Some important implications from the CT article...

This is a discussion on Some important implications from the CT article... within the Related Gear & Equipment forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Some sobering implications from the CT article… ”...hit ratios from shootings in the field are staggeringly low. The latest NIJ data shows that police officers ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Some important implications from the CT article...

  1. #1
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669

    Some important implications from the CT article...

    Some sobering implications from the CT article…

    ”...hit ratios from shootings in the field are staggeringly low. The latest NIJ data shows that police officers using traditional sighting and training methods hit their mark only about 25% of the time when shots are fi red. Remember: These are trained professionals. Men and women who must qualify on the range with high scores in order to keep their jobs.”

    The hit ratio, 25%, is up from the 17% we used to hear about, so that’s good. But, when is says, ”Men and women who must qualify on the range with high scores in order to keep their jobs.”, first that isn’t a sentence; it’s a fragment. That gets the “who cares” stuff out of the way and we can move on.

    I shoot sometimes twice a week at a range that several LE agencies use for quals so I get to see a some officer qual shoots. They are anything but “high scores”. Some are scary. One could barely reload his gun; others miss – a lot, but still score high enough to qualify. There’s a hint here about why were seeing 25% hits in the field.

    The article aptly points out some very real and legitimate reasons as well:

    ”…So why are hit ratios so low?
    (1) Over 80% of shootings occur at night, which makes aiming diffi cult.
    (2) Most armed encounters involve movement of the offi cer and/or the subject. Again, hindering aim.
    (3) Add the stresses of a life or death situation, and it’s easy to see why so many rounds miss their mark.”


    While I agree with the above, I also maintain that there are other equally important reasons. The major heading would be: insufficient training. There are budget constraints and training seems to get a low priority. It is claimed that the majority of officers have little desire to train with their guns. They rarely shoot more than twice a year and then just enough to past the quals.

    And another thing that I think is a major reason they miss is the ranges are longer than we have be lead to believe. We have all probably heard that the majority of gunfights take place not much over arm’s length and typically the gunfight ends with 2-3 shots. What is not commonly known is that these stats come from a study in which the officers involved in the gunfight died in the gunfight!

    If we think about this for a minute, we have to realize something’s not right. For example, if gunfights really do take place up close, i.e. arms length, how is it that the officers only hit a target within 6 or so feet of them only 17% of the time? I mean, that’s raise the gun and shoot. You don’t need sights, lasers or anything for that. Seventeen percent hit ratio for targets right in your face. It just doesn’t make sense.

    What does make sense is a study that revealed that officers that survived a gunfight fired more like 6 shots and the typical range was from 5 to 15 yards; the difference? We’re simply not as accurate at longer ranges. What about officer survival at this range? The BGs can’t hit as good at longer ranges either. Distance is our friend.

    It can’t be said enough: Make distance and use you superior shooting skills to end the fight.

    ”The numbers bear out Lasergrips’ success. Agencies using Crimson Trace Lasergrips are seeing hit ratios of over 90% in offi cer involved shootings. That’s a phenomenal 300%+ improvement over historic levels.”

    The numbers don’t agree. If officers are getting 25% hit ratios and CTs improve that by 300%, that means the officers hit ratio goes up to 75%, not the 90% claimed. Think of it like this. You go to the range, set up a B-27 target at 20 feet and fire 100 rounds using iron sights. You count your hits and there are only 25 in the “black” – not the X, 10, or 9 rings, but only 25 in the black.

    You repeat the same drill with CTs. You count the hits and there are 75 hits in the black - scary, huh? We’re use to all 100 hits being in the 9 ring or better with maybe a few “fliers” in the 8 ring, but no complete misses. But, that’s what police officers are facing - 75% hits. Why? I think it’s because of the three reasons given in the CT article, plus insufficient training, plus the longer ranges than we have been led to believe.
    Last edited by Tangle; September 19th, 2005 at 11:25 AM.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Short reply Ron to quite a big issue - bottom line is indeed IMO training, has to be.

    Even if CT's (or any add-on device for that matter) increases hit percent - they are still not going to give max benefit without good training.

    It does seem as broad generalization that LE training for firearms skills is woefully lacking. Probably the guys who do get up to good proficiency are those who are shooters anyways and practice as a matter of course.

    The actual CT issue per se is one where I think views can vary, as to their usefulness and whether they actually interfere with std sights useage. Nothing tho that I can see, can replace good and sufficiently frequent training.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  4. #3
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    15,850
    electronics and batteries can fail. Much harder to break or lose iron sights. Don't rely on gagets to save ya. Train to save your life, cause it just might .

  5. #4
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Let me be sure I'm not being misunderstood on this. I didn't want this thread to be a continuation, supplemental, or and addendum to the CT thread.

    I thought there were some salient points contained in the article that were actually secondary to the main point, but maybe more important.

    My point of this thread is how important training is; the degrading effect life threatening situations can have; if we are up close, we can expect to die, distance is our friend; we should expect some shots will miss; LEOs in up close gunfights AND that only shot 2 - 3 times didn't survive the fight.

    Don't stay and fight! Make distance; use cover; use your superior shooting skills to end the fight.

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member Array AutoFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arid Zone A
    Posts
    1,561
    I had a friend in corporate security who had a carry permit in Chicago (!) and ran the local police through training drills as part of his business. His estimate was that about 80% of the cops were incompetent with their service weapons. His most memorable comment was that for a drill where a BG is at arms length away, the lights go out and you are to shoot said BG, "some of these guys would empty their gun and completely miss the target at arms length!" Now the target doesn't move, you are facing it with your gun drawn, and the lights go out, signalling you to shoot (I don't know WHAT this drill is suppose to represent).

  7. #6
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    and the lights go out
    This is what you most surely hope for the BG - if faced with a bad situation - his lights!!
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  8. #7
    Member Array joe/OH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cinci, OH
    Posts
    376
    I know a Sheriff Deputy a couple of counties away who owns a private range where a lot of the officers in the area qualify. He said that over 1/3 of the officers have to take the qualification over because they fail. And the requirements to pass are laughable. In fact, my wife, who has only been shooting a handgun for a couple of months passed with flying colors using my father's .38 S&W snub.

    He also told us a story where a deputy was in a shootout with a BG - the distance the length of the officer's cruiser. The officer emptied his 9mm (15 rounds), reloaded, and emptied the second magazine (another 15 rounds). The bad guy also emptied his weapon. Luckily the officer was not hit - but neither was the bad guy. There was, however, a lot of damage to surrounding property that the department had to cover. I could hardly believe it myself, but the other deputy that was there at the time confirmed it. Amazing.

  9. #8
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Heaven forbid this should be taken the wrong way - but - almost makes me think that some BG's might even have a totally cavalier attitude to a cop shootout - if they happen to know figures and events like we are discussing. They maybe fear the armed citizen more.

    I am well sure there are plenty of cops out there who can do well but - makes me think!!
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  10. #9
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    15,850
    Some cops can shoot, but alot of em view a handgun as a tool they will never have to use. The good shots trained on their own dime and time to improve and retain shooting skills. And it showed at the monthly range shoot.

  11. #10
    Ex Member Array F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High in Colorado
    Posts
    1,706
    When I lived in Indiana a buddy of mine was a deputy sheriff and the department firearms instructor, I rode on patrol with him for 6 years, often 5 nights a week. I felt safer searching an industrial building at midnight with the backdoor standing open and burglar alarm going off than assisting him with qualifications; I ALWAYS wore my vest for that.

    Rick always had the guys fire their carry ammo for a “warm up” before qualifying, straight from the car to the firing line, the number of failures from debris and gunk in the weapons was amazing. The number of guys that hadn’t even had their guns out of the holsters since the last qualification was unbelievable, guns stuck in holsters, corroded ammo you name it. Had one deputy walk to the firing line, command to draw and fire, gun goes CLICK and he turns the muzzle towards himself, closes one eye and looks down the barrel Highly trained professionals my @. The lowliest D class shooter in my USPSA club could out shoot most of them, sure there were some good shots, but they all shot for fun outside of the department.

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array srfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    6,870
    Quote Originally Posted by rocky
    Some cops can shoot, but alot of em view a handgun as a tool they will never have to use. The good shots trained on their own dime and time to improve and retain shooting skills. (SNIP)
    The first sentence is very sad and very true....I've seen some atrocious gunhandling, firearms maintenance and/or shooting amongst fellow LEOs and USAF members. I hit the range once a week and train in specific tasks....I've had at least a couple of LEOs tell me that unless their agency paid them for range fees, ammo, and their time, they would not do any more training than what they got....yikes.
    USAF: Loving Our Obscene Amenities Since 1947

  13. #12
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,107

    Additional Thoughts

    As a seasoned and practiced shooter I am just wondering how prejudiced I am against lasers because they make it easier for less trained shooters to get better hits easier. I have a LaserMax equipped Glock 36 & I really never even play with it anymore. The novelty has sort of worn off of it a bit. It does not affect the function of the firearm at all so I'm leaving it installed...& I GUESS if I ever need it then it will be there.
    Is there any sort of analogy that can be drawn with Laser equipped firearms and say....Space Shuttle pilots.
    Here is what I was thinking...How do these space shuttle pilots feel when they TRAIN & RETRAIN for countless hours upon endless hours to land that shuttle & then they "sit back" and the computers do absolutely all the real grunt work for them...save for the final four minutes?
    The computers could actually completely land the shuttle if it were absolutely necessary.
    So Trained Shooters Exactly like Trained Astronauts really Don't need to be able to AIM Anymore unless a major equipment malfunction happens. The gun lasers have no moving parts - the batteries keep lasting even LONGER - The Crimson Trace switches are basically foolproof. I know that LaserMax tests EVERY individual firearm laser unit for 100 continuous hours & they are guaranteed to work for thousands of hours.
    I don't know...on one hand...I appreciate new technology & on the other hand - I like to keep things really simple and basic.
    To use ART as an example. Andy Warhol did some really great and innovate art work back in his day. Now though using the computer ordinary people can do digital computer imaging that Warhol could never even dream up on a good day in his era. Warhol & his same ART TODAY...would never even get a second glance. Of course he is high collectible for what he did before computer imaging but, his art style is nonetheless basically obsolete for Year 2005.

    Ho Hummmmm Andy.

    I remember one custom gunsmith years ago that had a specially machined heavy steel jig made up to custom "forge out" Colt 45 pistol magazine wells.
    He would lock the Colt 1911 frame into this jig & heat the protruding "mag well area" red hot with a torch. Then would swing this heavy steel arm over & give it one rap with a hammer & VIOLA the specially shaped steel piece that wedged itself into the mag well opening would form a perfectly forged out magazine well. It was such a BEAUTIFUL JOB!
    Now everybody pops on a Smith & Alexander combination checkered mainspring housing & Flared Mag Well...and nobody thinks twice about it.

  14. #13
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Well, we're drifting back toward the laser sight issue, but even though I've focused my remarks on things the negative side, I really think the laser sight is more of a plus than it is a minus. My points were that we need to use them wisely, and not become so dependent on them we can't shoot without them.

    But, then as I thought about it, most LEO can't shoot to start with for well known reasons and the laser is a very positive tool for them. It's just kinda scary that we have grown men out there running around with a badge and gun on and they can't shoot, and as we've read, can't/don't/won't even maintain their gun.

    But realistically, LEO departments probably don't have the resources to train and maintain their officers' shooting skills, so they're looking for other ways. I think unquestionably the lasers are a tremedous help, but the troubling part is we, as gun guys and gals would like to think laser sights are being used as Chris advises, in an adjunct capacity, not as the main sight.

    And, I think I just missed a great deal on a CT for my Sig 229R DAK because I hesitated. #$!%$!.

  15. #14
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,107

    Topic Drift

    yeah...I did kinda drift the topic away from laser sights.
    Just trying to think of a good example of what I was thinking.
    Maybe I should have tried a little harder.
    My apologies.

  16. #15
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter
    yeah...I did kinda drift the topic away from laser sights.
    Just trying to think of a good example of what I was thinking.
    Maybe I should have tried a little harder.
    My apologies.
    No, no, QKS, you did fine! I said "we" and I guess I should have said "I" was drifting back to the laser sight per se.

    As a matter of fact, I had been thinking about my mom always wanting to play a piano or organ. So she bought this little organ, small but nice, and soon discovered she didn't want to do the work required to play. But, she discovered the "auto-accompaniment feature and she became an organist! Kinda. That's the way it seems to be with LEO that don't want to do the work required to be a good marksman.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. A new CraigsList scam with home defense implications
    By MattInFla in forum Home (And Away From Home) Defense Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2010, 08:22 PM
  2. What's more Important to you
    By phantom1984 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: November 3rd, 2009, 03:52 PM
  3. IMPORTANT: Pre Heller Decision Article
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 28th, 2008, 06:54 PM
  4. A Bit OT, But Important
    By cray in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 1st, 2007, 02:17 PM

Search tags for this page

what are some important implications

Click on a term to search for related topics.