Yikes! What? You're a Police Officer? But how? Really? Oh, man...

Status
Not open for further replies.
My brother-in-law is about to retire after 30 years in the St. Louis P.D.
When he grew up there were no guns and certainly no outdoor activities at all. His first exposure to firearms was at the training academy. His first week on the job he had to hold a prisoner at gun point for five minutes while things were getting straightened out by his sargent. That is the only time he ever drew his duty weapon. Lucky guy. He is not a good shot. Only shoots to qualify. His son is also on the force. He is a little more gung ho than his dad.
 
This BS on the gun forums about most cops being lousy shots is a myth. Cops are like the rest of society, some like to shoot as a hobby, some don't. Some are great, and some are lousy.
Click to expand...

Drawing a general conclusion requires general experience. Trainers like John Farnam (who trains PD trainer across the nation) say that about 10% of LEOs are interested in shooting well. The rest do the bare minimum requirements, which in most PDs, are VERY minimum. Budgets rule, and what the budgets don't wreck, the lawyers do.


Obviously, in a smaller town in a gun friendly state, that's going to be low, and in an outfit like NYPD that may be high.
 
Budget schmudget! They can practice on their own time with their own funds just like we civilians do. Budget is no excuse for poor marksmanship. BTW most of the cops I've met are good to great shots.
 
My buddy is in the academy right now and just took their shooting test... which he scored 298/300. said most scored around 250 range, and quite a few didn't pass. He thought the test was a joke...(of course, he's also been to Frontsight's defensive handgun class)

I think firearms training varies from local to local. This is in a more liberal area of california. In his personal case, he is very disturbed at the lack of training provided and ease of the test. Often they are told to just do something, not taught how. For example- they are told to draw their weapon, and try not to swing it too much as you bring it up....thats it. Not taught what to do with the support hand, didn't break down the process of presenting a firearms from the holster, etc. Also, not taught fundamentals of marksmanship, no lectures on sight alignment, sight picture, trigger control. And his TO's (training officers) are also mixed. He said one of the older guys is nice and knows his stuff, but another is young, has serious attitude, and far as he can see, doesn't even have good skills. I could go on, but...

Point is, at this particular police academy, firearms training was very minimal. I'm sure at others, firearms training is much better. My own experience with police officers in the area has been mixed. I talked with one who was very much into shooting and talked firearms and shooting with me happily for some time, I've also met others who were of the attitude "why do you even want a gun, you know its liable to get yourself hurt blah blah"

Law enforcement who are on this board are probably very proficient with their firearms, but the fact that they are on this board at all means they enjoy firearms and take them seriously.
 
A friend of mine was previously a reserve cop in a small NH town. He's a pretty good shot. I'm not great -- I'm unqualified in IDPA but typically shoot in the lower sharpshooter level. I've competed against my friend and typically beat him, but not by a whole lot.

He says that when he was a reserve cop, most of the reserve cops on the force were like him -- college grads who wore body armor, carried a backup gun, and extra handcuff keys. Many (not all) of the fulltimers didn't wear body armor, didn't carry a backup gun or extra handcuff keys and learned all they wanted to ever learn in the academy.

Another fellow I know is a detention/deportation officer for BICE (previously INS). He's not a bad shot, but I'm significantly better than he is, even with his duty gun.

So it varies greatly. Some cops are great shots. Some are not. Chances are, the ones who are great shots didn't get that way at the academy.

As one of the previous posters said, there's a lot more to being a cop than being a good shot.
 
My home range is where most of our local officers shoot. I tend to watch them at times and have come to a conclusion.

If, for what ever reason a cop is shooting at me, I am to stand still. If I were to step left or right I may catch a bullet.:D :neener:
 
Chances are, the ones who are great shots didn't get that way at the academy.
Click to expand...
Well I can't speak for the various state and local academies, but the firearms training at FLETC for the feds is outstanding. We put thousands of rounds down range, had dynamic scenarios using Simunitions, and there was voluntary additional dry fire, BEAMHIT, and weapons handling drills after hours for folks that wanted extra training. People that were struggling had mandatory after hours additional training.

I am not a great shot, but I am very good and that was all due to my training for my job. Before I went to FLETC my only other firearms training was bi-annual M9 quals with Uncle Sugar's Association of Flyboys (USAF ;) ). I was a lousy shot due to poor military training, which resulted in bad habits. They corrected my bad habits, drilled in good ones, and turned a lousy shot who fired a 186 out of 300 on the first full course of fire, into a guy that was consistently shooting 275 or better out of 300 by the end of training. Again not great, but very good especially considering the time constraints and distances, and the fact that I was so bad when I first got there.

Again, I can't speak for other systems, but the feds have great training for the Criminal Investigator Training Program.
 
Well I can't speak for the various state and local academies, but the firearms training at FLETC for the feds is outstanding.
Click to expand...
I suspect that FLETC is well beyond the typical police academy in this regard. It is my understanding that here in MA, most police academies provide one week of firearms training. One intensive week can be a pretty good introduction, but it's still not a whole lot of trigger time. Personally, I've had about 160 hours of formal training at LFI, Sigarms Academy, and S&W Academy. I figure that I could use at least 80 hours more training and a bunch more trigger time. Too bad work seems to keep getting in the way...

IIRC, my BICE buddy typically qualifies around 250-275. I don't know if his agency uses the same course of fire as yours. He said his score went up noticeably when he transitioned from the Beretta 96 to the HK USPc LEM. He just got back from 5 weeks at FLETC.
 
I spoke with a constable who had done a considerable amount of research on police shootings with an eye to trying to determine which calibers were most effective.

He finally came to the conclusion that a large part of the reputation of the .45ACP comes from the fact that for years it was NOT an issue duty weapon. The cops carrying .45s were therefore the ones who were into guns enough to have bought their own guns and ammunition and also (most likely) spent the most time practicing.

The results of the shootings showed that the .45s were very effective, but the main factor, in his opinion, was that the cops carrying .45s were much better shots.

I think we're seeing some of the same thing here. A lot of folks are chiming in about how this or that officer that they see at the range is a GREAT shot while others are talking about an officer they know that can't shoot worth beans.

The cops spending their own money and time to frequent the range are almost certainly going to be much better shots than the AVERAGE cop who practices a little before he has to qualify and then doesn't practice the rest of the time.

Anyone who thinks that the average cop is a great shot and knows a lot about guns, doesn't know many cops.
 
I have never understood why this is such a big topic on the boards. Think about this: take every person in the US that owns or carries a gun for self protection and make them all demonstate their shooting skills. I think you might find that the police officers score better. Most of the average Joes that own guns have never recieved any training at all. They bought a gun or were given a gun and basically winged it. They would be insulted if you suggested that they needed training. I bet that among that group of people (persons who own guns for their own protection), you will find a huge percentage that have never fired the gun at all and most of the rest of them haven't fired the gun in the last year.

A little story similar to the guy you talked to that didn't know what kind of gun he was carrying.
I work as a firefighter. Full time, 56 hours a week not counting overtime.
I have a buddy that is not a firefighter, but always wanted to be one and is a fire department buff. He knows all about fire trucks and their specifications. He asked me what kind of truck we had at our station. I had to answer honestly that I didn't know. He couldn't believe it. I said that all I need to know is that when the alarm goes off I get on the one that is parked in our barn (garage). I don't know or care who made it: it is absolutely meaningless to me.
 
...take every person in the US that owns or carries a gun for self protection and make them all demonstate their shooting skills. I think you might find that the police officers score better.
Click to expand...
I think that's true. However, that's not exactly a reasonable comparison. Change your statement by omitting the two words I emphasized above and the comparison is now more reasonable, but now, I don't think it's true anymore.

The difference is that the average citizen who carries a gun does so by choice. Many (most?) cops carry guns because they are required to. Sure, some understand the need carry and the need to practice, but when statistics that say that 70% of the entrants to police academies in the U.S. have never handled a gun, the situation should be pretty clear.
 
A buddy of mine is the firearms instructor for the local dept. Preparing for thir qualifications one of his fellow officers actually asked, "Do we get some warm up shots first?". Unbelievable!! "EXCUSE ME!!! Before we have this shootout because I stopped you and your a felon/fugitive/copkiller, I need to warm up, please give me a minute and I'll be right with you."
 
John, I can't agree with you. It doesn't matter if it is your choice or not: if you need it, you need to do the same thing to survive.


Another angle on this: I don't know about you, but I am not an expert at every aspect of my job. There are some areas that I excell at. There are other areas where I am adequate but nothing outstanding. And, there are others that I am not up to snuff on. I know I should be taking the time to be outstanding at every aspect of my job, but often I am to busy actually DOING my job to train to that level. Sure, I could spend my off duty time to brush up on things and I probably should. But, after working I want to enjoy my time off, not spend more time on work. This isn't the ideal situation, but it is reality. And unlike many, I really enjoy my job and have a strong desire to do the best possble job. The situation is worse with people who are there ONLY for a paycheck. Not everyone is a superman. Not everyone is world class.
Keep in mind that you have a strong interest in firearms. You spend a lot of time talking about firearms, reading about firearms, shooting firearms, going to gunshows, shopping ..................................... That is your thing. Those cops' jobs are far more complex than that one thing. They have a lot more on their plate than firearms.
 
I could tell you stories about the people who I certify for their CCW permits.
The average "Joe or Jane" is a lousy shot.
Out of 15 students, maybe 2 or 3 are good shooters, 7 or 8 are good enough to certify (and that aint sayin much), and the last 5 or 6 are downright scary.
....
I had two retired cops in my last course, one was ex-FBI and was probably the worst shooter and gun handler I have ever seen. He was truly the lowest common denominator. The other was ex-city Police, fair shot, fairly safe, but a bad attitude.
 
I think its a very valid point that MOST of the people out there that own guns for "defense" are not terribly proficient with them. (I'll include myself in that group, but I feel that I am at least proficient enough to know that I'm not proficient enough. Many others don't even seem to know THAT much.)

I went to qualify for my CWP with a guy from work. (At my repeated suggestion, he bought and fired his first handgun the week before, rather than using one of mine). Considering the ease of the SC qualifications, he passed with no problem. He has not fired his gun a single time since the qualification. He mostly keeps it locked up in the center console of his car, empty, and has a mag of Wolf in the glove box. I often wonder at what point in time he thinks his gun would be useful for SD. And, keep in mind, this is a CWP holder.

I bought my last handgun (a 10mm) from a guy online off gunbroker. I called him up for some info here and there. He actually told me that he owned the gun for a long time, had it loaded for home defense, but had NEVER actually fired it. Not only that, but his new HD gun after the 10mm was gone was going to be his S&W 500 magnum revolver. :scrutiny: Said he would "just have to teach the missus to hang on". I bet. :scrutiny: He sounded about 80 years old.

Some people are just totally out of touch, even when they think they are, I guess.
 
I don't have a problem with a cop not knowing much about guns in general (any more then would have a problem with a cop not knowing how to tune up his cruiser), but I do expect them to know their weapon better then "A Glock? Is that what it is?" or the whole duty guns rusting in their holsters thing.

This is mostly for their sake though ... if their gun doesn't function, or they don't function well with their gun, it is THEY who will most likely suffer for it ... its Darwin's way ya know ;)
 
It doesn't matter if it is your choice or not: if you need it, you need to do the same thing to survive.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more!

What I was getting at is this: A lot of cops see the "gun part" of their job as drudgery--I think in some cases they actually see it as contrary to the reason they signed up--to help people. They know they HAVE to carry a gun and qualify with it. They may even understand why it's necessary. BUT they're not going to do anything more than the absolute minimum required by their department.

You don't find that kind of attitude as often in the average citizen who CHOOSES to carry a gun.

It just stands to reason. Take two groups of people and force one to do something that the other group does by choice. Which one is going to do it better on average?
 
Of those that I know and have worked with it was about 60/40:eek: not into guns got into it for the money:uhoh:

They do know what is issused and the type of ammo, the 40%ers well the like the 1911s and shoot quite abit and reload to help with the cost.:)
 
"...somewhat trained..." Sadly that pretty much covers it. Not everywhere, of course, but certainly up here. Most cops, everywhere, had no exposure to firearms at all prior to whatever training they get. Up here, our cops get 12 hours of firearm training in our Police College. A university degree is more important than anything else. Our cops are more interested in their 50 plus grand a year career than knowing anything about firearms.
They must qualify every year with their service pistol, but are not required to practice. Even though they get an incredibly good buy on ammo. Mind you, I also know cops who do and can shoot extremely well, but the average flat foot? No. They can't shoot to save their own lives. Never mind your's or mine.
Am I anti-cop? Not in the least. I like the guys who are cops. They really are a good bunch of guys. I've shot with them, against their Metro Pistol League team(they lost a lot and you could tell that some of the young bucks thought we shouldn't have guns), but on the whole, cops are pretty good guys.
Would I want to trust a cop's ability to shoot to keep me alive? No squid jiggin' way. Serve me. I'll protect myself.
 
I doubt that police skill w/ firearms is anything other than normally distributed. A minority are really excellent or really bad and the majority are somewhere in between. There are varying degrees of competence in all professions, look at what doctors pay for malpractice insurance.

Firearms are only a very very small percentage of what goes into policing. All of the training needs and requirements have to be balanced out - if you want more firearms training that time and money has to come from somewhere else. There is little in the typical police basic training program that doesnt need to be there. As enthusiasts we see this from a pretty jaded perspective. Maybe on the computer hobbyyist boards they are amazed that all cruisers do not have in car computers or that some officers have to do reports by hand. The car guys are amazed that there is only 24 hours of driving time. Trainers get very protective of their turf and are'nt likely to voluntarily cede hours and budget to someone else who is "more important."

It is tough to justify to government executives why they should sink more money into firearms and training when it actually gets used far less than just about every other skill or equipment. It is easy to get all self righteous about the importance of protecting lives, but it is difficult to "prove" that anything will have a significant effect. More police officer's lives would be saved by wearing seatbelts all the time than by high level firearms training.

Another factor to consider is the current trend to change guns every couple of years. Not too long ago officers generally kept the same firearms from the Academy thoughout their entire career. It has become trendy to update and replace guns as soon as the Next Greatest Thing is intorduced. From a logistics and training perspective this is a nightmare.

Incidently, I am a police firearms trainer and training administrator:)
 
Up here, our cops get 12 hours of firearm training in our Police College.
Click to expand...
Wow ... that's all?

To get a CCW in Colorado you have to have more training then that ... about 12 hours in the classroom. Then about 12 hours at the range.
 
Hmm, I would think that someone who may stake their life on a "tool" - in this case, a firearm - would *WANT* to be damn good at using it, even if their employer doesn't provide the means with which to gain those skills.

Maybe it's the crowd that I hang out with, but every PO that I know is very capable with their firearms. I have been surprised by a few though: they don't bring their duty weapon home, and don't own firearms... "Aren't safe around the kids," is the answer when I asked.
 
It just stands to reason. Take two groups of people and force one to do something that the other group does by choice. Which one is going to do it better on average?
Click to expand...

Yup. There's a self-selection process with one, it's missing in the other. Take a survey of LEOs as to why they are cops, and you'll get a wide range of answers. Take the same survey of CCW holders, and the variation will be MUCH reduced.


One is ALL about using a gun for self defense. One is about a LOT of different things.


I suppose the percentage of LEOs interested in shooting is higher than in the general population. But the fact that it isn't MUCH HIGHER than it is surprises us because it's contrary to our presuppositions.


And, as djsjd pointed out, it's contrary to SANITY.


As to why it's discussed so much, that's obvious to some of the LEOs here - it's because we HATE all cops and love to point out any failure on the part of any cop or PD.

Right?


Hmmm. Or maybe because we get the "only police are properly trained and should be allowed to have guns!" thrown at us by the antis so we are quick to point out the fallacy of that garbage.


Nah, couldn't be that. Must be just because we hate cops.


:rolleyes:
 
And, as djsjd pointed out, it's contrary to SANITY.
Click to expand...
I strongly suspect that for most cops, they'll retire without ever firing their gun, except for at the range. There are a lot of things more important to them.
 
"Nah, couldn't be that. Must be just because we hate cops."

Actually I think it is something else. I think that one thing is that we like to compare ourselves against those that carry a gun for a living. I also think that many of us like to blow our own horns.
It also seems that police officers are fair game on this board. Have you ever read a post by someone that shoots competitvely who posted about how bad the other shooters where and how much better they were in comparison ? I know I haven't. Most people have enough class to be humble and most people also realize that not everyone has the same amount of experience or practice as they do. However, it seems to be perfectly OK to do the same thing when talking about police officers. I am not sure that hate is the right word, but there is difinitely something there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top