The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 11, 2007, 05:35 PM   #51
David Armstrong
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
Quote:
At the end of the day LEOs are just people. Like me and you. Most of us go out of our way to improve our skill at arms because we see it as a necessary skill.
But you are selective at what you improve, and I'll bet you improve those things you have fun at. Have you taken a high-speed driving course? How many black belts in different martial arts do you have? Are you at the peak of your physical fitness level? Probably not, even though those things are far more likely to help you survive than your gun skills. Most of us are in the same boat. Cops are no different. Some like to shoot, some don't.
David Armstrong is offline  
Old December 11, 2007, 07:23 PM   #52
Perldog007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Location: Estados Unitas / United States
Posts: 986
Actually, I am a fat guy who hates the gym. I spent a year at the Ninja Academy in Ventnor NJ training in full contact and did two years of wrestling in H.S.

No black belts, held my own in more than my fair share of scuffles.

When I was in the trade got my chubby butt on a Nordic Track and could outrun much svelter folk in the short race. Believe me that twenty minutes was not my favorite part of the day. It was needed to relieve stress and allow me to move my big butt quickly on demand.

Never worked out of a car, but took and still take defensive driving courses for safety and insurance discounts. No use for high speed driving.

Still work out with kettlebells, nobody could mistake me for being in top shape unless you consider round the top shape.

Studied and worked hard on report writing and note taking. Played Kim's Games with other old timers during down time to sharpen observation.

Learned to do paperwork associated with arrests and behave in court.

Took correspondence courses and became a Certified Protection Officer, not required for any job I had.

To repeat myself, found no joy in going to the range at first. Pretty damn embarrassing to miss the whole target at fifteen yards when some goober in the next lane is cutting out the x ring.

Also, range fees and ammo can be pretty harsh on what a SPO/SO takes home.

Enjoyment of shooting took a while. Started out like anybody else. Wore the gun because I had to. Would have rather had a dog.

Because all aspects of the job were serious to me and staying out of jail/civil court/emergency rooms/morgues was a priority this cat tried to learn something constantly.

Yes I did spend a disproportionate amount of money on weapons, ammo, instruction, range time, reading material related to shooting. Since using deadly force is the gravest function of the trade took it very seriously.

Also read Marc MacYoung's streetfighting books and paid extra attention to the chapters about staying out of a fight. Massad Ayoobs "In the Gravest Extreme" was another good book.

Took courses in O.C. spray, straight baton and the pr24. Worked on blade techniques. Studied first aid and was basic first aid cpr certified. Took defensive tactics classes. None of my classes were company paid except the CPO correspondence course and the CPR class.

I also did a fair amount of unarmed work in D.C. Union Station Security carried nothing but radios and handcuffs. We got down on a nightly basis. In fact when I was first sworn in as an SPO my commission was unarmed/no uniform. Was still required to make arrests just like a real cop.

This thread is hit ratio in police shootings. I never said the job was all about shooting, that was attributed to me.

What I said and still say is that if you carry a gun, or keep one loaded to use at home, or even just shoot at the range on weekends - you owe a duty to exercise a reasonable level of care. That's common law and common sense.

To me, IMHO that means being the best safest operator you can be. My position is that such takes more training and practice than most cops get.

I feel it is foolish to upgrade weapons to compensate for lack of skill. Given the state of training requirements in general, the low hit rate does not surprise me.

People can swear to the heavens that range skill does not apply in a gunfight. Haven't been there but have come damn close and don't believe them. Practicing, training and competing makes handling your weapon second nature.

I know from unarmed combat (which I have plenty of experience at, that's what working unarmed in D.C. gets you) that practice pays off when the chips are down.

When you get the adrenaline dump because an adversary has engaged you in hand to hand combat with the intention of injuring you that is not the time to think about what you are going to do.

I know my fat butt was much more adept at taking suspects down and controlling them than more muscular men, even those with some boxing skills.
I had endlessly practiced putting opponents on the ground and controlling them and it worked even when I was pretty scared.

That put me way ahead of big muscular officers who were learning on the job.

Training no good in a real fight? That not what my son tells me. He is a Marine with two trips to the sandbox. He doesn't poo poo the value of cutting paper targets either. Haven't had much problem with him lying to me so I will accept the Corporal's estimate. YMMV.
Perldog007 is offline  
Old December 12, 2007, 09:01 AM   #53
Marty Hayes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 16, 1999
Posts: 244
Oh David...

I see I caught you in my verbal net.

You said:

"With all due respect, Marty, that "common myth" is far from a myth."


Referring to my post responding to IdahoG36, when he said:

"Under stress, your fine motor skills go out the window, and if the assailant is armed, you tend to focus on the weapon, not neccesarily your backstop or surroundings?"


When I said it was a common myth, I was referring to fine motor skills going out the window, (like they are gone from the building). Sure, they deteriate, but when under stress, if a person train sufficiently, you retain enough fine motor skills to handle just about any problem.

Secondly, when he said "you tend to focus on the weapon" I would also agree for the untrained, but for the trained, while he might initially fixate on the weapon in an assessment, he will re-focus on the sights to take the shot. That is why we so many shots clustered around the weapon, because they are pointing in that direction when they line up the sights and use their fine motor skills to squeeze the trigger.

All my best, my friend.
__________________
Marty Hayes, President
The Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, LLC.
www.armedcitizensnetwork.org

Last edited by Marty Hayes; December 12, 2007 at 09:02 AM. Reason: grammer/punctuation
Marty Hayes is offline  
Old December 12, 2007, 02:18 PM   #54
David Armstrong
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
Quote:
I see I caught you in my verbal net.
Darn it, not again!
Quote:
Sure, they deteriate, but when under stress, if a person train sufficiently, you retain enough fine motor skills to handle just about any problem.
No real disagreement. I thought I was clear with that when I said "the stress reaction can be reduced/delayed with extensive training and/or advanced warning,...."
My only real point of contention is when people call it a myth. May be semantics, but to me the myth categorization seems way off base when it is so regularly encountered.
Quote:
All my best, my friend.
And to you and the better (and prettier) half. Enjoy the holidays!
David Armstrong is offline  
Old December 12, 2007, 03:17 PM   #55
MikeOrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 3, 2005
Posts: 144
There is way more to this than marksmanship skills. NYPD's hit rate on dogs (smaller targets) is 2-6 times better than on people.

Looking at NYPD and Metro Dade stats there appears to be no "statistical significance between range and street efficacy".

"Since most of the shootings examined in this research involved perpetrators who were highly animated when shot at by police, until such time that police handgun qualifications involve naturally and randomly moving targets, and until such time we can simulate life-threatening dynamics during handgun qualification, direct comparisons are largely senseless. In addition, as much as trainers may wish to pursue this angle to more definitive conclusions, future efforts at quantifying the relationship between range and street efficacy will likely be further complicated by the fact that most agencies have adopted “pass-fail” qualification protocols.
However tenuous the relationship between range proficiency and street proficiency may seem with the sparse data available, it should never be used as an excuse to short-change training. Training isn’t just a means by which we foster firearms competency, it is a means by which we attempt to assure the use of lethal force within legal and procedural parameters."

Above from:

"Officer Involved Shootings: What We Didn't Know Has Hurt Us" by Aveni of the Police Policy Studies Council.

Research Summary of Facts
To encapsulate and contrast the conclusions reached through the course of this research, the following observations are offered:
1. It appears that using officer hit ratio data from metropolitan law enforcement agencies has skewed our expectations. Individual hit ratios may be substantially higher than previously thought. Since bunch-shooting data was seldom (if ever) segregated from other officer hit ratios, we might surmise that much of the historical metro police shooting data has been misleading. Shootings involving singular officers appear to have hit ratios approaching (if not exceeding) 50%.
2. Mistake-of-Fact shootings remain a troublesome issue, representing 18-33%of police shootings.
3. Bunch-shootings seem to increase the number of rounds fired per officer by at least 45%, and reduce per officer hit ratios by as much as 82%.
4. Bunch-shootings may very well influence the nature in which officers utilize deadly force through the manner in which judgment and reactions are influenced (e.g., MOF shootings, associative threat identification, sympathetic firing impulse, etc.).
5. Low light shootings account for at least 60% of police applications of deadly force. They seem to diminish police hit ratios by as much as 30%. Low light also accounts for as many as 75% of all mistake-of-fact shootings.
6. Applications of deadly force seem to be more frequently preceded by unsuccessful attempts to employ less-lethal alternatives.

Can find the .pdf at the Police Policy Studies Council: http://www.theppsc.org/

Another good source of info is Force Science News:

http://www.forcesciencenews.com/home/index.html

And of course, there is always our own personal experience, collected war stories, and the errornet.
MikeOrick is offline  
Old December 12, 2007, 03:26 PM   #56
Yellowfin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2007
Location: Lancaster Co, PA
Posts: 2,311
I shall make it a point to NEVER live there. In fact that makes me fear for my sister in law's safety. If she wasn't so insistent in pursuing a career as a Broadway star I'd have her move out of there ASAP.
Yellowfin is offline  
Old December 13, 2007, 12:12 AM   #57
MyGunsJammed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: in a very anti-gun state :(
Posts: 565
Yellowfin,

I totally understand man.... NYC/NYS is such an anti-gun state that it just sickens me......


I read the NYPD blotter from time to time in the newspaper. Its a list of all the crime that took place in the city each day, and its documented by the cops.

Wheter it be robbery, murder, rape, shootings, assault...... the bad guy always gets away with the crime, and the victim usually goes to the hospital badly injured, or worse ends up dead.

Why? Because the frigging NYPD normally takes about 10 minutes on average to arrive at a crime scene once the crime has been committed.
They just come, take statements, collect evidence, pick up dead bodies and send survivors to the hospital.

Why is that the average citizen is not allowed to protect him/herself??

maybe its just that we give too much reliance and trust to the NYPD to protect us when they really cant....

For example, I work in a bank, and I always feel safe, why? because there is a lot of car and foot traffic that passes by my bank all day long. There also usually is a cop or two standing in front directing traffic, and there usually is an undercover walking the streets looking for cabbies to pull over.

I need to friggin get outta this expensive, overly crowded, hell hole one of these days....
MyGunsJammed is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.05417 seconds with 10 queries