LEO training question

[Tom Servo]

I get a lot of folks from law enforcement at the range. Some are real marksmen, while most are adequate at self-defense ranges. We're talking 7-8" groups at 7 yards. As a whole, they're a nice bunch of folks.

Thing is, we also get a few who give me real cause for worry. I had two locals tonight who couldn't hit the 10-ring on a 3x4' silhouette. They shot down the pulley and conveyor wires to the target carrier. I was informed by one of my employees that they'd been previously warned about muzzle discipline.

They are in fact law enforcement, as they badged me (with quite some profanity) when I told them they'd have to leave.

From what I remember from qualifications, anything less than 75% is considered a danger to bystanders.

So, how much training do most municipal officers get? At what point does the system catch this performance, and what remedial measures are required? Bear in mind, this wasn't stress shooting or timed fire.

 

[yesit'sloaded]

Thats why some of us carry guns rather than rely on the police.

 

[JWarren]

So, how much training do most municipal officers get?

Short answer: Not enough.

I'm not disparaging LEOs by saying that. But there was a study done recently (by the FBI, I think) that showed LEO's getting less than 20 hours per year of trigger time on average, if I recall correctly. Tomorrow, I'll see if I can dig up the study if someone doesn't do it first.

I'd love to see LEO's have more opportunity to practice on the dept.'s nickle. Hell, they already don't get paid enough for putting their lives on the line. You'd think that they could at least get the fringe benefit of getting to shoot a lot for free.

But budgets are what they are.


-- John

 

[larry_minn]

Nothing new. Many Officers (it seems) think of a gun as a tool they are FORCED to carry. (Think Colombo) I was RO at a private range that allowed LEO free use.
First they did NOT want any of our people present "we don't want to give away our tactics" So because the club had agreed we handed them the keys. (note the range had just been cleaned/repainted/repaired) Well I was there two nights later. You would think a drug bust/shootout had happened. Lights shot out, target turners shot, the dang PILLARS down center of range (that do NOT have any lanes by) also hit Less then 10' infront of firing line .
I called senior club member and was thinking of calling Police as clearly someone must have broken in and shot up place. Nope the PD.
Next time they asked we informed them our insurance forbid us to let them use range. And wer agreed if any of us got in trouble (caught in middle of bank robbery) and others saw we would NOT call the Police. ;( This was decades ago so hopefully things have changed.
Then again check the GSSF online scores. Police shoot the same course. Normally if I was LEO I would be in $$ and I am high middle of pack in civilian. I feel any Officer who practices at all beyond required training should compete in GSSF. Its dang near a sure thing.

 

[MisterPX]

Shoot once a year, because you're forced to, and see how well you do.

 

[gregthehand]

At the department I was at, they had to shoot once a year, and for many that's all they did. I know one who literally told me the only time his firearm ever left it's holster was during qual, and then he cleaned and put it back in the holster for another year.

 

[Mousegun]

If you are a truck driver, you strive to drive it well if for no other reason as to stay alive.

If you are an engineer, you strive to make your designs perfect if for no other reason as to keep others alive.

If you are a LEO, the main thing that keeps you and others alive may come down to what is on your hip. I could never understand why a generally quality group of professionals often overlook this essential part of that profession.

I was in charge of repairs on a police pistol range for many years and never had "nothing to do".

OTOH those that practiced often were hard to keep up with in competition.

 

[LeonCarr]

IME about 90% of LEOs shoot only when they have to (six month/yearly qualifications, etc).

The other ten percent live at the range. These are your firearms instructors, SWAT guys/girls, and people like me who are just addicted to shooting .

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Deanimator]

They are in fact law enforcement, as they badged me (with quite some profanity) when I told them they'd have to leave.

You need to notify their supervisors.

Bad skills and a bad attitude amount to a negligent homicide waiting to happen.

If it had been me, I'd have asked them if they'd like to repeat their language in front of a supervisor, and that I'd be very willing to call one.

 

[jay43]

One of the problem with LEO's not getting enough range time is cost. Ammo costs range time costs. some of these small municipalities and towns just don't have a couple grand lying around so the leo's can practice, unfortunitly thats how it is, and I can only imagine what NYPD, or LAPD or some of the larger cities pay just to qualify some of there officers

 

[GRB]

I am not in a municipal department, but in a federal agency. The truth be told, we get about 4 to 6 hours of range time, 4 times per year. That is it, no more. That includes qualifications and tactical shooting exercises. That does not include classroom time, of which we get about another 8hours per year regarding firearms use, regulations and so forth. Sometimes, and this is only once every few years, we get additional firearms training in the form of some sort of practical exercises. Lately, much to my dismay, the training times above also include practical exercises in baton training and chemical weapons training. I believe training in those should not cut into firearms training, but should be offered on other days. The brass do not think so.

Now that may not sound like a lot of training, but it is sufficient in most instances or with most shooters. It is amazing how many of our agents are more than proficient because of it, how many are proficient, and how few do not do well enough and therefore require additional remedial work (in addition to the regular hours shown above). Remember this is training, actual training by qualified instructors, and not just going to the range to have a blast.

I was an instructor for 14 years. I would like to have seen more training. I would think that training every month would be optimal, or that every second month would be optimal, but either way it would be difficult to accomplish. It would be difficult because of the manpower it requires (most agents are off working criminal investigations of some sort that require them to be dedicated to that task), and it is difficult to round up enough range personnel from among them. It is also difficult on the logistics end. Just imagine having to train a few hundred agents over the course of a month, then set up and be ready to do it again the following moth. That would not work. As for every two months, it could possibly work, but it would be a tight squeeze indeed because my agency has at least 6 weeks of firearms training going on each quarter just to get folks qualified. That time does not include remedial shooting. Nor does it include training for people who are being qualified for the initial time with long guns such as the MP5 or M4. Those training sessions last at least a few days each and have to be fit in among the regular qualifications/training sessions. In addition, the costs for training law enforcement officers every quarter is high relative to each department size versus their budget. Training on a more frequent basis is probably cost prohibitive for many agencies or departments. So, as it works out, quarterly qualifications have become the norm within my agency, and within many other agencies and departments throughout the country.

Now as for law enforcement officers being jerks at a private range, what can I say. Their shooting down cables, and their badging people while displaying unprofessional behavior, is unacceptable just as it would be at their police range. I am sure their range officers, if worth their saltpeter, would have slammed them for such behavior at the police range. At least I would have done so, and that could be why I am no longer an instructor but alas no one will tell me why they took me off range duties, but I readily admit I got on shooter's cases when they were unsafe. You apparently did the same, and had them leave the range, good for you. Now don't allow them to come back until they promise to act responsibly. If they really want to shoot, they will act accordingly. Letting them back, to do the same allover again, would be less than responsible on your part. I think you did good, now keep it up.

All the best,
Glenn B

 

[MechAg94]

My range decided not to let police shoot free. They had apparently done it in the past, but decided against it when it was brought up. They didn't give all the details as to why.

 

[Ala Dan]

I use the local PD range, so I have too play by their rules. Most PO's
who frequent this range [and some civilians] ] are very proficent to
the max; with a few of both struggling to hit the B-27 target or the
bowling pin target, from the 7 yard line~!

 

[Deanimator]

My range decided not to let police shoot free. They had apparently done it in the past, but decided against it when it was brought up. They didn't give all the details as to why.

I've had varied experiences with cops using ranges where I either belonged as a club member or shot.

There's a range in the basement of the Gray's Armory in downtown Cleveland. It used to be one of the Cuyahoga County Pistol League ranges. The CMHA housing police used to shoot there. It looked like a troop of chimps on acid, armed with MAC-10s had been down there. There were bullet holes EVERYWHERE but downrange. When the Armory completely remodeled the range, they booted the cops.

I used to belong to the NASA Lewis Sportsman's Club. The center rented their outdoor range out to other government agencies. We weren't allowed to fire automatic weapons on the range, but they allowed Federal law enforcement to. One year, we built up all new target frames. A Fed agency (DEA, I think) came down with their full-auto Steyr AUGs and DESTROYED just about every target frame we'd built. No appologies, no offers of replacement. Supposedly, they showed attitude to people objecting to their trashing the range.

On the other hand, I used to shoot service rifle matches with a Berea cop who was one of the regional snipers. He was professional and a good shooter. Never gave anybody any problems.

 

[CountGlockula]

I can relate.

I also work at an indoor shooting range and I'm happy/sad to have LEOs come by.

I'm grateful that they're coming in to improve their marksmanship and training; but sadden of what their performance has shown. But some are still in the academy or having their hostile tactical test the next day.

One concern is that some of those attending the academy are not allowed to go to a range in their personal time, because their firearms instructors don't want them to develope bad habits. BAD HABITS? I think they need to gain as much bad habits to spawn into good habits.

Our boys/girls in blue need more time at the range.

 

[Tom Servo]

You need to notify their supervisors. Bad skills and a bad attitude amount to a negligent homicide waiting to happen. If it had been me, I'd have asked them if they'd like to repeat their language in front of a supervisor, and that I'd be very willing to call one.

They're both banned, with the understanding that I will have them cited by the local police for criminal trespass if they return. They were both Atlanta City Police, and I've filed a formal complaint with their department, asking for remedial safety training and a reminder that talking to citizens the way they did, in or out of uniform, is unacceptable.

What bugs me the most is the fact that I've worked in that jurisdiction, and every other APD officer I've met has been professional and very courteous. Several shoot at the range, and they're a good bunch. These two stand out in really stark contrast.

I make a point of mentioning this because starting pay for APD officers in 2001 was $30,000/yr. I admire them for what they do--I wouldn't do it for that pay.

I knew that training standards leave a bit to be desired, but I thought they received more training than this. We have a situation where the officers demonstrated an inability to hit the 10-ring on a standard B-27 target at 15-20', with numerous shots missing the paper completely.

I can take a person off the street, who's never shot before, and teach them to do better than that in 20 minutes.

I understand that economics play a role, but funding shouldn't be the reason officers are placed in danger.

 

[Deanimator]

They're both banned, with the understanding that I will have them cited by the local police for criminal trespass if they return. They were both Atlanta City Police, and I've filed a formal complaint with their department, asking for remedial safety training and a reminder that talking to citizens the way they did, in or out of uniform, is unacceptable.

Well done. APD seems to be having some problems lately, as evidenced by the murder of that old woman via the perjured warrant.

I can't imagine my local PD acting that way.

 

[sacp81170a]

From what I remember from qualifications, anything less than 75% is considered a danger to bystanders.

In our POST quals, anything less than 80% is failing. In my department, failure to qual in the first reshoot requires remedial training and another trip back to the range. Failure to qual twice in a row on the next trip to the range means disciplinary suspension or termination. 90% is the score required for Sharpshooter, 95% for expert.

I'm a CCW instructor, and yes, I've had folks walk in off the street and shoot better than half the officers on the force, but that was with no one shooting back and under no stress. Shooting well is an essential part of the equation, but it's only one factor. Knowing when to shoot and when not to are far more critical.

 

[Pilgrim]

One of the problem with LEO's not getting enough range time is cost. Ammo costs range time costs. some of these small municipalities and towns just don't have a couple grand lying around so the leo's can practice, unfortunitly thats how it is, and I can only imagine what NYPD, or LAPD or some of the larger cities pay just to qualify some of there officers

Ammo and range are not the big costs. The big cost is payroll. No matter how you schedule the range, some officers, a third perhaps, will be there on overtime. If you expand the range hours to limit trainee overtime, then the instructors will be drawing overtime.

I was a department firearms instructor, and one time management - which rarely attended firearms training (another long story) - decided overtime could be limited by running the range on the weekend where one shift ran into another. To get the coverage management wanted to limit overtime for patrol officers, other staff like detectives, civil, deputy coroner, and firearms instructors made out like bandits on overtime.

So, how much training do most municipal officers get? At what point does the system catch this performance, and what remedial measures are required? Bear in mind, this wasn't stress shooting or timed fire.

Mine was a rural county sheriff's department with some municipal duties in cities which contracted with the Sheriff for law enforcement.

The Sheriff budgeted two hours of firearms training per sworn employee every two months. Because of the location of the range, one of those hours was spent in traveling to and from the range. So, we effectively had six hours of training per year for handgun, shotgun, and patrol rifle. Since one hour was annual day qualification, and one hour was annual night qualification, that left four hours for real 'training'. Therefore, it was not unusual to see that the only really good shooters in the department were those who did a good amount of shooting on their own.

Most deputies could meet the 75% minimum score required for qualification. If they didn't, they were given additional range time to make 75%. I encountered only one deputy whom I considered unsatisfactory in that she loaded the cartridges in her magazine backwards in preparation to firing the qualification course. When she shot her pistol dry during qualification, she couldn't remember which button/lever dropped the empty magazine, returned the slide to battery after the reload, and what position of the safety lever made her pistol safe.

A letter was sent to her commanding officer saying she didn't qualify. The remedy was to schedule 8 hours additional training on a weekend, where she drew time and a half overtime. Needless to say, management was not happy when a deputy failed to qualify. I am pretty confident the failure to qualify was considered more the instructor's fault than the deputy's.

Another factor that figures in overall officer proficiency, including firearms, is that when money is scarce, training is the first to take a 'hit' in cost reduction.

Pilgrim

 

[GRB]

A side note on a comment made above:

A Fed agency (DEA, I think) came down with their full-auto Steyr AUGs and DESTROYED just about every target frame we'd built. No appologies, no offers of replacement.

If you were building target frames, I imagine they were wood. If the owner of the range allowed fully automatic weapons to be fired at wood framed targets, and did not contractually arrange for the shooting agency to repalce them if ruined, then the owner is an exceptionally poor business person. Even if the target frames were made of metal, such a contracual agreement should have been made if the target frames could not withstand the ammo being shot at the range. In fact, with or without a contract, it would have been really poor planning to allow for use of ammo that would quickly destroy the frames, or looking at it another way it was very poor planning to make use of target frames that could not withstand repeatedly being struck by gun fire. I mean, that is a fact of operating a range, many shots will hit the frames, especially if fully auto firearms are allowed. You almost make it sound as if it was some evil mission of the DEA, rather it sounds like p--- poor planning to me. Of course, nasty attitude if given, was probably a bad thing, but I have to wonder about any possible attitude from the other side. Nasty attitude is often a response to nasty attitude. Not that one bad thing excuses another, but you make it seem all one sided. The truth be told, the manager or owner of the range apaprently did not plan very well. I am not making excuses for the federal agency, but let's face it, the owner of the range should know how to operate the business, and that includes knowing what type of damage to expect, and being prepared for it, or knowing how to best minimize such damage through use of proper materials or limiting types of ammo.

All the best,
Glenn B

 

[Jim K]

Aren't Atlanta cops only required to shoot minute of grandmother at ten feet? Sounds like that PD is in sore need of a new attitude and a new chief.

Jim

 

[boalex207]

PX, greg & leon are right on the money.

The vast majority of LEO's shoot once or twice a year because they are made to. As long as they get their 70% or whatever it takes to squeak by, they have no inclination to ever try to improve.

Sad but true. I see it regularly.


Also, very few LE agencies "train" most only "qualify"

 

[Tom Servo]

Aren't Atlanta cops only required to shoot minute of grandmother at ten feet? Sounds like that PD is in sore need of a new attitude and a new chief.

I didn't start this thread to bash cops, nor do I want it to go there.

I've lived and worked in the city, and I've found APD to be almost unanimously friendly and professional. They're overworked and underpaid, and it takes a special kind of person to do that job.

That's part of why this situation galls me so. These two were way out of line, and certainly not what I'd expect of the department in terms of behavior.

The answers to my original question really disturb me. 80% against a stationary target is one thing, but 80% against a moving under stress is something altogether different.

I'm no Ed McGivern, but if I only shot a couple of hours a year, I'm not sure I could make 80% when the time came. Obviously, our cops need more range time and training.

As far as budgetary constraints, is it possible for departments to outsource to private instructors? Officers could be given vouchers for ammo and fuel costs as an incentive.

 

[Deanimator]

If you were building target frames, I imagine they were wood. If the owner of the range allowed fully automatic weapons to be fired at wood framed targets, and did not contractually arrange for the shooting agency to repalce them if ruined, then the owner is an exceptionally poor business person.

The "owner" wasn't a business. It was NASA Lewis Research Center. And if I had to bet, the people who trashed the range either never mentioned automatic weapons or didn't mention that they were going to physically damage the range.

When people come to your house, do you make them sign a contract agreeing not to destroy your home and its furnishings?

If common courtesy and decency aren't part of your op plan, maybe law enforcement isn't the career path for you.

 

[larry_minn]

Then there is the problem. IF the Police do take training/equipment seriously there are those who get upset at the "Militilization" of the Police.

Yep we hear about abuses/serious mistakes. IMO they should be exposed and those involved reprimanded/punished (depending on situation of course)
We do NEED to remember most Law Enforcement are dang good people doing a hard job. Yep I second guess them like everyone else...
As said the cost in ammo is chicken feed even in large dept. There are options everywhere. I see LEO only classes for dirt cheap/free offered fairly often. Going to a range and shooting a stationary target is not a bad start.
I was member of action shooting group. We welcomed LEO but few showed and only ONE came back second time.
The group was very good at being careful of folks ego. (until you were known) The Officer would shoot a hostage (or two) make other simple mistakes (range max 50' in winter) and we would tell them that everyone shoots a couple at first and they likely are terrorists in hiding. Thing is the Officers never came back. The one who did. UFTA. His El Presidente were sub 8 seconds with cover jacket zipper zipped. Speed rig no cover IIRC sub 6 seconds with all A hits.