Guns and lights

[Jim K]

I have not been a LEO for many years, and I am not "up" on current police training. So maybe there is more than I have seen in the gunzine ads and "reality" cop shows on TV.

But back in pre-historic times when cops carried revolvers and didn't look like soldiers ready to take on an army, I was trained to enter a dark area carrying my gun in my right hand (strong hand) and the flashlight in my left hand away from and ahead of the body. The idea was that if a BG shot at the light or if he assumed the light was in the officer's right hand and fired to its left, he would hit nothing and the officer could fire at the muzzle flash.

I was also trained in the radical idea that if an officer entered a dark room where there was a good chance of BG's being present, the best way to get light on the scene was to (ready for this?) turn on the lights if he could find the switch. Since the cop would be ready for the brightness, the chance of disconcerting and blinding the BG was pretty good.

Now, it seems to be the fad to attach the light to the gun, and then stand up with the face directly behind the light where (IMHO) the BG will put his bullets. I realize that police now have all kinds of "bullet proof" vests, but they don't cover the face, which is right behind the light that BG will shoot at.

Also, it seems that it is now considered a no-no to turn on a light. Instead, the officer switches on a tiny light that covers maybe 2 degrees and "sweeps" the room, looking for the bad guy. So unless the light happens to illuminate the crook first try, the BG simply shoots at the light. A laser light does an even better job of pointing directly back at the gun (and the cop).

I was also trained in the idea that anyone entering a dark area from a lighter area would be silhouetted against the light; that would seem to make sneaking around the door edge or even going to the floor a better idea than jumping out into the middle of the doorway, as is done on TV.

Now police funerals are impressive, with all those flashing red and blue lights, and bagpipes and all that, but IMHO, most cops would prefer to avoid the necessity. So why are they carrying what amounts to a neon sign reading "shoot here"?

Jim

 

[John C]

Jim;

An old time cop I know used the method you describe from the 'old days' long after the fad had changed to the current style. He was in an officer-involved shooting where the suspect fired 6 .357s at the light he was holding, perforating a Buick parked behind him. He was unhurt, and returned fire, wounding the suspect. He opted to never change his style. While now retired, he trains recruits at the academy and still works as a reserve officer. I believe he referred to it as the 'FBI Method'?

Turning on the lights still works, but usually only in like low(er) threat situations like building searches on burglar alarms. We still search guns drawn, and flashlights ready. If a suspect is holed up somewhere and is known or reasonably thought to be armed & dangerous, my department policy is to call in the cavalry, unless it's an "active shooter".

Prior to weapon mounted lights, we used the Harries Method of holding the tactical light in the off hand crossing the gun hand so as to support the gun hand. This has the same disadvantages as the weapon mounted lights, from your perspective.

The advantage of combined weapons/lights is twofold: First, the lights we use today are BRIGHT. They will blind an opponent and make it difficult to shoot directly at the light. Second, it serves as an aiming device, if you can see your target, your shots will hit it.

The idea is that officers shouldn't be searching alone, as they used to do in the old days. My dept. SOP is to have a minimum 4 officers to search a regular house, more if needed for an office building, warehouse, etc. (I work in a large department) The idea is to have cover officers covering the areas outside of your flashlight cone.

We don't usually turn on the lights other than from cover/concealment, since the lights work both ways. We don't jump out from behind cover as seen on TV, or hold a pistol point upwards a la TJ Hooker. We hold them at the low ready position. "Sneaking" around corners is a technique known as "slicing the pie" and the purpose is to use the cover/concealment as long as possible by keeping the body behing a corner and only showing the pistol and the eyes behind it to keep the target small. The usual technique is to stand as far as possible from the corner, so that larger movements are needed for small incremental amounts of visibility around a corner.

Police funerals are impressive, luckily, we don't have them near as often as we used to. Police fatalities have dropped to less than half what they were in the early 1970's, even with a much larger number of police officers and general population. Most officers die in car crashes, and if I recall correctly less than 150 per year die from felonious assaults. That's pretty amazing considering there are approx. 700,000 law enforcement officers in this country, a number which includes Park Rangers, Fire Marshals, Local cops and deputies, to the State and Feds. Seat belts, kevlar vests, better techniques, and life flights are all to credit bringing down LE fatalities. Most people are surprised to learn that LE isn't among the top 10 most dangerous professions.

-John

 

[Blackhawk 6]

My experience is based on the military use of weapons-mounted lights not a law enforcement background. Still, I believe I can provide some perspective.

First, once circumstance have eliminated all other options and it appears a confrontation is unavoidable, I believe an offensive posture is better than a defensive one. Not that one is necessarily better than the other, the offense is what I prefer.

Typically, I find that persons who go in harms way are of one of two schools of thought:

1. "I need to prevent him from hurting me so that I can hurt him." I consider this to be a defensive mindset. People embracing this thought process are concerned with finding tactics/techniques that afford them the maximum amount of protection while still allowing them to react to a threat.

2. "I need to hurt him before he hurts me." I consider this to be the offensive mindset. People embracing this thought process are concerned with finding tactics/techniques that allow them to address a threat as effectively as possible while still affording a degree of protection.

Both are viable methods of dealing with the threat. Both have been used with a great deal of success. As it relates to this discussion, a weapons-mounted light is a tool for people who subscribe to the second school of thought.

A weapons-mounted light allows me to operate my handgun much more efficiently than using a handheld flashlight in conjuction with my pistol. It has no impact on my ability to reload, clear malfunctions or make subsequent shots (actually, my splits are often slightly faster with the light mounted.) I can use my standard ready position and maintain it for extended periods of time. I can operate my weapon with one hand if necessary.

Using a handheld light requires me to align not only the weapon, but the light as well. It is more difficult to reload my weapon or clear a malfunction. While subsequent shots can be made rapidly, the firing position tends to "fall apart."
Some positions, such as the Harries, border on the masochistic when held for extended periods of time. One handed operation is out of the question.

The advantages a weapons-mounted light has over a handheld light in terms of affording the operator to more effectively handle his weapon become obvious when one shoots an El Presidente-type drill using both techniques.

With regard to turning on the lights; with the lights on the playing field is level. Sometimes darkness is your friend. Under those circumstances, I do not want to level the playing field, I want to maintain my advantage. The lights stay off. When the darkness favors the bad guy, I want to eliminate any advantage he may have so the lights come on.

With regard to the handheld technique you described, it was taught to me as the "FBI technique." In my opinion it stems from a defensive mindset. When I am searching a building for a bad guy, I am most certainly on the offense. I am, in effect, "hunting." This technique requires me to align the axis of the light and my weapon on the target independant of one another does not allow me to pie corners effectively. There is also a tendency for the shooter to illuminate himself either by positioning the flashlight too far back or from "splash" off of the walls, ceiling or other objects in the room. This obviously negates the primary advantage. While I have used it, it is not one of my preferred techniques. (Though I will readily admit that on those occasions when I operate a flashlight without a weapon in my other hand, I use the FBI technique. Go figure.)

With regard to the bad guy shooting at the light, again, defensive mindset. In my expereince most (not all) bad guys are poor marksman. While it does not require a high degree of skill to shoot someone across a room, it is difficult to rapidly orient on a target that suddenly appears and fire a reasonably accurate shot. It is not as though he is aligned on the target and is waiting for the light to come on in order to fire. If I am using proper tactics, I should be behind cover and he should be looking into my light when it comes on. This more than mitigates the risk in my mind. Perhaps not yours.

I whole-heartedly with your comments regarding the hazards of silhouetting oneself in a doorway. I am not sure anyone can "sneak around the edge" of a door and going to the floor compromises mobility. The only thing worse than being silhouetted in a doorway is being silhouetted in a doorway and unable to to get out of it quickly. Clearing the doorway quicly and deliberately is the best technique to mitigate the risk in my experience.

In the end, its not that one technique is better than another. Rather it is the operator selecting the approriate technique for the situation and applying it correctly. In a no- or low-light environment this means having weapons-mounted and hand-held flashlights available to you.

Hope this helps.

 

[Jim K]

Thanks, John. I see the point about bright lights, but I was not thinking of the BG being in the light beam. If he is, then he can be picked up and will have a bad day. But if he is off to the side, he can still see the light and pretty well know where the cop is from the position of the light.

I am sort of glad to know some folks still use the old ways. It is nice to have all those people, but some departments don't have four officers on the whole force, so I think there are going to be times when the search will be a one-person affair unless there is a good indication that something really is wrong.

I just hope that the new ideas work as they seem to. But some of the old ideas stood the test of time, too.

Jim

 

[Zach S]

The advantage of combined weapons/lights is twofold: First, the lights we use today are BRIGHT. They will blind an opponent and make it difficult to shoot directly at the light.

+1. Compare a 6 volt surefire/streamlight/[insert whatever here] to the 6 volt (4 D cell) maglights of yesteryear (and today, although not as common), and there's no comparison.

Unfortuneatly, the surefires/streamlights/[insert whatever here] dont make very effective clubs, and that's where the maglight really shines Thats probably why a lot of officers that still carry them do so.

 

[John C]

Blackhawk 6;

Interesting point about the offensive/defensive perspective. However, I think I fall into a hybrid situation. As a patrol officer, my goal is to take a suspect into custody with a minimum of injury to all parties. This sometimes involves the use of force. On a micro level, this falls into your definition of defensive thinking, in that I only use to force to prevent injury to myself or others.

However, I often have to go looking for trouble, whether responding to calls or self-initiating activity. On a macro level, I need to find violent suspects, and take them into custody, an offensive mindset. From a purely tactical perspective, these activities seem contradictory. A successful officer finds the appropriate balance and can conform his reaction to the situation.

I'm never in a purely offensive role, since my dept. has several specialized units the make forced entries, etc. and I've never had the pleasure to serve o n one. Luckily, I've never responded to an "active shooter' scenario which would place me in that role, though I am prepared to take of business if that ever should happen.

Regardless, a weapon light is valuable for the reasons you mention. If you can see him, you can shoot him; and having a hand free to open doors or clear a malfunction is important. I couldn't agree more about the Harries method, it is a b*tch to keep in position for long.

Again, you're spot-on about tilting the relative advantages and disadvantages of darkness always in our favor.

I think I may not have made myself clear about 'sneaking around doorways'. The technique of slicing the pie is actually very effective in clearing rooms and maintaining distance. In law enforcement, time generally favors the officers, and we want to slow down the unfolding of events as much as possible. We usually leave dynamic entries to specially trained and equipped entry teams. The purpose of slicing the pie is to stay out of doorways until cleared. There's an article about slicing the pie in a current or recent issue of GUNS magazine. I didn't read the article, so I don't know how good it is, but the pictures do a much better job in decribing the technique than I've done.

-John

 

[John C]

Jim;

You're right about the pleasure of working on a large department. I have nothing but respect for rural officers working all by themselves. I know that I couldn't do that job very well. I enjoy the security blanket of a lot of backup the few times I've had to call for code 3 backup.

My dept. has been able to adapt our procedures around the large number of officers we have working at any one time. This allows us to lower officer and suspect injuries. In the case of building searches, it means we have enough pairs of eyes and weapons to cover all aspects of the search group. The old ways worked within the constraints of the time period, but now I think we have better tactics and tools.

-John

 

[Blackhawk 6]

John,

My reference was to Jim's original post. I took Jim's statement "sneaking around doorways" to mean sneaking through doorways. Your comments put things in perspective. I am well acquainted with how to pie a corner but I appreciate your effort to educate me further.

With regard to the offensive/defensive mindset, while I presented it as an either/or situation, it is really more of a sliding scale with the two schools of thought representing the poles. Based on our training and experience we may be more comfortable at one end of the scale or another. In my experience, most patrol officers and private citizens tend to approach problems from the defensive end of the spectrum. Military and SWAT personnel tend to approach problems from the offensive end of the spectrum. However, in my opinion, a well-trained individual needs understand all of the options available to them and be able to move up and down the scale as the situation dictates.

Stay safe.

 

[Onmilo]

Surefire and Streamlight weapon lights are extremely bright.
If a bad guy looks directly at one it will momentarily blind, stun, and immobilize.
If he does shoot at the light chances are he will fire blindly allowing you to make a more precise shot and giving you plenty of justification for your actions.
It is never a good idea to leave the light switched full on, the crook can track your movements by following the beam.
Use of a pressure switch and one second quick flashes to light the area of observation are the preferred method.
If you jacklight a bad guy while conducting a search and observe investigation you then maintain pressure on the switch to keep the blinding light focused on the crook until other officers can arrive and detain the goofball.