Extremely interesting (and sobering) report

[valorius]

Found this at stoppingpower.net, it's a summary of an FBI study about cop killers. There are some extremely enlightening statistics and quotes in it.

http://stoppingpower.net/commentary/comm_cop_killers.asp

*Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally, usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows.

*Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study says.

* More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)

Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, "10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers."

*Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work.

* Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing "most of the time." Gang members especially started young.

Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% "regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year," the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and "street corners in known drug-trafficking areas."

*More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these "street combat veterans," all from "inner-city, drug-trafficking environments," had taken part in 5 or more "criminal firefight experiences" in their lifetime.

---------

 

[esheato]

Interesting, but not surprising.

Thanks for posting.

 

[LHRGunslinger]

I wonder if these facts are going to make any impact on LEO training.

 

[BigDeesul]

Very interesting. I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'm going to start to implement it. Instead of aiming through the sights, I'm going to shoot without aiming, just pointing, and see how accurate and consistent I can be. If I can shoot instinctively like this and be accurate, seems like a very valuable skill.

 

[valorius]

I did one better and put a pressure activated crimson trace laserguard on my LCP.

One thing this report really screams out is that there are some highly experienced veteran criminal killers out there, and if you run into them you're going to find out just how good your combo of tactics, awareness, pistol and ammo choice really are.

 

[Manco]

This report comes up every so often, and while sobering it should be noted that these criminals are basically the top echelon with regard to gunfighting, which is why they'd deliberately target LEOs in the first place. The "average" armed criminal, much like the "typical" law-abiding gun owner, probably has little if any formal training and almost as little practice (speaking very broadly here).

Very interesting. I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'm going to start to implement it. Instead of aiming through the sights, I'm going to shoot without aiming, just pointing, and see how accurate and consistent I can be. If I can shoot instinctively like this and be accurate, seems like a very valuable skill.

Feel free to find out for yourself, but generally pure point-shooting or shooting from the hip can be effective out to maybe 3 yards unless you're exceptionally skilled and well-practiced. It's usually best to at least visually index the gun while aiming at a target, if you have the time to do so. I'd always aim the gun visually (using various methods depending on the circumstances, including using the iron sights) unless an attacker were practically on top of me, in which case simply pointing and shooting would be fastest.

 

[Manco]

I did one better and put a pressure activated crimson trace laserguard on my LCP.

In my experiments with lasers, I've found that they work surprisingly well as long as you can constantly see the reflected dot, but when outdoors there is usually no wall or other structure to guide you until the target itself is illuminated, and often it is too bright in the daytime to easily see the dot even at typical handgun combat distances anyway. Lasers will always have certain advantages such as sure, precise aim without having to line up the gun in your visual field, but they have a lot of limitations as well, and I've found that I can virtually always shoot just as well with the iron sights or by lining up the entire gun, even in the dark and without night sights as long as I use my flashlight properly.

One thing this report really screams out is that there are some highly experienced veteran criminal killers out there, and if you run into them you're going to find out just how good your combo of tactics, awareness, pistol and ammo choice really are.

That's who we all should train against, but at the same time we shouldn't let what is an unlikely worst-case scenario paralyze us with feelings of futility. Not that you necessarily meant to imply anything like that, but I've discussed the issue before, and this has come up.

 

[mljdeckard]

I strongly doubt that their idea of 'training' is the same as mine.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I wonder how much of the criminals' success vs. the officers' has to do with initiative. How many of these incidents involved the killer preparing himself to shoot the unsuspecting officer a few moments beforehand? Initiative and the loss of it can be a strong force in a confrontation. If you're reacting, you're already at a disadvantage. I've seen more than a few videos of officers getting killed on duty, and many of them involve the killer shooting the officer during a traffic stop or at some other point during contact. This is while the officer is dividing his mind between watching the criminal, and doing whatever job he's doing at the time. Whereas the killer has a few moments where he can wait for his chance to act, and start the confrontation at his own time and place. Officers by the very nature of their job are very rarely allowed to start a gunfight. Criminals can start them whenever they want. I wonder how much impact that has on the statistics.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Read up on the force of violence and flow of combat,
hell play paintball and you will see and feel it.
Officer is late in pulling his gun, and has to do it under adrenaline while the BG is aready fireing at him, or has it out not expecting anything. The scary thing is the lack of accruacy at these ranges, I really do wonder how difficult is it to completey miss at 10 feet. I can shoot that blind

(try it, it's interesting to do point shooting, pick a target close your eyes, trigger the laser and 'shoot' then see how close you were)

I hope never to learn if I can shoot that under stress.

 

[valorius]

n my experiments with lasers, I've found that they work surprisingly well as long as you can constantly see the reflected dot, but when outdoors there is usually no wall or other structure to guide you until the target itself is illuminated, and often it is too bright in the daytime to easily see the dot even at typical handgun combat distances anyway. Lasers will always have certain advantages such as sure, precise aim without having to line up the gun in your visual field, but they have a lot limitations as well, and I've found that I can virtually always shoot just as well with the iron sights or by lining up the entire gun, even in the dark and without night sights as long as I use my flashlight properly.

Lasers, like all tools, have limitations.

However, the CT laser is very bright for a red laser, and is clear in broad daylight for about 5 yards. Since FBI stats tell us the overwhelming majority of shootings occur at 7-10 feet...

Once CT comes out with green laserguards, this limitation will disappear. I had a Green laser on my AR, you could see that plain as day in at high noon out to 50 yards plus.

One other nice thing about a laser is that it gets you used to point shooting. Eventually you instinctively know where the pistol needs to point to get your laser centered up. So even if your laser craps out, once you're at that point with a particular pistol, pure point shooting does become a good deal easier IMO.

Another really nice feature of the laser is the speed with which you can shoot very precise shots. With an LCP and it's crappy irons, the laser is a huge upgrade IMO. Good Tritium night sights close that gap a lot, but the LCP has no such thing.

Finally, dry firing a laser sighted pistol is a magnificent way to master the trigger. If you're moving...it will show on the target.

But yes, they are not a be all, end all super sight.

One thing i did mention in another thread the other day that is totally borne out in this report, you had better mentally prepare yourself for the distinct possibility that the first shot in any gunfight you're involved in is YOU getting shot before your pistol even clears leather. If you mentally reconcile yourself with that real possibility, i believe your fight or flight drive will work much more effectively if that time ever comes.

"90% of the game is half mental."
~Yogi Bera

 

[Deltaboy1984]

Sobering stats! Looks like LEO needs to update training. And the Rest of us need to do the same.

 

[Old Fuff]

BigDeesul:

Very interesting. I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'm going to start to implement it. Instead of aiming through the sights, I'm going to shoot without aiming, just pointing, and see how accurate and consistent I can be. If I can shoot instinctively like this and be accurate, seems like a very valuable skill.

Any additional skills or thechniques you may learn are valuable, but if you just point and shoot you may be disapointed. With any method there is a right and wrong way to go about it. You can learn a lot by simply using this forum's search feature (in the green bar toward the top of the page) and the search term "point shooting."

Also I suggest you buy a book: Bullseyes Don't Shoot Back, by Col. Rex Applegate and Michael D. Janich.

Learn first, practice later.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Instead of aiming through the sights, I'm going to shoot without aiming, just pointing...

Suggest you consider: http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6661051&postcount=31

 

[jlasserton]

There are some interesting statistics in the report. I am not surprised by any of them. I particularly liked the last last bullet you mentioned. I can agree and believe this percentage!

 

[Manco]

I wonder how much of the criminals' success vs. the officers' has to do with initiative. How many of these incidents involved the killer preparing himself to shoot the unsuspecting officer a few moments beforehand? Initiative and the loss of it can be a strong force in a confrontation.

Most definitely. The military aviation world has a great term for it--"first look, first shot, first kill." Sneak up on your enemy if you can, undetected, and shoot and kill them before they can shoot back at you. That's why it is so important to be able to recognize the malevolent intent of others in how they set up their attacks, both physically and mentally if it shows in their facial expressions, body language, or words. In the case of home defense, making one's home as difficult to forcibly enter as possible can take the initiative away from the attackers and give it to the residents. Done effectively, whoever is determined enough to make it inside is likely to be facing somebody else's initiative to gun them down the moment they get in. Unfortunately it's not as easy to be as prepared ahead of time outside of a locked and reinforced house.

Lasers, like all tools, have limitations.

However, the CT laser is very bright for a red laser, and is clear in broad daylight for about 5 yards. Since FBI stats tell us the overwhelming majority of shootings occur at 7-10 feet...

Once CT comes out with green laserguards, this limitation will disappear. I had a Green laser on my AR, you could see that plain as day in at high noon out to 50 yards plus.

I've been considering lasers, both red and green, and playing around with them, but ultimately I expect that the red dot sight will prove to be the most effective type of optical sight overall for defensive shooting. I'll be strapping a cheap one to my Airsoft pistol soon to find out for myself whether it helps my target acquisition speed. While I'm not hurting for cash, I'm still reluctant to spend hundreds of dollars on gadgets that won't necessarily improve my performance. In order to find out I use cheap, flimsy (but still effective--you can get full-strength lasers on weak mounts for cheap) substitutes on an Airsoft pistol, and simulate night sights with phosphorescent paint. Thus far, no fancy accessories have helped me become more proficient as a shooter, except when used as training aids. The only accessory I need is a flashlight (or weapon-mounted light) for obvious reasons.

One other nice thing about a laser is that it gets you used to point shooting. Eventually you instinctively know where the pistol needs to point to get your laser centered up. So even if your laser craps out, once you're at that point with a particular pistol, pure point shooting does become a good deal easier IMO.

This is true--lasers are without a doubt great for training in a variety of ways, whether or not one uses them in actual shootings.

Another really nice feature of the laser is the speed with which you can shoot very precise shots.

I've found that with lasers I'm just as fast and a bit more accurate, which is definitely a benefit and why I've been considering them, but it may not be enough for me to use in real-life scenarios given the drawbacks I described earlier (even green lasers). My main consideration is that other members of my family, who hardly train at all, may benefit a lot more; while I'd hate to use an electronic gadget as a crutch, in the end one does what one has to do in order to get the best results. I'll see how the red dot sight works out for them, too.

With an LCP and it's crappy irons, the laser is a huge upgrade IMO. Good Tritium night sights close that gap a lot, but the LCP has no such thing.

On that platform, I'd almost certainly get a CT laser, too.

Finally, dry firing a laser sighted pistol is a magnificent way to master the trigger. If you're moving...it will show on the target.

That's exactly what I do with my cheap laser attached to my real (non-Airsoft ) pistol.

 

[mcdonl]

I wonder how much of the criminals' success vs. the officers' has to do with initiative. How many of these incidents involved the killer preparing himself to shoot the unsuspecting officer a few moments beforehand?

When you or I, or a LEO are involved in a shooting either self defense or line of duty we have many considerations to think about... liability, innocent bystanders, etc... the criminal has none of that. If you take a well trained criminal against a well trained good guy I would think that advantage goes to the bad guy.

 

[valorius]

I've been considering lasers, both red and green, and playing around with them, but ultimately I expect that the red dot sight will prove to be the most effective type of optical sight overall for defensive shooting. I'll be strapping a cheap one to my Airsoft pistol soon to find out for myself whether it helps my target acquisition speed. While I'm not hurting for cash, I'm still reluctant to spend hundreds of dollars on gadgets that won't necessarily improve my performance. In order to find out I use cheap, flimsy (but still effective--you can get full-strength lasers on weak mounts for cheap) substitutes on an Airsoft pistol, and simulate night sights with phosphorescent paint. Thus far, no fancy accessories have helped me become more proficient as a shooter, except when used as training aids. The only accessory I need is a flashlight (or weapon-mounted light) for obvious reasons.

I actually tried a Burris Fastfire II HUD/red dot setup on my HK P7, and was somewhat disappointed with the results. The problem occurs in times of near or total darkness, when it becomes impossible to see the HUD frame, making orienting the pistol very tricky, especially at odd angles. I added some luminescent paint that made it a lot easier to orient in the dark, but this setup still requires a lot of practice to master. Getting yourself to present that pistol with the dot oriented in that tiny little window every time is not easy.

I think the combo would have worked a heck of a lot better with a good light affixed- especially since the Fastfire II dots auto-dim makes the dot very dim indeed in times of near darkness- but at the time i didn't have a rail on my P7. Now that i do, perhaps i'll revisit the setup and tinker with it some more.

Here's a pic of my P7 w/Fastfire II:

And my low light modification:

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I wonder if these facts are going to make any impact on LEO training.

Looks like LEO needs to update training. And the Rest of us need to do the same.

What new training should cops implement in order to stop ambush attacks?

As alluded to here and pointed out in the study, the perps had no hesitation in shooting, a luxury not afforded the officers.

For those who are interested, here is a link to the PDF of the 2006 study.
http://www.pdsdc.org/Resources/SLD/... Nation's Law Enforcement Officers by DOJ.pdf

 

[KodiakBeer]

Gun skills are one of those things that have to be encouraged rather than mandated. Cops should have their own practical shooting league and organization, and they should get promotion points for participating and more points for winning.

 

[Old Guy]

Training with interviews

This is while the officer is dividing his mind between watching the criminal, and doing whatever job he's doing at the time. Whereas the killer has a few moments where he can wait for his chance to act, and start the confrontation at his own time and place. Officers by the very nature of their job are very rarely allowed to start a gunfight. Criminals can start them whenever they want

In a training program, Firearms Training, we were given the job of backing up the Officer who was asking questions, when it was my turn, to do this, a set of stairs was the interview scene.

Two subjects, the interviewer was concentrating on the female, the male sitting on the stairs he more or less ignored. When that ten minute segment was over, the sitting male showed me his small pistol in his left sock!

He said he managed to deploy this weapon normally, not with our team.

Just acting our normal paranoid selves worked for us!

 

[Beaux Nehr]

I strongly doubt that their idea of 'training' is the same as mine.

I agree; when I see their type at the range, "training" always amounts to standing in place, firing as quickly as possible, then commenting while 3 other imbeciles observe and giggle.

 

[Manco]

I actually tried a Burris Fastfire II HUD/red dot setup on my HK P7, and was somewhat disappointed with the results. The problem occurs in times of near or total darkness, when it becomes impossible to see the HUD frame, making orienting the pistol very tricky, especially at odd angles. I added some luminescent paint that made it a lot easier to orient in the dark, but this setup still requires a lot of practice to master. Getting yourself to present that pistol with the dot oriented in that tiny little window every time is not easy.

Oh definitely, it's not like a long gun with which the red dot is much more consistently and naturally placed when preparing to aim and fire. I never shoot in the dark (gotta positively ID my targets), though, so I can always see where the sights are, at least indoors. The rest is training one's "muscle memory" to position the gun as consistently as possible.

I think the combo would have worked a heck of a lot better with a good light affixed- especially since the Fastfire II dots auto-dim makes the dot very dim indeed in times of near darkness- but at the time i didn't have a rail on my P7. Now that i do, perhaps i'll revisit the setup and tinker with it some more.

That should work better I believe, at least indoors. I'm starting to think that a laser might be the best compromise in the end for my situation, though, even if the red dot sight turns out to be better for me personally (or maybe my defensive pistol should have both types of sight! ). The rest of my family just won't train in any serious manner--only occasional range practice to get used to and maintain familiarity with the blast and recoil. If we ever have to face the kind of adversaries described in the link that you originally provided, then I sure hope that I'm home when it happens (I would anyway, but even more so because I'm the only one who is prepared to any significant degree).

 

[Gouranga]

Great report.
Found a couple points in there to be interesting.

The first was the idea of the officer not thinking but reacting to shoot. That is not going to happen. Of course the criminal will shoot without hesitation. He/she does not care if they miss the officer and hit the guy standing behind him. He has no other consideration than "Kill the cop", the officer on the other hand has a LOT more to consider. They do care if they harm bystanders, rules of engagement, etc.

I double the call that these are top echelon shooters they are dealing with here. I have seen a number of gang banger types at a local range. They got the swagger down, they sure do look cool and you can tell they have handled a lot of firearms. Then they pull it out, hold it sideways and the safest place in the range is suddenly the target they are aiming for. I would guess (guess being the word cause my experience is limited) that way more of these types are garbage shots than are the types describes in this report. Still important to note they are out there and we should not underestimate them.

Another side issue was training. This did not surprise me. I have multiple officers in my family. I am not an LEO but I shoot more than all of them combined in any given year. The city does not have a budget for them to practice more than the minimum and many of them do not practice more than that on their own.

 

[valorius]

That should work better I believe, at least indoors. I'm starting to think that a laser might be the best compromise in the end for my situation, though, even if the red dot sight turns out to be better for me personally (or maybe my defensive pistol should have both types of sight! ). The rest of my family just won't train in any serious manner--only occasional range practice to get used to and maintain familiarity with the blast and recoil. If we ever have to face the kind of adversaries described in the link that you originally provided, then I sure hope that I'm home when it happens (I would anyway, but even more so because I'm the only one who is prepared to any significant degree).

Having lasers mounted on a few of my weapons, i have definitely come to the conclusion that new shooters shoot a laser sighted weapon better than any other type of sighting system.

Gouranga: I agree with your observations.