-police competitive shooting friends expend a LOT more ammunition in practice and when shooting in matches than any cop I know, other than myself and members of the local tac team. Of course they're better -- they have a recreational interest in shooting and they PRACTICE. And when they practice, it just isn't some aimless expenditure of ammo, they have drills they shoot to develop specific skills.

There are a lot of cops who have a mild interest in shooting and go out and practice once in a while. There are many others who at least go shoot in practice a little bit before they have their next qualification, so they fire a better score. The majority of cops just sort of bumble along and get by. And many who do practice don't get full value out of it because they don't have any plan to what they're practicing. At the least, keep shooting the mandated qualification course until you can consistently get a high score under all circumstances. Just following that course will give some kind of structure to your practice routine.

Of course, marksmanship skill isn't the only issue to survival. Tactics and situational awareness are citical.

And shooting isn't the only skill that cops need. Once skill I find sadly lacking is writing skills. The work product of the police officer is a written report (in that way they're just like a newspaper reporter). I find a lot of cops (MANY on my department) who have awful writing skills and they're always getting reports rejected by the supervisors or by the DA's office. At least where I work, they need to implement MUCH higher standards on reading comprehension and writing skills for new employees, to avoid these problems.

And the cops need to be able to be proficient in emergency vehicle operation, and defensive tactics, and elementry interrogation and investigation and keep up on changes in the law & procedure and maintain an acceptable level of physical fitness and . . . so marksmanship isn't the ONLY skill they need nor the only thing the PD needs to train on. But, to be a professional, you need to be able to perform competently on ALL that stuff, and a police officer's level of marksmanship skill and gunhandling is one way to evaluate their personal professionalism and commitment to the job.

The good cops will make the effort to be competent on all those skills, even if they don't have a particular personal interest in some of them.

[big daddy 9mm]

some cops are probably good shots and others suck. I am sure that you will meet both. :) :) :)

[Superhornet]

LEO's are no better or no worse than 99% of the civilians I see at the range. I used to shoot with a few who were into the GSSF match's and they were very, very fast and accurate.

[9mm1033]

Most law enforcement officers carry a gun because it comes with the job, not because they like to shoot. A fair amount of those who don't really care about shooting learn to shoot well and never have a problem, but there are always those few who come out and always slip by with barely passing scores.

Well said and true. However, many forget that shooting for police qualification is MUCH different than shooting for pleasure at the range. Very good (civilian) shooters would do poorly when placed into a stressed, timed qualification course. So, I'd say most cops are average to fair shooters with a few poor ones thrown into the mix. But, others are mean, fast and accurate at any distance.

[SamD]

D.S.Brown,
That's why I qualified it to the average SHOOTER, not the average OWNER.
And the quality of police training leaves a lot to be desierd. It really is not that intense or in depth, it is more akin to exposure.


Let me digress for a moment.
So long as our police departments are used as armed social workers and not as policeman, it will be that way. Very little time is spent actively looking for criminals and lots is spent on bureaucracy, enforcement of feelgood and revenue enhancing laws. In the "old days' our cops were much more in touch with people, not employed as a deterrent force and in many cases actually shot the hell out of criminals.
That's why you can name gunfighting officers of the 30's-50's and none from today. Used to be that the cop who was a shooter, was a killer of criminals, and people knew who they were. Not that way today. Different approach to keeping the peace. Rough towns actually used to compete for the services of a shooting cop. Paid a bonus for those who demonstrated real proficiency. You will never see a modern department, actively recruiting experienced crook killers. Lawyers and judges would be messing their britches or go out of criminal practice and into torts real fast.

Sam

[D.S. Brown]

SamD,

I actually agree with 99.9% of evertyhing that you are saying. However what I'm saying is that police officers even with that crappy little bit of "exposure" are better suited to deal with a violent encounter than your average civilian without ANY exposure. I'm not saying it is overwhelming but I think it is enough that yes, once again given equal circumstances, I'll bet on the police officer to prevail. Again it's a safer bet though not a guaranteed one.

One thing that I failed to mention but just remembered was a pole done with criminals. The question was posed to them as to whom they would rather face in an armed confrontation. They overwhelmingly chose the police. I think because they perceived police to have greater constraints in the use of deadly force, whereas civilians were not viewed as having to operate within those same constraints, and thus had less inhibition of killing said criminal. Food for thought.

I wholeheartedly agree that police departments generally don't train "gunfighters" any more, nor do they actively seek their services. You and I may not like it, (I don't), but the times they have a changed since the days of the likes of Bill Jordan.

Best,
Dave

[kymasabe]

I was at the range yesterday, 2 lanes down from a LEO with his service weapon, looked like a Glock to me as I glanced down the line. This guy had shoot-n-see targets pasted on a piece of cardboard WAY down range and was blowing the center out of the targets over and over and over. This cop was one great shot. Was my only experience shooting with a LEO at the range with me. I felt humbled.

[buzz_knox]

I've seen cops who shot better than I could dream to shoot. I've seen cops who couldn't hit the broadside of a barn from inside the barn.

Like anything else, ability and training combine to, hopefully, produce good results. And I've seen plenty of civilians who have far more training than 90% of cops.

By the way, most of the cops I've trained with had to pay for their own training. They also tended to be the best shots. I think that says a lot for the individual officer. And it also eliminates one of the myths about "cops being the best shooters." They aren't. The best shooters are those who are dedicated to learning how to most effectively use the tool they have chosen for defense of themselves and others. It just so happens that a lot of them happen to be cops.

[FrankDrebin]

Anybody think they could shoot like this off the range:

Police: Bar Owner Kills Two Robbers With Single Shot
Wayne County Prosecutor To Review Alleged Robbery, Shooting

POSTED: 8:03 p.m. EST November 3, 2003
UPDATED: 8:09 p.m. EST November 3, 2003

Two suspected robbers are dead after a former police officer and owner of a Detroit bar fired a single shot, Local 4 reported.
Video

The robbery and shooting happened early Sunday or late Saturday at Adela's place on the city's southwest side.

Police say the 49-year-old woman who owned the restaurant -- a retired Detroit cop who was a former member of Mayor Coleman Young's security team -- tried to hold the suspects in the parking lot until police arrived. But when the two men attempted to speed away, and nearly ran over one of her employees, she fired a single shot that apparently struck both men, according to police.

"We've had some robberies in that area. We have some evidence now that may indicate that someone was robbed there and assaulted there. There attempted to be another assault against one of the employees, before the owner of this establishment fired one shot in an attempt to stop a fleeing felon," said Detroit police Inspector Marilyn Hall-Beard.

The two men -- Dorian Gordillo, 22, and Rosalio Becera, 33 -- were later found dead from a bullet wound in a car parked on the Interstate 75 service drive, according to police.

One of the men was reportedly still holding a beer in his hand.

Family members of Gordillo and Becera were initially confused over their deaths, Local 4 reported.

"He was a very good guy. He would never look for trouble. I don't understand what happened. I hope we can find some answers," said Barbara Gordillo, the sister-in-law of one of the victims.

Officers who had responded to the incident at the bar wrote down the description of the car that left the scene and later made a match with the vehicle in which Gordillo and Becera were found dead, Local 4 reported.

While the shooting appeared to be justified, the Wayne County prosecutor was expected to review the case to determine if the bar owner would face charges.

[nug_38]

I wonder if that was a case of overpenetration? Or was it a ricochet? What caliber gun was used?

I have never been in a situation like that, so I don't know if I could have done that cold.

[FrankDrebin]

Overpenetration???? She got both of them with one shot and the round stopped in the second guy...I would say it was "just right penetration"...It was a .38 Smith, carried Mexican style (no pun intended). Don't know what kind of round.

The bullet entered the left side of Gordillo's neck, just below his ear, according to the Wayne County medical examiner. It punctured his throat, exited the right side of his jaw and slammed into the left side of Becerra-Santoyo's chest, near the nipple.

The wounded Gordillo kept driving. He missed Cuevo by 2 feet as he sped through the gate, which had closed only halfway.

Why do they have to say "slammed"?? I would have said "penetrated"......

[FrankDrebin]

How about you other range guys? Ever make a shot like that? How about this one: A police officer and her partner stopped a cab with a passenger they thought might have been involved in a robbery. As I recall, the police officer who did the shooting wasn't great at the range. The bad guy shot her partner through the throat and killed him. He then shot her below the vest and she went down. As he was running down the street, she dropped him with one shot to the back of the head from her Model 10 Smith from 15-20 yards away .

Anyone ever make a shot like that? These are just two cops I know. Cops make those kinds of shots every day across the country. How many range jockeys do?

How about this one. I knew this officer too:

Redford man convicted of murdering Detroit police officer


By David Shepardson / The Detroit News

Comment on this story
Send this story to a friend
Get Home Delivery

DETROIT -- A 23-year-old man was convicted Friday in the Feb. 12 stabbing death of Detroit Police Officer Mike Scanlon after a traffic stop.
A jury deliberated about five hours over two days before convicting Brian Joseph Bourne of second degree murder and the felony murder of a police officer after a six-day trial in front of Judge Prentis Edwards, a court clerk said Friday.
Scanlon, 35, a father of two, was stabbed 10 times after a scuffle following a traffic stop in Redford Township.
Bourne broke free while Scanlon was frisking him, police said. Scanlon caught up to Bourne in a back yard, and a struggle ensued in which Bourne was shot in the stomach.
Bourne denied stabbing Scanlon. He told the jury Thursday that two friends stabbed the officer.
Bourne has faced numerous run-ins with the law.
In 1991, at age 11, Bourne was found guilty of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and committed to a youth home, juvenile court records show. He spent time in three juvenile facilities before his release in April 1999 to his grandparents.
Bourne had a series of other criminal scrapes involving driving and drugs.
Bourne faces mandatory life in prison when he is sentenced on Oct. 15 by Edwards.

Anyone ever pull a shot like this off? Ever practice firing while being stabbed in the throat 9 or 10 times?

Another oldie but goodie: Ever practice at the range shooting someone while you're undressing? Or is it usually shooting someone else while THEY'RE undressing!!

Off-duty officer kills suspected carjacker

Detroit patrolman hurt in exchange of gunfire; second suspect arrested

By David G. Grant / The Detroit News

Comment on this story
Send this story to a friend
Get Home Delivery


DETROIT --- An off-duty Detroit Police officer shot and killed a suspected carjacker early Wednesday morning during an exchange of gunfire in which the officer also was seriously wounded.

The officer, whom police declined to identify, was shot in the back, foot and thigh and he is listed in good condition at Grace/Sinai Hospital in Detroit.

Investigators said the shooting happened about 12:10 a.m., minutes after the officer and a friend had left the B.M.G. bar on Burt Road, got into the officer's car and drove a short distance down the street. In the 8800 block of Burt Road, just north of Joy, the officer stopped his vehicle.

"The officer stopped his car to change a CD when two men in a car drove up alongside them," said Cmdr. Craig Schwartz, head of the Major Crimes Division.

Schwartz said the passenger in the suspect's car jumped out, pointed a gun at the officer, who is assigned to the 10th (Livernois) Precinct, and his friend and told both men to get out and to take their clothes off.

While the officer and his friend were disrobing, the gunman was distracted and the officer pulled out his pistol and fired several shots at the gunmen, Schwartz said.

Both men exchanged gunfire and the officer was hit three times. The gunman, who has not been identified, died in Grace/Sinai Hospital. The officer's friend was not injured.

The gunman's accomplice, a 22-year-old Center Line man who was driving the car, sped away but was arrested later when the car he was driving was spotted by police in the area.

[FrankDrebin]

One of my favorites: Anyone ever shoot all three guys who robbed you after being shot?

Robbed ex-cop kills suspect

In critical condition, he wounds two other teens
June 6, 2003






BY BEN SCHMITT AND CECIL ANGEL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS




A retired Detroit police officer shot and killed a man and wounded two others early Thursday morning after being robbed outside an east side bar, police said.

Robert Strickland was walking toward the Elbow Lounge on the 7300 block of Macknear Field in Detroit at 12:50 a.m. when he was approached by three teens. One brandished a gun and demanded money, said Homicide Inspector Craig Schwartz.

Strickland, 57, gave the young men $80 and credit cards. One of the teens then fired at Strickland, striking him in the stomach, Schwartz said.

The teens fled. Strickland opened fire with two handguns he was carrying legally -- a .25-caliber and a 9mm -- Schwartz said. He fired 17 shots, striking the 15-year-old suspect in the back and an 18-year-old suspect in the back of the left leg. The third suspect, Antonio Harris, 18, was killed after being struck in the head, Schwartz said. All three were from Detroit.

Stephanie Henry, a bartender at the Elbow Lounge, was working when she heard gunshots. She said she she kept working because it didn't sound close by and the bar has had little trouble with crime.

"It's a nice place," she said.

A moment later, Strickland, a regular customer, walked in and sat in the chair at the end of the bar nearest the door, Henry said. He appeared calm.

"He just sat down and told me to call the police," she said.

She barely remembers what happened after she found out he had been shot. "It was a scary feeling," she said.

The two wounded suspects were listed in temporarily serious condition Thursday night at St. John Detroit Riverside Hospital. Strickland was in critical but stable condition at Detroit Receiving Hospital. All three are expected to live, Schwartz said.

The wounded suspects were questioned by police. They face felony charges, including armed robbery.

No charges are expected against Strickland, Schwartz said.

Strickland, who lives in Detroit, joined the department in 1967 and retired as a sergeant on disability in 1986.

He had worked in the 11th (Davison) Precinct.

[FrankDrebin]

Moral of the story: You don't know if you're a "good shot" until the day you have to shoot someone who is stabbing you in the throat, or who is holding a shotgun on you while you're taking off your drawers, or until three animals come up on you and shoot you AFTER you hand over your wallet or who just killed your partner and shot you and is now running down the street while you're bleeding. THAT'S who a "good shooter" is. And if you can do all these things at about a .16 BAC, you're a REALLY good shooter....Just kidding....

[ATW525]

How about you other range guys? Ever make a shot like that?

Well, I tried convincing a couple of my friends to sit in a car so I could try, but they weren't very cooperative with helping me practice... :(

[FrankDrebin]

You can't have them sit there and cooperate....you have to let them SHOOT at you.....Disclaimer: Don't try this at home.

[CarbineCaleb]

Well, I haven't seen any LEOs shooting. But I can beleive that there is a broad distribution of talent, experience, training there - some top notch, some lousy, most competent.

I have seen a good number of civilians shoot though. I would say that 3/4+ of them are doing good to stay on paper at 25 feet. And those are the ones who visit the range, rather than have their gun sitting in closet or nightstand for the last n-years. :D

When I took my required pistol class, I was truely dismayed at the lack of maturity and general common sense of my (civilian) classmates. I had been under the impression we'd have a live-fire portion of the class - it turned out be an electronic simulator. When I asked the instructor why no live fire, he answered, and I will quote: Take a look around you, (Carbine), these guys aren't real bright. Would you like to be standing next to one of them on the range while they were handling a loaded firearm? After a little reflection, I decided he was right :D In addition, he said that he wears an armored vest in the live fire classes that they offer due to the "skills" of the students. :eek: :D

[FrankDrebin]

When I took my required pistol class, I was truely dismayed at the lack of maturity and general common sense of my (civilian) classmates. I had been under the impression we'd have a live-fire portion of the class - it turned out be an electronic simulator. When I asked the instructor why no live fire, he answered, and I will quote:

Haa...I believe you......A retired cop friend of mine took a CCW class, thinking he had to to get his permit when he retired. This was during a time when MI's CCW for cops law was in a state of change....Poor gun didn't need to take the class after all...It was taught by a Sheriff's deputy (off duty) who really didn't know what he was doing. Cost him something like $150.00 and they never shot real guns....they shot airsoft or something like that....Silly...

[CarbineCaleb]

My class was required by MA for the pistol permit. The instructor was really pretty good, and I thought the class was worthwhile.

The simulation was, for a simulation, actually pretty danged cool. The guns were modified semiautos with electronics stuffed into the grip... they made a bang sound and even recoiled when shot at a big electronic projection screen, and after each string of shots, the instructor could show us the positions of our strikes on the screen, in the sequence they were shot for diagnostics, using a computer interface. It was a very nice system, and I think would be useful even for experienced shooters.

And, I am glad that those guys weren't all holding loaded firearms :D The average age was actually roughly 35, but I felt like I was sitting in a high school classroom. It was bad, real bad... :barf:

[k9lwt]

The Diallo shoot was a justified shoot. It's unfortunate, but it happened. Keeping that in mind, it shouldn't matter how many times you shoot the threat, as long as it hasn't stopped. I don't care how many times I have to shoot something to stop it. When the S@#t comes down, I'm not counting rounds, and I'm not stopping until the threat stops. If that means emptying 5 of my magazines, then using close combat, that's what it means.

[Mannlicher]

Come on now. An unarmed man, with no record, is shot multiple times( gee Frank, how many was it?) by 4 cops, at point blank range, and thats 'justifiable'? Geez
Guess the jury nor the NYPD agrees with you. The city paid, and the police revamped their prodedures.

[stevelyn]

I would say on average only about 10% of cops are real gun nuts and that average probably drops more the farther east you go. They are the ones who make up most of the notable shooters and firearms instructors.
However, all have received excellent basic training in firearms. Problem is like anything else, is ongoing training and maintaining proficiency with a busy work schedule and other priorities that make training take a backseat to other requirements. Afterall how many cops from a given academy class still maintain the same level of physical fitness they achieved by the time they graduated?
Those who have a real interest in shooting are going to take the time to practice maintain those skills. Those who don't are going to muddle their way through at qualification time.

[ESI Agent]

Perception and reality. As a member of the security industry I lack perception as do most people in the industry. I shoot weekly and attand at least four combat shooting courses a year,which I pay for. I do this because I take pride in what I do and am a professional . I also am a high ranking blackbelt and continue to train at least twice a week in the arts as I've been doing for over 20 years. What I've learned in life is this , labels are just that, labels. Very few of us are objective, most people see with their minds not with their eyes. I found regardless of my 1000 hours of documented training and my collage degrees when one puts on a uniform saying security the perception is your just a guard. I understand perception is everything. I judge people not by their labels but their ability.

[k9lwt]

Mannlicher,

Like I said, it's unfortunate, but it happened. As for the jury nor the NYPD agreeing with me, last I knew the officers were cleared of wrongdoing in an internal investigation AND in their criminal trial. A NY jury of 7 white men, 1 white woman, and 4 black women found that the officers were justified in fatally shooting Diallo.

They thought he was armed with a gun. As for him not having a record-what the hell does that have to do with anything? I guess they should have tried to do a record check when they were in fear for their lives, huh? Hey-if I thought someone had a gun and wasn't responding to my commands-I'd just assume it was a misunderstanding-he probably has a clean record and I'd leave. Everyone starts out with a clean record, then they commit crimes and get the prestigous record. How about the Columbine kids-they couldn't be a threat because they were just kids...

It's a horrible thing that happened, but it happened.

[Jeff22]

I attended an Officer Survival Class presented by the S&W Academy back in the summer of 2000. The Diallo shooting was discussed during the class. I don't know all the facts of this incident, but we were told at the class that the major tactical issue involved in this mistake of fact shooting was that the NYPD cops DID NOT have flashlights with them, so they weren't able to illuminate Diallo as they challenged him.

Does anybody know if this is true or not? Not having a high intensity light on your person when attempting to perform law enforcement tasks at night is careless at best and negligent at worst. Having a light available might have prevented the whole tragedy. You don't use deadly force to respond to a perceived threat until you can identify that there IS a threat.

(Before someone accuses me of being "anti-police" I should point out that I AM the police, an officer since 1981 and a firearms instructor since 1982. Counting the security officer job I had while I was in college, I have worked the 11pm-7am midnight shift since August of 1977 so I'm quite aware of the tactical dynamics involved in challenging unknown people presenting a potential threat in the dark.)

[srfl]

Jeff22....I'm a Fed LEO....I know of very few fed and state-level investigators that carry flashlights; in fact I'm the only one I know that does....having one has helped me during warrant executions and simunition drills at FLETC or follow-on courses. I agree with you, a good light (like a mag or revolver reload, a good folding knife, a set of cuff and keys) is needed by LEO's...not to have one is just one this tool that will be needed when you need it most.

[4V50 Gary]

Most cops don't have the same level of interest or enthusiasm for firearms as do civilians. It's just equipment for them. There are some LEO who are outstanding shots and active shooters too.

[foghornl]

Hmmmmm OK, my experience from a couple of years back, before Ohio had CCW and LONG before the AWB expired...

Was shooting in my local indoor range with my 1911 Champion model Springfield, and I have my Vaquero .357 in my bag. Guy in next lane has a Glock of some sort...don't remember which one, but he seemed to shoot A LOT before changing mags...15/16/17 but I don't see any holes showing up on his standard (B-27??) target, but I see a couple on the edge of my carboard backing sheet.

We start talking, and he says his "Agency" has all field folks carrying. Finally admits he is a Dept of Agriculture Agent, but doesn't say whether state or fed. Is whining about how inaccurate his "Clock" pistol is. I give him my 1911, and he manages to put 1 of 7 rounds on the paper, but NOT in the black AT 7 YARDS. I shoot his "Clock", and all of mine are in the 8-ring, on an 11x17 (B-34Revised black edges, white center) sillouhette, not the huge honkin' B-27 target he is using. I also punch 6 holes inside the 9-ring with my short-barrel "Sheriff's Model" [3-1/2" barrel glossy stainless] Vaquero.

Diplomatically, I suggest that perhaps the sights "are maybe a bit off, for your grip and stance. Here, try a couple of these targets, I sometimes have trouble lining up my sights on a black target center."

"Harrumpf!" he snorts, reloads a mag & chambers one, then stuffs gun in his waistband, NO HOLSTER, AKA "Mexican Carry" and leaves.

[SamD]

Can any of you tell me why the Department of Agriculture needs to have an armed "agent"? One way or the other it's a pretty sad state of affairs if the hog inspector needs to be armed or the Dept of Ag. is meddling in criminal affairs.

Sam

[Gunmongo]

Most police that I know consider their guns part of the uniform and are not great shots. They also do not make that much money to afford spending it on bullets for practice versus for their families. No matter who you are or how good you shoot if someone is shooting back your percentage of accuracy will decrease. If they do stay and shoot back or even stay in the area they deserve credit. Administratively, police should be given time and bullets to become better but sometimes police are not even provided ranges to practice on much less time and bullets. I am glad I can shoot because if the danger is current it may be many minutes for the police to arrive and a lot can happen in minutes. Not their fault but police ussually arrive after the shooting anyway.

[CarbineCaleb]

Can any of you tell me why the Department of Agriculture needs to have an armed "agent"?

It's that killer corn! Homicidal hogs! Terrifying tomatoes! :p

[Dave R]

Yes, I am a better shot than my Brother in Law, who is FBI.

Actually, I should specify that my offhand, slow-fire groups were tighter than his. In other, more important ways, he could clean my clock.

We went shooting together at our last family reunion. I shot his Glock, offhand, slow-fire, and made smaller groups than he did, consistently.

I think, then, he decided to show off...

He showed me how he trains. He could draw from concealment, and put 4 rounds on target, in a palm-sized group, at 10 yards, in something like 2 seconds. I don't remember exactly, but I remember being astounded. Just amazed me. Looked and sounded a little like Jerry Miculek's video.

He explained that speed from the draw and multiple rounds on target are likely the critical factors in a successful defense. So that's how the FBI has him train.

And that changed the way I train.

[foghornl]

Can any of you tell me why the Department of Agriculture needs to have an armed "agent"?

Methinks SamD has never seen "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" or "Children of the Corn" or "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"....'Body Snatchers" start out as some sort of seed pod.

:D :D :D :D

[sendec]

Depending on which "Department of Agriculture" we are talking about, they have jurisdiction over food stamp and benefits fraud, which amounts to zillions of dollars and a lot of drug and organized crime influence. They most definitely need to be armed. On the federal level the forest service is in agriculture and has a LE unit.

[jcoiii]

Funny story from my academy to illustrate a point about 4 officers firing on one BG.

One of my instructors (during communication instruction if I recall correctly) told us of his rookie days. He was in a smaller dept. and his FTO was a Sgt. (I think, not important though). They were talking one night about having to shoot. The Sgt. said "if you see/hear me shoot, start shooting." So one night they are out and happen to pull over a car that turns out to have a fugitive in it. Once they are out of the car, said BG tries to drive at/around them. Once BG drives past them, the Sgt. starts firing and instructs the rookie to do also. Rookie (my instructor) fires one shot striking BG in the head (not killed, but it stopped him). Sgt. yells "Holy @*&^, boy! I meant shoot the TIRES!" :D

All that to (make a laugh) say that if one LEO hollars "GUN!" and starts firing, it's a good bet those with said LEO will fire as well.

[N.H. Yankee]

Most L.E.O.'s do not get the trigger time we hardcore shooters achieve, and it may not be fair to compare their skills to a weekly shooter. My son is a federal agent and while he can shoot very well I have been shooting for 35 years and have shot in competition for years and can shoot circles around him. Most people in law enforcement view a gun as a tool and most feel the chance of them using it is slim. Some agents in my sons agency dont even wear vests because they feel the chance of being shot are very slim and they are not comfortable to wear. This is a fatalistic viewpoint and dangerous not only to themselve but other agents who depend upon them for support in a firefight.

When I shot in competition we regularly shot against local departments and sadly most were horrible. Having worked with a small dept I can say that most cops do not shoot regularly, only to qualify and when mandatory if it is at all and some have to shoot more than once to qualify. I have even seen fudging for some who couldn't qualify especially older officers who's eyesight was poor or had physical problems. This was in the 70's and hopefully this practice has been stopped. I think some cops are in denial when it comes to the prospect of using their gun. I think some departments do not put enough emphasis on how important it is to shoot regularly and not just when qualifying. My sons agency has a all the ammo you want to use at the range policy and whenever you wish to shoot, yet most agents are strangers to the range.

I tell my son he owes it not only to his fellow agents, but to his family, the public and his agency to keep his firearms safety knowledge and shooting skills sharp. I tell him when and if the time comes to use a weapon theres no time outs for pratice rounds. I had a local sheriff a few years back bring his gun to my house as I have a range and he stated he was concerned because the gun ( ruger GP100 ) wouldn't shoot. He was shooting at 7 yards and had a shotgun pattern with some misses. I setup my 25 yard target and shot a 10 shot 1 1/2 inch group off a benchrest, I then shot offhand and got a 3 inch group. I also made sure we used the same ammo he was using to make sure it wasnt poor ammo. I shot a few more groups to assure him it wasnt a fluke, he kept the 1 1/2 inch target and I asked him if he was going to tape it to the door of his cruiser to ward off the bad guys lol. He figured out he needed more trigger time, and I gave him some pointers on trigger squeeze, body stance and breathing. I told him in the meantime use the shotgun lol.

[swmike]

The expectation that cops can shoot well just because they are cops is a mindset that has been moulded by movies and television. In the Old West (at least as portrayed on TV and in Movies), the Marshall or Sheriff was the quickes and best shot. He could kick butt, take names, and knock a fleeing felon off a horse at 100 yards with a hip shot from an old Colt Peacemaker. :cool:

Reality is another picture. I have spoken to State Troopers that have only had their gun out of the holster to clean it and shoot their mandatory rounds at the range. I have taken officers in to the ER (when ambulance driver) with GSW's in the cheek of their A$$ from playing with their weapons while holstered. We all have seen, or read, the accounts of LEO's vs.BG shootouts where hundreds of rounds have been expended with limited results.

It has been said by others here that the gun goes with the job but is not necessarily of primary interest to the officer. That being said, just being able to outshoot one at the range doesn't carry any special status. I am pleased with my level of skill and feel it will go a long way to protecting me if the time should come. Just remember what happens at the range is just that, at the range. When the SHTF, and your pants contain more than just your keys, wallet, and change, :eek: it may very well be the Cop that didn't shoot well that comes through better, due to the training (and the ability to better control the bodily processes). :p

[Wyo Cowboy]

A lot of LEOs do think of the weapon as just another piece of equiptment. When I went through Fed LEO training at FLETC one of the firearms instructors told me (over a couple of beers) that about 10 to 15% of the trainees are "gun guys (and gals)". These are the ones that are out at the range on their own time and dime. I'll stack them up against almost any civiy. Some of the non-gun type LEOs realise that marksmanship is a perishable skill and do make an effort to practice... some. :rolleyes: Some would rather just leave the gun at home. :eek:

When I go to the local gun club almost no one knows that I'm a LEO. I'm just another gun nut who loves to shoot... almost anything. I've had the "Gun Expert" try to offer instruction without having seen me shoot. I've had the "IPSC Champ" try to clean my clock with his race gun. I've had the "MAll Ninja" tell me that my guns were crap and so was my stance, grip, hair style, etc. I just smile, keep my mouth shut, punch holes in paper and knock over the steel plates.

I requalified this week and was talking with a few others afterwards. The subject came up about 'just how much do you pratice' (we have to pay for our own practice ammo). One guy said that he shoots a couple of boxes just before he requals and that's about it. A couple others said that they try to shoot a box a month. I finally admitted that I reload my own and shoot about 600 to 800 rounds per month and use an airsoft copy of the HK in my basement when I can't get to the range. Oh, and the requal? I didn't drop a point. :D Practice makes... you better.

[Bare Bones]

I saw this thread and told myself that it should be interesting to see how officers are preceived by members of the forum. Some of you just don't get it. In fact, most of you just don't get it.

Frank Dreblin gets it. A few others do too. If you are a police officer, you arn't training to increase your proficiency with firearms in the expectation that, at some point in the future, your chosen profession might possibly mandate that you utilize that firearm to protect the lives and property of the citizens who pay your salery. If you have an ounce of brains in that shell casing you use for a hat stand, you are practicing to make sure you and your partner get home at the end of the shift.

Weapons are a tool, yes. The are also the cheapist insurance policy you'll ever get. If you are in law enforcement, you best get that into your head.

The next thing you need to survive is situational awareness. If you are in patrol this means know your district and your bad guys. Don't seal up your squad against the heat or the cold. You don't want the last sound you hear is the glass breaking just before the bullet enters your body, huh?

A lot of people on this thread are making a big thing about about a variety of skills; some justifiably. The minimum requirement law enforcement demands is to show up when the call goes out and do your best for your brother officer. If it turns out that your best wasn't good enough to contain the situation of immediatly resolve the problem, you will find that your buddies will be tolerent of your shortcomings and work with you to improve. If you allow fear to incapacitate you or weaken your resolve, your best bet is the shrink and an outbound bus.

Sorry, I got a little wordy. Specifically, the average cop is not a target shooter per se. Such training does not drive the officer to form habits that will serve him well. There are many cases in point were fallen officers have been recovered at crime scenes with empty brass in their pockets. A product of faulty training. Same thing with empty revolver speedloaders. I could create quite a list of these types of shortcomings, but what I am getting at is that the officer must develope situational awareness and tactical responses that fit the street and are immediate. So guys, go on and out shoot that putz at the range and make your "informed" opinions about a person whose world you know little of. It probably makes you feel a little better and causes him no harm, but I would advise you not to rely on that opinion should the day come when you meet him confrontationally in his world...

I'm getting up there in years at this point in time. Sixty nine and counting and gravity and more than occasional beer are not having a slimming effect on my manly figure, but I still shoot occasionaly for the sheer fun of it and , if you mess with me and mine, I'll strive to drop you like a hot rock. If age and luck determine the outcome not in my favor, I'll trust the guys in blue to finish the job - not people who plink and form opinions of others

Oh, and Frank Dreblin : I'd partner with you anytime... :D

[tshadow6]

A lot of cops are not "gun people". In fact they make fun of the "tacklberrys" (Police Academy movie series). I once failed to qualify and I still haven't lived it down. Most cops hate to shoot. The women don't like having to clean the gun and the men don't want to give up their own time. Since I failed that one time, I make it a point to shoot at least once every other month.

[swmike]

Bare Bones--- I agree with you totally. Well, sort of. The reality of it all is that there are too many "on the job" that don't agree with what you said. They would just as soon leave the piece in the locker and unless the job requires them to carry when OD, they don't. Practice is as some others have said, the box they run through just to make sure they can re-qualify. When was the last time you saw a squad "opened up". I have lived and traveled extensively in Seattle, Denver, Portland, LA, SF, Phoenix, Tucson. Most times the only time the window is down is when the officer picks up his order at the drive through. Yes, there are a lot of good officers that have the same thoughts and dedication to the job as you expressed. Don't try and tell me that this is universal. Too many have been lucky. Unfortunately training (especially the kind that saves lives) is expensive. Since most Police Chiefs today are required to be administrators and live within a budget handed to them by political bean counters, the first thing that seems to get cut is training time. Next thing is 2-man patrol cars. I can't even remember the last time I saw an officer walking a beat (except in Seattle where they costumed two officers as turn of the century (1898-1903 era) cops and put them out in a tourist area.

My post was not intended to denigrate the LEO's as a group but to put into perspective the boast that was made about being able to outshoot one at the range. I don't question the desire of every officer out there on the job to discharge his/her duties to the best of their ability and most importantly, go home safely at the end of the day. Not all have the same skills and dedication to the job. Wouldn't it be nice if they did?

[CarlosDJackal]

This is freaking hilarious. I am wondering what the thread starter would have thought if he had observed three LEOs who happen to be good shooters instead of the three non-shootiers he did meet?

Three shooters do not in any way shape or form represent the whole LEO Community. But regardless of this, based on my experience teaching Basic Pistol Courses, the percentage of all gun owners who cannot shoot is probably the same as the percentage of all LEOs who also cannot shoot.

The fact of the matter is, the (good) shooters that you see at the range is probably the top 5% of all gun owners. Much like only about the top 5% of LEOs are decent shots because they like to shoot. JM2CW.

[John Ringo]

I am actually in the process of becoming a LEO here in DC...but...

In my experience LEO shooting ability varies as it does with anyone. Most LEOs I know have never been in a "Dirty Harry" shootout per se. There are a lot of LEOs around the Washington DC Metro area that are very questionable in my book. There are tons and tons of agencies around here of every make and shape. My point is that marksmanship is probably wayyyyyy down on their list of priorities.

[Clayfish]

I shoot with a LEO in my church every now and then. He down right puts me to shame every time, and I'm a pretty good shot. SOme are good, some aren't.

[swmike]

I shoot with a LEO in my church every now and then Doesn't that bother the fellow church members? What does the Minister have to say? Break any of those stained glass windows? :D

[Bare Bones]

SWMIKE: Sorry to say that I must agree with you as to the disparity of attitude seen in the ranks of most modern departments. Where I sort of disagree with you is that I would argue it is not necessarily a budgetary problem. Even with the money crunch, much can still be accomplished.

Where the problem exists, IMHO, is in the mid level command structure ( Sgt. FTO's Range officers, etc.). In the departments zeal to free up money, they made a conscious (sp) decision to release or early out many senior officers to free up money for more warm bodies. When they got these bodies, there was no one left to impart the needed education on the street. Not much later these became the mid level management. Hence, you have a situation where the uneducated are teaching the uninitiated. I know that this is an over simplification and not true in every case, but when you talk to young offciers andSgt. with three to four years in or, better yet, read their training schedules and their roll call instructions, it is realll inciteful.

A young officer, regardless of sex, can not be expected to perform better than the examples presented to them by their more experienced peers. This is, I think, the root problem that rears its ugly head when officers do not take pride in mastering the basic skill demanded of them. ie. shooting.

As to the department dead heads; every department has them and they are the bane of our existance. There is no known solution short of culling them during probation. Once on the job they are like pilot fish sucking the blood out of a living organism. Much contempt, but no solution.

There. That's the sermon. I freely agree that there are degrees of skills in regard to firearms across the board, both civilian and law enforcement. The obvious has been stated. Extreme efficiency is to be desired, but not expected, of all practioners. So get to the range whenever you can and practice those skills you find necessary, but don't assume that your accessment of "necessary" is mine. :rolleyes:

[Clayfish]

Doesn't that bother the fellow church members? What does the Minister have to say? Break any of those stained glass windows?

Well since I'm the music minister and he's the church handman we usually shoot after hours and he fixes all the windows and drywall etc... Hey that was good. I love a good sense of humor. :D

[Wyo Cowboy]

Our pastor obviously can't make the Sunday, after church shoots. But lookout on Monday! He can bless you, praise the Lord, and beat the pants off of most of the shooters that might be at the range. :D

[Dave H]

It's honestly tough to make abject judgements about how good somebody is by watching the black on their target. All of us have had lousy days on the range, and if you are going to train to a new skill or technique or fix a specific bad habit, one would expect to be all over the page at first. Good, reliable, well-trained peace officers have to use LOTS of tools and abilities to get the job done, argueably that pistol might be the least often used one. I shoot next to cops (on the pistol range that is) once in a while and sometimes they shoot great, sometimes I'm a little better, but when the chips are down lawmen have to do a lot more than just hit where they are aiming; they have to reason and think, which is a good deal harder to do and to train for.