Author Topic: LEOs how would you rate??  (Read 2764 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jgalar

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Gender: Male
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2005, 01:52:00 AM »
Federal Air Marshalls are very skilled with firearms. Their training and qualifications are much more stringent than other branches of law enforcement. Of course their duties are entirely different from other branches. In flight they have no backup. They do not respond to disturbances that would put the average LEO into action. Only threats to the safety of the flight are what they are supposed to respond to. They must identify and take out terrorists/hijackers quickly and without collateral damage to the passengers.

Offline muskybite

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2005, 07:21:36 PM »
Depends upon the agency (standards and how much shooting officer's get) and the officer's interest in shooting. A lot depends upon the size of the agency, the bigger the department, the more logistical problems you have getting officers to a range.

For example, Chicago PD. My understanding is they only have approx. 8 ranges which can support 15 officers shooting at a time. They have over 13,000 officers. Very difficult to get officer's the training they need, especially since the ranges are indoors.

My agency is pretty small (26 sworn) but we have an ERT team which responds to calls in 2 counties. All officer's at my pd qualify 4 times a year (approximately 20 hrs of firearms training a year). When we qualify we don't just shoot the qualification course. ERT members do a whole lot more shooting.

Several officer's would shoot worse than the average recreational shooters I have seen. Most would shoot much better. Just depends upon the person. Some recreational shooters are great, some aren't. Same for officers.

All officer's at my PD receive dynamic firearms training, its not static. There is a lot of shooting while walking, after running, etc.... In addition we have simunition training at least 8 hrs a year. 1/2 of the department trains at a time (except for ERT training), so each officer is not standing around waiting to shoot or go through a scenario.

Many members of our department hunt and are recreational shooters too.

My pd is somewhat different than many others because it is relatively small, yet we have an ERT team (members are only from our department), therefore there is a large emphasis on training.
Favorite hobbies: Deer hunting  with bow/gun and fishing for muskies.

Offline muskybite

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #32 on: February 25, 2005, 08:12:50 PM »
As others have pointed out, it is very easy to "quarterback" and criticize officer's for poor shooting ability during a gun fight.

Many non-leo's have no idea of the stress involved in law enforcement and have not been involved in the types of altercations/incidents we regularly have to deal with. During altercations your senses diminish and you can loose your fine motor skills. I have not been involved in a shooting yet (hopefully, never will), however I have responded to plenty of domestics and other calls where one of the parties was reported to have a firearm or other weapons. Some did.

If you think because you are an excellent shot at the range, you will be able to shoot well during a gunfight,  you are deluding yourself. If officer's who have already been conditioned by experiences to minimize the effects of stress don't shoot very well during a gunfight, civilians will most likely shoot a lot worse.

Also, a number of shootings occur after a pursuit, hot call, etc... meaning there is quite a bit of time for stress to develop and affect officers. If someone suddenly pulls a gun with little notice, this is a much different situation because you will hopefully react very quickly and will most likely feel the effects of stress after the shooting.

Well, anyway. No offense meant to anyone. Hopefully, none of us have to find out. :-)
Favorite hobbies: Deer hunting  with bow/gun and fishing for muskies.

Offline bgjohn

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 602
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #33 on: February 26, 2005, 03:39:11 AM »
Most people I see at the range can't hit didley.

I once saw my bro'-in-law shoot a  styrofoam cup out of a tree 100 yards away with my 9mm. He's an ex-sheriff deputy. I'd say that I wouldn't want to get in a shootout with the deputies out here. I think the problem is too many shots available. Get rid of the Glocks and make them shoot revolvers again. If you can't get it done with six shots you ain't gonna get it done at all.
JM :-)
I know nothing. I am only a messenger.

Offline chris s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 74
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #34 on: February 26, 2005, 05:47:14 AM »
Most LEOs are not shooters. If you are a shooter everyone considers you a buff/gun nut. Most PDs will give minimum training to meet state standards. Mental preparation is as important as the mechanics of shooting. Most LEO's feel a training day is like a day off. For larger departments training becomes quantity not quality. When we transitioned to semiautos. they just wanted to fire the whole magazine. The biggest problem we had was, we had to teach shooting basics to veteran officers. Many did not understand sight picture and trigger control. There was alot of spray and pray mentality.

Offline Doc TH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 69
LEOs
« Reply #35 on: February 26, 2005, 09:14:02 AM »
Muskybite is correct about shooting occurrences (& combat) being entirely different from range practice.  His comment about second-guessing has merit.

However, it should be obvious that someone who is not competent at range shooting is unlikely to suddenly acquire skill under pressure.  So, while a good range shooter might not be efficient or effective under life-threatening stress, a bad range shooter will certainly not be.

Also, there are unfortunately sufficient numbers of really bad shooting incidents wherein "second guessing" is not a factor.  Most of us know of enough of them that restating those cases isn't necessary.

Offline Rscout6945

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Gender: Male
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #36 on: February 26, 2005, 04:02:06 PM »
I took the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy firearms range test for revolvers and pistols in 1998.  I consider myself an average shooter by hunting standards but I scored a Master rating with the revolver and an Expert with the pistol.  

I thought the course was easy and unrealistic.  Very little moving to cover.  Some drawing from the holster.  Some reloading but not enough.  no nighttime/darkened range shooting.  It even had shooting from the hip and an arms distance target, fun but not very realistic.  And the worst thing is that there was no stress added to the firing to make it somewhat realistic.

The small town LEO in Iowa really worry me because an Iowa town can hire you for up to 1 year without sending you to the Academy (no formal training needed to hire) and most towns will only hire you for that year and then dump you on the 364th day.
The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference-they deserve a place of honor with all that in good.-George Washington  Semper Fi!

Offline IntrepidWizard

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2005, 04:44:03 PM »
I carried a Smith 19 in 357 on duty and a Colt 1911 off,still carry a Colt,you are right "to many shots",few aimed or point practiced.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is
a dangerous servant and a fearful master. -- George Washington

Offline cvixx

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 61
times have changed
« Reply #38 on: March 21, 2005, 12:37:31 PM »
I worked LAPD from 1971-1994, when I retired on a disability pension.  When I started 90% of my academy class were vets and over half had been in the Nam.  We knew firearms and a bunch of us were shooters away from work.  In 1974 the courts mandated that we hire females.  Very few of them enjoyed shooting and they had to  have extensive training to meed qualification (and physical fitness) standards.  

Over the years the percentage of recruits who have previous firearm ownership and use has declined, making the range coach's job a lot harder.  However, they do have to meet the minimum qualification standards and L.A. has so much action that drawing your firearm is normal and being under fire, and returning it, happpens to most street cops.  

The low hit rate is often cited as evidence that cops are poorly trained.  Remember, this is not the range.  Shootings take place at all hours, many at night, with reduced visibility.  The target is moving, not stationary, and the fact that he is shooting at you does tend to hamper your marksmanship.  And while many suspects are prepared and know what they are about to do, the average cop walks into the situation with no advance knowledge.  

The North Hollywoood shooting is a goood example, however, of what can happen when officers have a minute to react.  Yes, the 9mms were bouncing off the suspects' body armor, but officers became aware of that and if you remember the video, they were starting to stalk the badguys to get closer, for more head shots.  Even if SWAT has not arrived when they did, I firmly believe the suspects would not have lasted 10 minutes longer.

Offline retrieverhunter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 76
LEO can't shoot!!!
« Reply #39 on: April 11, 2005, 06:42:08 AM »
Unlike Deputy's brother in law, mine can shoot well enough to qualify but is not a "shooter".  He was pretty much "anti gun" until he joined the PD and got "interested" in guns and shooting at that time.  He has been talking for a couple of years about getting a personal gun (no, he doesn't actually own a gun).  His duty weapon is a Beretta 92, which I personally hate, but he is "proficient" enough to qualify every 6 months and as has been stated earlier, he "crams" for the test every 6 months.  He is a great guy and is probably a good cop, but I DO NOT want him protecting me.  CCL holder since 1995, I will protect myself thanks.
Jeff S.

Offline HotGuns

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #40 on: April 25, 2005, 04:38:48 PM »
Heres my "take" on it...

I am with a county Sheriff Dept that has 50 sworn officers, 20 of which are Reserve and which I am one of.

Most of our Reserves shoot better than the fulltimers with 10 or so that consistently qualify expert.We do have some fulltimers that are good shots, most are average and a couple have trouble qualifying every time its time to requal.

Most of our Reserves are "gun people" whereas most of the FT'ers arent. That makes a big difference as we shoot a whole lot more than the FT'ers are able too.

With that being said, the County Officers appear to be much better shots than the 70 sworn city PD officers that we have here and we all use the same range. Why exactly that is, Im not sure.



When it comes to qualification, as far as Im concerned it does little to prepare one for shooting. No one is going to stand still and let you shoot at them like a B27 target and it isnt going to happen at a known range. Likley, both shooters will be moving,juking and jiving and trying to get behind cover if they have time. We all train using Simuntions and it is nothing like shooting at a static target. I have been shot at and missed at ranges of less than 1 foot and I would have never believed it if I hadnt seen it. I have participated in shootouts with multiple "badguys" using full auto M-16 and Mp5s and pistols with several magazine changouts and noone being hit. I have been in point blank shootouts were I have shot my guns dry at arms length ranges and hit and missed "perps".

To me,that kind of training had much more value than the standard Police course which has you shooting at 1,3,7,15  and 25 yard ranges at a well lit target that dosent shoot back.

Yeah target shooting is great and I do it quite abit myself. But in a shooting situation, it dont mean squat. Everyone gets humbled the first few times that they train with someone shooting back at them. THe great thing about using Simuntions is that you can learn from your mistakes. In the real world if you make a mistake it could be your last.

We do train hard and we train often, and we spend a considerable amount on ammuntion. We just hope that when the day comes, we'll be better trained than the average perp.

Offline mikedb

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 320
Re: LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #41 on: June 14, 2005, 03:26:43 PM »
Quote from: lostone1413
On an average how would you rate the marksmanship of the average LEO Then how would he rate with the average recreational shooter? I for one feel that the average LEO is no better or worst then the average recreational shooter and if you took the average LEO in say an anti-gun state like say Illinois that his shooting wouldn't be on par with the average recreational shooter in a gun friendly state say AZ because the one in the gun friendly state would be shooting allot more. You agree or disagree??


Most cant shoot as well as the average rec shooter.  I was recently at an indoor range in suburban Detroit.  The woman shooting next to me was having a hard time hitting the target at all at about 5 to 7 yards.  I though she was a new shooter.  I started up a conversation and found out she was a retired Detroit cop and was currently working for the feds in a security function and was practicing before having to do her annual quals.

Offline jhm

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3169
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #42 on: June 15, 2005, 02:30:44 AM »
Hotguns :  It sounds like you might be in Faulkner Co. is that so, if not where?  :D    JIM

Offline HotGuns

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #43 on: June 16, 2005, 01:49:17 PM »
jhm:

I'm in Pope County.

Offline jhm

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3169
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #44 on: June 17, 2005, 02:31:05 AM »
Hotguns:  My son-in-law is on Springdale PD. I live in faulkner Co. we Have the best Co. Shierif Marty Montgomery, he is the only Democrat I will allow to put campaign posters on my property :-D  :D    JIM

Offline HotGuns

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #45 on: June 17, 2005, 03:07:28 AM »
jhm...

we also have a great sheriff. He is very progun....and like yours he is a registered Democrat although wtih very conservative values.

In fact, I have him teaching the "Law Enforcement" part of the CCW class that Im teaching next week. He is very level headed and does an exellent job.

We are fortunate to have a fairly progun attitude here in Arkansas,unlike many of the yankee states where ownership of certain guns scares the juice out of citizen and leo alike...

Offline Charcoal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 67
LEOs how would you rate??
« Reply #46 on: June 25, 2005, 05:05:22 PM »
Quote from: lostone1413
On an average how would you rate the marksmanship of the average LEO Then how would he rate with the average recreational shooter? I for one feel that the average LEO is no better or worst then the average recreational shooter and if you took the average LEO in say an anti-gun state like say Illinois that his shooting wouldn't be on par with the average recreational shooter in a gun friendly state say AZ because the one in the gun friendly state would be shooting allot more. You agree or disagree??



I agree.As a now retired officer I fought this battle too long,nothing has changed.Most Departments and Chiefs dont care about firearm training.Most just shoot what the State Training Board requires,its mostly a CYA situation in my experience.Most officers just want to get through their shift and collect a paycheck.
Too many officers and Brass have the attitude "ive been doing this for X amount of years,and ive never had to fire my weapon"True to a point,but just remember,every day you suit up to start your tour of duty,it COULD happen.I bet Jim Cirillo didnt have this attitude.

Many civilian shooters are in the same boat.They dont practice and spend their money on gadgets instead of ammo and competant training.Every year before deer season opens,ranges across America are flooded with hunters sighting in their new magic deer slayer.It still amazes me that folks do not know how to sight a rifle,the ammo companies love this.Fouled barrels,canted scopes,loose screws and yet they still wonder why the weapon wont stay on paper.Ever wonder why Rob Leatham is so good??


Bill Jordon said it best "NO SECOND PLACE WINNER"

Offline hipshot300

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
retired
« Reply #47 on: July 03, 2005, 09:41:54 AM »
I am a retired sgt from a small dept. Things certainly have changed.
Of course when I started, most folks carried a revolver but a couple of officers had 1911's and browning hp's. In the early part of my career, we took pride in qualification. It was based on a % score 25yd ppc style on a b-27. Everyone practiced because a fail to qualify back then resulted in a suspension w/o pay for each day you failed to meet standards. Area agencies also had annual ppc style shooting contests open to any leo.
During my career things slowly changed. The hi-cap auto replaced the revolver. Scores did at 1st go up but then they started to slide. Officers figured that since the auto was easier to hit with they did not need to practice as much. New admin came in and changed qualifications to once a year and removed the suspension policy. Scores continued to drop so the b-27 was replaced with a more generic type of target. % scoring was replaced with a simple pass/fail. This eliminated the paper trail of how well(or poorly) an officer shot. I was told to think of it this way---if an officer has a track record of 80% on a ppc, that means someone could say that 20% or 1 in five of his shots were bad. We were told that by going only to a pass/fail score with no % score mentioned would eliminate at least in print the 1 in five argument. This however also resulted in officers not really knowing their shooting abilities and becoming content with a "pass"
Towards the end of my career, I tried to get some officers out to the local club to try IDPA. No one would go.
Yep, 40 cal is all the rage in light plastic guns that recoil more in holsters of officers who are content to "pass" and learn computer skills and are afraid that civilian shooters will beat them in a "game". No wonder they went to low recoil shotshell rounds....................................glad i retired