Surprized by the inaccuracy of a LEO

[nerd-with-a-gun]

I was at the range today for a little lead therapy after a very frustrating day at work. In the lane next to me was a LEO shooting at the same type target as me (a standard B-27 silhouette) at the same distance (10 yards). Her target looked like it had been hit with buckshot although she was using a S&W M&P semi-auto. There wasn't a bullet hole within 6" of the 10 ring. Now I have only been shooting since December of 2009 and I can pretty much consistently get 50 out of 50 in the 9 ring with 20+ in the 10 ring. Now I am not trying to brag, I just like shooting and my goal when I started out was to be able to get all of my shots in the 8 ring at 7 yards within 3 months of practice with my .357. I have achieved my goal plus, but the accuracy of the LEO next to me really surprised me. I thought that a LEO should be able to shoot better than that.

This is no negative comment on you LEOs out there that read this forum, but am I not wrong to think that a LEO should be able to do better than that? If you looked at her target, if it were a real bad guy, she might have disabled his right arm, and that is about it. Not one shot was anywhere near a vital area of the body.

 

[rmfnla]

Not all LEOs are gun people. For many the sidearm is just another required piece of equipment and quals are something to be gotten through.

 

[Starcheck55]

+1 I spoke to a CHP officer and he's only shot his sidearm at academy and quals....it collects dust in his holster otherwise. He called a mutual friend a few weeks ago because he couldn't remember how to field strip it and didn't want to ask anyone at work (I'd be too embarrassed to do that also!!)

 

[W.E.G.]

In fact, most LEO's are NOT gun people - especially the closer you get to urban centers.

 

[One-Time]

Yeah I have always been surprised how many only qualify as required to keep their job

I always shot extra and love to see LE agencies making people qual 2 or 3 or more times a year

 

[Sam1911]

(This topic comes up frequently and sometimes threatens to devolve into a cop-bashing thread, so let's all try hard not to go there.)

There are police officers, sheriffs & deputies, and other LEOs that love to shoot, and shoot often and well.

And there are more (many, many more) who don't.

Many non-LEOs think that ability with a gun is a defining characteristic of an officer's skill at his/her job. The reality is most officers go years (maybe a whole CAREER) without firing a shot "in anger."

Shooting is an important skill, of course, and we all may cringe to think that an officer who can't hit the target accurately on a square range, at 10 yds, may be called upon someday to fire his weapon in a dynamic situation with innocent folks downrange. But most officers don't spend much time training with or even thinking about their guns. Guns just don't factor into their day-to-day duties.

A friend of mine is a Detective Sargent with the NJSP. He's the most accurate pistol shooter I've ever met (I've seen him shoot a 150 rd. IDPA match and come out down 3 points ... on the WHOLE match.) and blisteringly fast. He told me a while back, "If you offer most cops a new gun -- or a new PEN -- 99 out of 100 will choose the new pen. Just because it's something they'll actually USE."

 

[Ben86]

I think it is nice when police agencies use strict firearm qualification requirements for their officers, but that is most often not the case, and in the scheme of things isn't necessary, especially in a low crime area. A lot of police officers, maybe even most, do not train to be "gunfighters." They are quite content with obtaining only the necessary level of skill required. That's ok I guess, since most gunfights happen really close and hardly often anyway. However, I know that if it was my life on the line, I'd think differently. ASAP- As Skilled As Possible

 

[medalguy]

Not surprising, especially when you read a story about a LEO shootout where there were maybe 30 shots fired but the BG got away unscratched.

 

[searcher451]

At the range I often frequent, a number of LEOs gather regularly for practice. Most of them are pretty good; a couple of them are scary good; one or two aren't as good as the others, but they are plenty good enough to keep you from wanting to test their abilities for real. Put another way, you'd appreciate every one of them having your back when the time came.

Then again, these are LEOs who are range regulars and practice constantly to hone their skills. As has been pointed out, not all of them do. It's also possible that the LEO the OP saw was new to the game, or perhaps new to the gun, and was just getting started in either becoming a range-rat or in getting used to a new firearm. Either way, I admire the work that they do in the face of the nonsense that they have to put up with daily. God bless 'em, everyone.

 

[41magsnub]

At least she was at the range working on it!

 

[Bovice]

At least she was at the range working on it!

A perfect practice makes perfect. All practice does not make perfect. Clearly, she did not know how to adjust her trigger finger to stop snapping to the side. She ought to know this, gun person or not, she IS A POLICE OFFICER. No excuses for excessively poor shooting. I'm in school now for my mechanical engineering degree. I've been taught to use powerful programs to complete difficult calculations. Does that mean I can slack on my basic math and calculus skills? Absolutely not. While it is true that I probably won't go to work daily and integrate by parts or use trigonometric substitutions, do you really want somebody who's weak in mathematics building the high rise buildings you work in and bridges you cross every day? I don't think you do. The focus of the job isn't to work mathematical wonders as a mathematician, but I still need to be pretty damn good at it. That's why I don't feel a bit bad when people bash on the police here that can't shoot well. It's a part of their job and they had better be proficient or find a new line of work.

 

[Bovice]

By the way, that B27 is huge. Anyone worth their salt with a gun should be nailing center mass on that on a 10 yard range.

 

[Straight Shooter]

A perfect practice makes perfect. All practice does not make perfect.

So wait a minute, she gets dumped on for being a cop who is a bad shot AND for being at the range trying to get better? Give me a break!

Clearly, she did not know how to adjust her trigger finger to stop snapping to the side.

How do you know what she clearly did wrong? Where you there?

I'm sure you were born with a sixgun in your hand but give the woman some credit for trying to improve.

 

[mljdeckard]

Institutions hate range time. The time means that the trainees won't be carrying out other duties, and someone has to buy the ammo. When an officer or soldier makes the minimum training qualifications, the institution has to focus the time and money on other things. (Yes, even military units have to maintain budgets and pay for ammo.)

This is also why I scoff when the antis say that police are qualified to use deadly force, but civilians are not.

One day, years ago, I was at a range in Salt Lake, and a lot of rookies from West Valley city (our local war zone) were there having an informal shoot with their wives. They had MP-5s and stuff out there, and they were all over the place. I was shooting a G-22 right next to them, and I couldn't resist some gloating when we all retrieved our targets.

This is not to say that all cops are terrible shots, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the really good ones are the ones who have been out-of-pocketing for their own ammo and practice time for many years. They didn't learn it at the academy.

 

[JR47]

There is merit in the fact that poor practice won't improve skills. It's just true. However, until someone actually observes WHY the officer is spraying the target, advice is also a poor practice. The gun may actually be too large for her to grip properly. In the case of the M&P, it may need a different back-strap installed. Trying to diagnose her problem via third party reference shows only a lack of teaching skills.

Perhaps, if she shows up a few times, someone will be able to help her without being judgmental.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I applaud that she took the initiative to work on her marksmanship. Now, if she had a shooting coach to point out what she's doing incorrectly and to help improve her shooting form then she'd probably develop her shooting skills more quickly.

At least she learned how she can expect to perform on demand and maybe that will motivate her to find somebody to help her improve.

 

[Manco]

Shooting is an important skill, of course, and we all may cringe to think that an officer who can't hit the target accurately on a square range, at 10 yds, may be called upon someday to fire his weapon in a dynamic situation with innocent folks downrange. But most officers don't spend much time training with or even thinking about their guns. Guns just don't factor into their day-to-day duties.

All they have to do is qualify--maybe the issue is really about the standards at law enforcement agencies. Obviously one would hope that LEOs rarely, if ever, have to use their guns on an individual basis, but it's rather important to be sufficiently competent if and when they are forced to, I think. While there certainly are LEOs who take it upon themselves to exceed the minimum standard set by their department, many do not, and even some of those who do, from what I've seen, need some instruction in addition to the extra practice they take, as issues with one's trigger pull and flinching, for example, seldom go away unless one is aware of them and knows how to train against them.

In addition, while taking untimed shots at a paper target can be valuable training in many ways, it's pretty far removed from actual combat shooting, and I have to wonder about what kind of training goes on at most police academies and departments. This is not to rag on cops themselves one bit, but to question certain aspects of law enforcement standards.

 

[RobMoore]

I'm guessing she has her annual qualification coming up within a week or so and she doesn't want to fail ("again" would be a word I'd add to the end of that sentence based off your description of her shooting). That time of year is normally when you'll see the non-gun LEOs "tuning up".

 

[rscalzo]

Not surprising, especially when you read a story about a LEO shootout where there were maybe 30 shots fired but the BG got away unscratched.

So you are equating a true deadly force situation with your day at the range?? That makes zero sense. Let us know how you do when you are faced with a similar situation.

 

[One-Time]

Saw it w/ an ATF agent too, she was all geared up and at the public range, which is odd as most LE there would use the LE Range @ Pat Thomas

ALL her shots were low at the 6'oclock and down around the nads

Come to think of it, maybe she was a feminist LOL

 

[Sam1911]

maybe the issue is really about the standards at law enforcement agencies

Everything in life is a set of compromises. Considering how much training it is CRITICAL to jam into a police recruit's head -- and how much further training they receive in all the details of law, arrest procedures (especially in avoiding violation of rights and rules of evidence), handling their vehicles safely in emergency situations, dealing with the public, filing reams of paperwork, using commo gear, testimony and court procedures, prisoner handling, etc., etc., etc., it is probably unrealistic to say that their firearms training is wholly WORSE than the quality of all of the other training they have to take.

And that's a scary thought indeed. But what thing do the academies and/or instructors cut back on so there's room in the schedule and budget for more shooting instruction? Where can they afford for their training to be LESS sufficient?

Or, viewed another way, what if they just raise their shooting standards? If you can't hit 50% of your shots in the 9 ring of a B-27 target at 10 yds, you're off the force! Where are all the new, qualified, officers going to come from to replace the 75% that fail their quals? You've got to have officers/deputies to have a law-enforcement agency. If you can't find people who can qualify (or who are willing to put in the hours to learn) WHO's going to be policing your town?

In the end, most cops do pretty well with what they get. Poor shooting training can have some pretty bad consequences. But so can poor -- everything else -- training. And shootings are still a smaller part of a cop's job than that other stuff.

 

[bigfatdave]

Not every cop is going to be capable of being (or want to be) a handgun tactical sniper.
In many cases, as mentioned before, the handgun is one of many tools, issued and maintained to the minimum level. Chances are she was new to that pistol, wasn't finding that pistol a good fit, or had developed bad habits that nobody had helped her to correct.
You could have offered some tips or asked her if she needed any help, nerd-with-a-gun.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Most cops are not into guns, rarely practice outside of necessity, and are not that good at shooting. Fortunately, the bad guys GENERALLY get less range time, and are worse shots than the average cop. I say this after 20 years of law enforcement, and endeavoring to be the best (occasionally tied for first place) on my department. I would have been embarassed to have a civilian/citizen outshoot me (although when you run with the real combat shooters, you WILL be humbled.)

 

[Sam1911]

I would have been embarassed to have a civilian/citizen outshoot me (although when you run with the real combat shooters, you WILL be humbled.)

Rob Haught, who writes the "Behind the Badge" column in IDPA's Tactical Journal, has written about that problem as well.

Even when a cop really does enjoy shooting, sometimes it is hard to go shoot at gun clubs or in competitions because there is a certain expectation that the "professional" gun-carrier should be a master of the art. That expectation, or the fear of not upholding it, often comes from within the officer himself. (Though, obviously from this very thread, there is a strong perception of that from the public as well.)

This embarrassment can be a strong dissuading force that keeps some avoiding the range -- especially if they don't know how to improve and think (as a lot of untrained folks do) that good shooters are simply born that way and they [the officer] just must not have been.

 

[KodiakBeer]

One of the most impressive shooters I ever met was a retired Alaska State Trooper. He taught the CCW course here, back in the 90's when you still needed a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
Ho told a story about flying out to Dutch Harbor to apprehend some armed nutbar who had killed a hooker, and he took a .30 carbine along as his primary weapon. He ended up cornering the guy behind some heavy fish totes - thick plastic boxes designed to hold 2000 pounds of fish, that have four walls of heavy plastic, with insulation in between. Anyway, the totes stopped the rounds from penetrating, so he ended up flanking the guy and shooting him in the head.
Some years later, he was called to fly out there again under similar circumstances, and took a Garand along. In a similar situation, he trapped the guy behind some metal conex boxes and just riddled the fellow full of holes, though the perp ended up surviving.

He told that story after a question about shooting through car doors with a handgun with the lesson being - use enough gun.

He also could also make cloverleaf holes in a 25 yard target shooting double-action with a .357, and demonstrated that for us. So, some cops really can shoot.

His best advice (which may not apply in some other states) was to always claim you were making a citizens arrest when you are forced to shoot somebody. In Alaska at least, that's a pretty solid defense that's been tested in the courts many times. Citizens here, have the same power of arrest as police officers. "I'm placing you under citizens arrest" - BANG!