"Non Traditional Threat" Training Targets

I think it is just a training exercise. As a LEO you cannot assume that somebody is not a threat just because of how they look. A pregnant woman takes it to the extreme, but you must be aware of everyone's hands no matter what they look like.

And no I am not a LEO.

I have to say after looking at all the targets, not just the pregnant woman, they are really kinda creepy.

Remember folks, citing or linking to Infowars is a bannable offense!










No, not really, yet, but we're getting close!

bannable offense

Click to expand...

It should be.

Having said the above: Ask a veteran police officer if there are folks who are "safe." Shoot/no-shoot decisions are extremely complicated and troubling and incredibly varied. Some of those presentations are pretty "out there" but not impossible by a long stretch. Some of them surely may need a SHOOT response. Some of them may not, even though a gun is present.

A company producing these more specialized training aids isn't necessarily helping to train up the super secret ninja troopers to come kill your kids and pregnant women.

Presenting officers (or defensive-minded folks!) with really troubling, frustrating, scary scenario training may help them to formulate better responses that may save lives. The more things you can expose someone to, the fewer things will shock them out of their OODA loop and leave them momentarily rudderless in the moment of decision.

In bad taste, and very unlikely

there explanation:

The targets are, “meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time.”

The targets include “pregnant woman threat,” “older man with shotgun,” “older man in home with shotgun,” “older woman with gun,” “young school aged girl,” “young mother on playground,” and “little boy with real gun.”

Click to expand...

As a retired LEO, I would say granny and gramps get no slack, the got the eyes and are holding correctly - bang.

The women and kids Im not sure I would shoot before talking. Thank God I never faced that kind of thing.

Sorry, I didn't know. I will try to find the pics elsewhere and change the link.

Click to expand...

No need. Just try not to accept anything those nut-jobs say -- even a weather report.

As a retired LEO, I would say granny and gramps get no slack, the got the eyes and are holding correctly - bang.

The women and kids Im not sure I would shoot before talking. Thank God I never faced that kind of thing.

Click to expand...

Right! And that's what I meant by saying some of them might NOT need a shoot response. All depends on what the trainers are trying to impart.

Kid with a gun? Pointed more or less AT you? What, you think no cop has ever walked into that situation before? That's reality. What do you do?

Maybe having that target appear helps a trainee put real brain muscle to work figuring out what he should do WHEN that happens to him.

Not all training targets are intended to be simply scored for accuracy.

I suppose there is some practical training applications for these targets, I find them to be a bit distasteful and don't believe the scenarios are frequent enough to make them part of standard training protocol.

Click to expand...

It makes a point people have to be aware of. From an LE perspective, I don't think it is one of those deals where six minutes of reality is worth more than six months of training. Getting surprised by one of those targets in a shoot house environment might make an impression on a recruit or officer -- but the first (and only) time a drunk grandma turned on a dime on me and went from compliant to kicking me in the face when going into the patrol car for her ride to the drunk tank extinguished any willingness I might have to give someone the benefit of the doubt solely based on their appearance.

On a related note, I have used those sorts of targets in .mil shoot house training -- some company did a run of the same basic premise, only in Iraq appropriate clothings, where you'd have a kid or a woman who in some versions was holding a pepsi and in some a pistol or grenade.

If these are real from a "DHS supplier", I'd be very curious why they would need such things. Presumably local and state LEO's would be tasked with dealing with civilian threats, not some federal agency that has been loading up on ammo, guns, and armored trucks.

As to non traditional Silhouette targets in general, I find it funny how all the target images you find now days are whites, not blacks or browns. I guess the idea of target practice against whites is less worrisome for the PC crowd. On a somewhat related note, anyone notice how ADT/Brinks commercials for home invasions never portray black or brown actors breaking in?

`

If these are real from a "DHS supplier", I'd be very curious why they would need such things. Presumably local and state LEO's would be tasked with dealing with civilian threats, not some federal agency that has been loading up on ammo, guns, and armored trucks.

Click to expand...

DHS is responsible for training hundreds of thousands of LEOs all across the country. DHS isn't the Army or the Marine Corps.

On a somewhat related note, anyone notice how ADT/Brinks commercials for home invasions never portray black or brown actors breaking in?

Click to expand...

That's not a related note, but it probably makes sense to reflect social sensitivities when making a commercial. They're selling a product, not making a documentary about social justice or prison demographics. They probably make all the homeowners attractive, fit people with nice upscale, clean houses, too ... just like real life...

Infowars.. sigh.

That is really disgusting.

Funny thing how the manufacturer's website is dead/slow/not-responding.

Guess someone out there with a lot of disposable bandwidth took offense to what that company was doing.

Consider that these aren't targets they're likely to sell many of to average Joe heading down to the range for an hour of plinking at "Little Jimmy with a Gun."

Put these in their proper context. They belong in a shoot house training environment where officers are preparing for the real world. Officers who will be making life-or-death shoot/no-shoot calls on the spot, out in the real world where some very "SCREWED" up stuff really does happen.

Again, there's probably at least one officer in almost every department in the US who has has encountered a child (of some age), pointing a real (or real-looking) gun.

It may be unsettling that these exist, and no, most folks won't understand them AT ALL, but they have a legit purpose.

The 'no-shoot' targets for police training used to be really obvious things like 'pastor' or 'old lady' etc while the 'thug' looked like someone from Central Casting. Now they have paste-on hands so you can give the clergyman a gun and make people think about what they are going to shoot/no shoot on.

I wouldn't buy them to use recreationally, and I'd wonder about someone who did. I understand how they can be used to train an officer to think quickly. I don't think its fair to hire a person to be a police officer and then purposefully leave out vital parts of their training because it addresses situations that are morally objectionable or hard for us to think about.

I think its just getting the DHS used to shooting woman, children, & old folks defending their homes from unconstitutional search and seizures. Just my opinion.

Sam1911 said:

DHS is responsible for training hundreds of thousands of LEOs all across the country. DHS isn't the Army or the Marine Corps.

That's not a related note, but it probably makes sense to reflect social sensitivities when making a commercial. They're selling a product, not making a documentary about social justice or prison demographics. They probably make all the homeowners attractive, fit people with nice upscale, clean houses, too ... just like real life...

Click to expand...

Really?
Where did all the LEO's get their training prior to the DHS becoming an agency?

As to them not being an Army, if the reports that keep coming out are accurate, why are they acquiring so many rounds of ammo, guns, etc?

Lastly we can agree to disagree about the images not showing minorities having to do with political correctness. The same is probably true of the targets in the article because not a single one was of a black or brown person. Yet they have images of little children with guns.

Really?
Where did all the LEO's get their training prior to the DHS becoming an agency?

Click to expand...

You really need to research what DHS is. Pretty much ALL federal law enforcement agencies were placed under the director of Homeland Security when that office was established in 2002.

Prior to that, all those agencies were independent and had to come up with their own training, info, EQUIPMENT, AMMO (training, and duty ammo), etc. DHS is intended to streamline a lot of that.

It isn't a great, fantastic, wonderful thing. But it isn't a secret army out to take over the US from the inside, or whatever the Alex Jones nutcases pretend to believe it is.

EDIT:

Here is the list of the various agencies and groups under DHS now:

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC)
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
United States Coast Guard (USCG)
Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS)
United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
Office of Air and Marine (OAM)
Office of Border Patrol (OBP)
Office of Field Operations (OFO)
Federal Protective Service (FPS)
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Enforcement Removal Operations (ERO)
Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)
Office of Intelligence
Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR)
United States Secret Service (USSS)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
Office of Law Enforcement/Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS)
Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHSOIG)

So, every training round the USCG, Federal Marshals, Secret Service, etc. etc. shoot in training, or are issued for duty use, come through DHS. That's a whopping pile of rounds.

I always have a problem with a male holding a dewalt drill, like a pistol. I can't seem to get over that one.

As far as the kids/preggers...I'd pause just long enough to bark some commands, then reassess, possibly taking a round; wrong decision. I agree gramms and grampa would be a nobrainer. Engage.