Police Chief Qual Scores Released

[DustyGmt]

"She hit the victim, he missed the shooter, she was taken into custody"

I must be reading this wrong, it's a lil confusing. Who hit who?

 

[Speedo66]

M. Ayoob wrote of a department that shot the original 90 shot IDPA Classifier for qualification. I think a Sharpshooter score required to qualify.

I don't know how long ago he wrote that, but good luck.

You can't even get new applicants to take police jobs in the current climate.

 

[Craig_AR]

"She hit the victim, he missed the shooter, she was taken into custody"
I must be reading this wrong, it's a lil confusing. Who hit who?

Male chief (HE) came upon a female assailant shooter (SHE) firing at another (unarmed) female (VICTIM). HE (Chief) fired at shooter (SHE). He missed his target (the shooter). She (shooter) successfully hit her target (victim). Additional officers arrived on scene quickly and the shooter (SHE) was taken into custody.

 

[lemaymiami]

From personal experience (not in gun fights, thank heavens...) - when you arrive on the scene of a violent confrontation armed, un-armed, or who knows.... it's very difficult to tell what's going on at first (as in who's the victim? who's the assailant, etc). Going by what they look like can mislead, assuming the male (in a male/female donnybrook) is the bad actor can mislead... What's the good guy to do?

If you think reading about it later is confusing "you should have been there" is very appropriate and rarely painted in clear black and white colors ( or for these times "correct or in-correct"). Of course if you wait until you're 100% certain who the bad guy is - it will mostly be all over before you can intervene - so in some part you're stepping up and acting based on what the participants actions are towards you after they realize you're on scene and ready to act. None of this is desirable (and rarely will you ever see it portrayed properly in any popular entertainments -or the usual terribly slanted or distorted coverage by those fine propagandists that pose as news reporters these days....).

Glad I'm long out of that world and can have the luxury of trying to sort it all out afterwards... I don't envy any first responder in these times (police, fire, ambulance, rescue, or ordinary good citizen... ) - they're in a tough spot no matter what actions they take if there's a serious confrontation going on when they get there...

 

[GEM]

Two things. When I lived in Portland, OR - it was common for the politically chosen chief to fail the quals. I think it happened a couple of times and one chief got a CCW permit to be able to carry.

As far as keeping score - I've mentioned this before. When I took the first TX CHL test (quite easy if you were a shooter), some guy tells me I should miss some shots of the center zone because if I go to court, I will be asked why I didn't shoot him in the leg (being such a good shoot). He said he knew because he was a sniper. I thought this was BS until LEO friends told me that this advice was common in some LEO circles. Given that department in GA (IIRC) that is promoting disabling shots - who knows nowadays.

I shot with quite a few officers who were dedicated shooters. Are they rare - probably.

 

[WestKentucky]

I noticed the same in both police and military. The officers and soldiers who took their qualification seriously usually sought out additional training in firearms. Which helped qualification. Plenty are happy to pass and be done.

Having grown up right outside of a major military installation… I have ran into a bunch of guys at the local ranges who had the attitude of “army training makes me better” and I gladly whipped them when money was put on the line. Very rarely have I had the same thing happen with law enforcement personnel. There seems to be an age difference at play as well, because military pays fairly well for a high school grad, but it takes a bit to get through a hiring process and police academy to become a police officer. Given a 19 yr old private vs the 23 yr old street cop I’m putting my money on blue instead of camo every time. If the officer has a CJ degree then I’m doubling down on the officer. Give that a few years though and it spins. Captain vs Captain I’m betting camo.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

That is an IDPA Scenario or USPSA Field Course.
How are you going to define pass-fail qualification?
Hire a Master class shooter to run it and require your employees shoot half as well?
(I am USPSA C class and am doing well to exceed 50% on Classifiers. I am IDPA Expert but have only shot Expert on the long Classifier once, otherwise match promotions, meaning I won Sharpshooter in that Division.).

I didn't say I had all the answers.

Obviously there would need to be some sort of pass/fail grade. For example, you would need to qual a SS or above to pass. Just like they have a pass/fail on the LEO quals.

Or if you didn't want to "label" them like we do in competition you could just set a minimum requirement for hits and time.

IDK I just think more movement, using cover and reloading would be more of a factor in overall proficiency.

 

[WrongHanded]

This whole thing makes me wonder about the bigger picture.

Assuming the qualifications are annual or semi-annual, I'd also assume those having to requalify would practice prior to being tested. But after the qualification, do they keep practicing on a weekly basis? It seems like 50 rounds a week should be a mandatory minimum for any LEO who's required to carry a sidearm in the line of duty. Possibly even to shoot the qualification course of fire - not under test conditions, just by themselves - every week.

Skills deteriorate without regular practice, I think we all know that. LEOs may deal with, social interactions, conflict de-escalation, driving, and comms usage on a daily basis. But they don't shoot on a daily basis as part of the job. Yet if/when a rare necessity to shoot arises, they're supposed to do it well.

 

[bihj]

The club/range I belong to lets the local DPS do their qualifications on our range. One year I watched several miss the target completely at twenty-five yards from the prone position with an AR15.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

The club/range I belong to lets the local DPS do their qualifications on our range. One year I watched several miss the target completely at twenty-five yards from the prone position with an AR15.

Thats really not surprising given most LEO'S are not gun enthusiasts nor do they regularly practice.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

Proficiency is entirely up to the individual. My eldest nephew is a retired Delta Operator and still works on his shooting skills. He has several shooting set ups around his home on our family farm in Iowa. I always take several guns with me when I visit and he runs me through multiple drills with both pistols and long guns. He survived 11 years in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention his original area of deployment in Africa, for a reason. During his retirement he has ran several training schools for LEO swat teams, mostly in Texas. You practice how you work.

 

[lemaymiami]

Let's clear something up... any agency can set its own standards for firearms proficiency, as long as they meet the minimum - but state standards are what we all MUST meet. Those state standards are not as arbitrary as you might think - they're pretty uniform across the country. State standards are what are required to be achieved to become a "certified police officer" in that state (your license in effect to be able to do the job). Chiefs of police are almost always required to be certified officers - but not always since the hiring of a chief (and the firing...) are always a political process - as opposed to sheriffs that are generally an elected "office"....

Yes training and practice time on the range should be more than the minimum - but that has real money costs that most agencies simply can't meet.. You're not only paying for range usage, ammo, etc. - but also training officers - and if you require the training you'll either be taking personnel off the job to attend training - but if they're off duty -paying them to attend as well... No it's not ideal, but it's the system that's been in place for years and years, and for some small agencies with no money allocated for training at all- it's up to the individual to train and practice on their own - bearing all the costs in time, money, etc.

Take into account the truth that most officers will never fire a single shot on the street while on the job and you begin to see the difficulties involved... No it's not ideal -but it is what every agency deals with. Not surprising then that in each agency individual officers may choose to excel in weapons usage while most hope they're never in any kind of shoot out at all...

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

Well, yeah, that'd be fun for a few in every department. But some of y'all seem to believe that cops are supposed to love guns and shooting. Just like there are guys working construction or as carpenters who may not be particularly good with certain tools, or master chefs that can't chop veggies like the average tableside cook at your local Benihana, there's mostly officers and deputies who actually don't look forward to in-service weapons training and qualification. I know, hard to believe, right?

And the higher up in rank ya go, well, you already know...

I get what you're saying, I do.

But the same majority that would not find a comp stage fun probably wouldn't find the standard LEO qual "fun", am I right?

Its not about fun but testing their abilities.

Whether or not that's worthwhile on an individual department scale is beyond my pay grade.

But personally I think its a better judge of ability.

 

[roscoe]

I guess I am surprised this is a thing. Police chiefs are largely administrators and politicians. Do we expect our military generals to be good shots? I always thought the fact that military officers at colonel and up carried sidearms was symbolic. Same with police chiefs.

 

[MedWheeler]

I'm guessing he'd still be being strung up in the media if he'd hit the suspect, especially if she'd been killed.

 

[DoubleMag]

...keep practicing on a weekly basis? It seems like 50 rounds a week should be a mandatory minimum for any LEO who's required to carry a sidearm in the line of duty. Possibly even...

I was an advid shooter so, I agree! However, the training budgets of most departments just cannot handle this level of training due to expenses. Every officer shooting weekly XX rounds- the rounds cost is minimal but, who is going to replace that patrol? OVERTIME. And monthly means during peaking vacation times i.e. summer, when OT is up anyways. When left with no other resources beg/barrow/steal for manpower, the public would be forced with reduced patrols and response times.

So, when 'looks good on paper' meets 'who's gonna pay for this?!!' , well, it falls back into ...what happens in departments training centers, now.

 

[WrongHanded]

I was an advid shooter so, I agree! However, the training budgets of most departments just cannot handle this level of training due to expenses. Every officer shooting weekly XX rounds- the rounds cost is minimal but, who is going to replace that patrol? OVERTIME. And monthly means during peaking vacation times i.e. summer, when OT is up anyways. When left with no other resources beg/barrow/steal for manpower, the public would be forced with reduced patrols and response times.

So, when 'looks good on paper' meets 'who's gonna pay for this?!!' , well, it falls back into ...what happens in departments training centers, now.

I hear what you're saying. It seems like 1 hour per week isn't that much time, but I guess it stacks. Seems like a drop in the ocean compared to all the other costs that must be present for each officer, but I don't really know.

 

[Randy in Arizona]

This whole thing makes me wonder about the bigger picture.

Assuming the qualifications are annual or semi-annual, I'd also assume those having to requalify would practice prior to being tested. But after the qualification, do they keep practicing on a weekly basis? It seems like 50 rounds a week should be a mandatory minimum for any LEO who's required to carry a sidearm in the line of duty. Possibly even to shoot the qualification course of fire - not under test conditions, just by themselves - every week.

Skills deteriorate without regular practice, I think we all know that. LEOs may deal with, social interactions, conflict de-escalation, driving, and comms usage on a daily basis. But they don't shoot on a daily basis as part of the job. Yet if/when a rare necessity to shoot arises, they're supposed to do it well.

Unless the Department reloads it will cost over $1000 per officer per year, just for ammo.
IF they reload it will still cost over $500 per officer per year, plus the wages for the employee doing the reloading.
And frankly I have not heard of any departments still doing any reloading!
YMMV!

 

[Jim Watson]

My club shared a range with the local PD, until a real estate developer got us all evicted.

I heard a cop to say "I'm not going to have earplugs in a gunfight, so I don't wear them to qualify."

 

[Sistema1927]

Back when New Mexico first implemented CCW, the Department of Public Safety (DPS) was tasked to draft the qualification requirements. As might be expected, they were so onerous that most folks would have been deterred from applying.

I did a little research, and soon discovered that the CCW requirements were more than twice as strenuous as that for Police Officers, something that I documented at a public hearing. I suggested that if citizens would be required to complete that course of fire, then certainly LEOs should as well. Fortunately the adopted requirements were something more reasonable.

 

[arsterling180]

I was an advid shooter so, I agree! However, the training budgets of most departments just cannot handle this level of training due to expenses. Every officer shooting weekly XX rounds- the rounds cost is minimal but, who is going to replace that patrol? OVERTIME. And monthly means during peaking vacation times i.e. summer, when OT is up anyways. When left with no other resources beg/barrow/steal for manpower, the public would be forced with reduced patrols and response times.

So, when 'looks good on paper' meets 'who's gonna pay for this?!!' , well, it falls back into ...what happens in departments training centers, now.

Quarterly or even in trimesters then? The real smart move would be incentivize with some sort small pay bump if they go to a range and shoot X number of times with Y accuracy and get it signed off. People get illogical for a pay bump even if they took the five seconds to factor in range time + buying a box or two of ammo each trip would probably eat the slight pay bump.

 

[WrongHanded]

Unless the Department reloads it will cost over $1000 per officer per year, just for ammo.
IF they reload it will still cost over $500 per officer per year, plus the wages for the employee doing the reloading.
And frankly I have not heard of any departments still doing any reloading!
YMMV!

I wonder how much those cruisers cost to maintain. And the computers, radios, uniforms, body cams, etc. $1000 sounds like a lot for an individual, but it seems less when factored as part of the whole cost for one officer.

Assuming they work 40hr work weeks and are paid time off also, that's about an additional 48c per hour. I don't know how tight the budgets are, but I'm not seeing a major issue for a government entity. I'd assume the general public would be shocked to know officer aren't required to practice regularly already.

 

[lemaymiami]

Here's the figures we came up with to actually account for the true cost to our city for each new hire, all those years ago...Doubt anything's gotten cheaper so plug in your current, published numbers.

If the starting salary for a police officer was $50,000 per year - the actual cost to the city in equipment, vehicle, training, insurance, etc. was double the starting salary (which didn't include any figures for overtime, court time, etc..). Just to bring it into focus - after selection, then hiring,,,, it would be a full year before that new hire was out on their own contributing to actual policing efforts (academy, then field training... ). Not exactly how most think about their police departments...

Now for a few incidentals the public in general rarely hears about... Any time you put in place a "hiring freeze" for any police department you're actually establishing a force reduction since normal attrition will cost you 10% of your force per year.. That's right on the money and is very normal - 10% of your force will retire, leave the job for a variety of reasons, and/or accept a job with another outfit each year... Not exactly something politicians like to talk about.

Lastly, any time your hear of efforts to cut the funding for any agency - the very first thing to go is funds for training.. and every dollar in the budget for training is usually already less than what's needed... That's the real story behind efforts to "defund police" in some jurisdictions...

 

[DoubleMag]

Unless the Department reloads it will cost over...

Long long time ago in a land far away ...called we carried REVOLVERS, there were reloads,FOR PRACTICE ONLY. Full factory fresh ammo for duty carry. Roughly now, ammo would cost $50 for primary arm...DON'T FORGET any secondary gun, i.e. shotgun or AR in the trunk. Multiplied by whatever interval, X total #s of staff shooting, re-shoots/requals, etc. ... any post or division that fired would have to be updated, not just line staff.

Quarterly or even in trimesters then? The real smart move would be...

and I'll link my following answer to this quote...

I'd assume the general public would be shocked to know officer aren't required to practice regularly already.

Cost$ of training to make the individual staffer competent comes at a cost other then dollars. One side of the public would say ''they're stone cold HIGHLY TRAINED killers!'' . The other side would say similar, ''why did you miss?'' Somewhere in the middle the Chief gets the call from HQ (think Mayor) ''why don't you train to shoot in non-lethal areas?''

SERIOUSLY, it's a downward spiral.

 

[Jim Watson]

Cost$ of training to make the individual staffer competent comes at a cost other then dollars. One side of the public would say ''they're stone cold HIGHLY TRAINED killers!'' . The other side would say similar, ''why did you miss?'' Somewhere in the middle the Chief gets the call from HQ (think Mayor) ''why don't you train to shoot in non-lethal areas?''

I have seen that from the other side.
A skeet shooting deputy sheriff upon learning of my non-shotgun activities asked "Why are you so interested in shooting a pistol?"
A staffer at the then new range here watched me and a friend doing drills and whispered to her "Just what kind of professionals are you?"

There are scenes of a Georgia department with color coded humanoid targets indicating supposedly disabling, dangerous, and deadly zones. They were practicing on the green areas, mostly limbs but not joints.