Originally Posted by
jd950
I agree there is no good repository of such information, and doubt there could be, given the number of agencies and cops in the USA. But I do know there are a number of active and retired LEOs around here, including some investigators and instructors, and I wanted to at least check. I have already made other inquiries and conducted as much research as I could, with no results. I kind of hoped that by limiting the request to data (although doubting there would be any), I could keep the thread drift and broader discussions reduced, at least until anyone with such data had an opportunity to respond.
But, yeah, I think for the most part, the scan before holstering stuff is BS. There are a number of reasons for my opinion but a post explaining them properly would be very long. In short, from a cognitive standpoint, and knowing what we do about the psychological and neuro changes that occur in a high stress situation, it isn't going to happen or if it does, it will be useless.
Additionally, from a practical perspective, we don't holster when the threat goes down. If in a shooting, one's attention is going to be on the threat until the officer is confident it is no longer a threat. No officer is going to have a down but unsecured threat in front of him and start looking around and scanning the onlookers. Plus, if the training actually takes hold and is applied in a real situation, whether we mean to or not, we are "teaching" cops to holster right after shooting, while in other aspects of training, we are training them not automatically holster after firing. That inconsistency and unintended training isn't just BS, that is crazy BS.
Plus, what is an officer to do if he scans and sees someone who looks hostile or whose hands are not visible, or whatever? Start ordering them to show hands, approach them, cuff them, hold them at gunpoint, take cover from that threat and ignore the guy who he just shot? In most OIS cases I have handled, there are plenty of onlookers around, or who show up, and some are unfriendly. Handling such a thing is not a an automatic process, it requires some strategic thought. Or are we only interested in looking for and identifying someone who is pointing a gun at you and for some reason not yet shooting? Has that ever occurred? Is it likely to? I have to teach this scan thing sometimes, but not by choice. It is nothing more than a dance step, IMO, and I am not willingly a dance instructor. Even when this is taught by people who believe in it, it is taught as an automatic, rote behavior, and is learned and applied that way. Pointless.
I spend a lot of time working with and studying and thinking about the human factors aspects of police shootings; the psychological, biological, neuro aspects of these things. I don't believe adding crap like having instructors hold up fingers or signs to make officers "see" those things makes any difference "on the street" and cannot think of a valid scientific theory that would support otherwise. I would be willing to bet that no expert in the field would disagree with me. We aren't really teaching people to do anything but go through the steps, and we can't do more than that without a massive amount of time, effort and money.
In none of the OIS cases that I have handled, or have ever heard about, has there been an officer ambushed from someplace off to the side or behind during an OIS. My suspicion is that if such a threat was in the area, he or she is not going to stand by and wait for the officer to reholster, that person would already be shooting, running away, or whatever. Sure, a terrorist attack or organized assassination of a cop might be different, but scan and assess is not going to help in such a situation. Granted, I do not disagree that in the event of a "situation," it would be a good idea, if practical, for an officer to check for suspects, threats, victims, evidence, witnesses, etc. And I do see that happen, but usually only after the threat is secure and ems and backup is on the way and the situation is at least semi-stable. But that is a different thing, and scan & assess before holstering has no impact on that. In fact, often we want to get the gun out of the officer's hand and into a holster as soon as possible post shoot. Muzzle awareness and trigger finger discipline is often not great when you have just fought for your life or that of a victim.
With all of that said, I accept that maybe this silliness began as a response to a legit issue, and not just some tacticool wet dream, and I have been making efforts to see if that is the case. Facts matter. If they exist. And I am always willing to change my mind in the face of meaningful evidence or argument, which is why I started this topic. If you think scan & assess is a good thing, and practice it, then that is great and support your desire to do what you think works for you or if you think it is great and teach it, then I disagree but support your desire to teach what you think is important and if you want to tell me your rationale, I will listen and consider your position.
So after stepping into this steaming pile, maybe I should talk about "getting off the X?"