Point Guns at Innocents

[BehindBlueI's]

"How do you know what you think you know?" is one of my most favorite questions, ever.

I don't have a study handy to point to, but I think FSRC has documented a bunch of this stuff with various officers and untrained volunteers. Sorry, no link handy but I believe that may be the most readily available information that is most robustly obtained and documented.

I know I brought my own times into it, but I don't think that invalidates the basic point. I'm not that special. Most people in our classes are able to plug A-zone hits at 7 yards in under 0.50 seconds from ready, repeatedly. That's just a continuation of my mentor/predecessor's standard, which he derived from his prior agency standards combined with some other training standards he had been exposed to. A hit from ready to an 8" circle at 7 yards has been a core skill at the Rogers Shooting School for ~30 years I think. People routinely do it. I don't mean untrained people, but I do mean people of a very wide range of training background get it done with not a whole lot of work.

So that's where I know it from - my own personal experience in training and training others, as well as that standard being used by more than one training school.

How long it takes to fire a shot from on sights and on trigger is something again that I think has been documented by FSRC, and again where I know it from is my own experience training and shooting and seeing others do the same. This is not something I've seen practiced nearly as much as engaging from the ready, so my knowledge of this point is less robust but I still think valid and correct. You can see some self-reporting on this task from the DotW 110: Jerk The Trigger, located here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....k-The-Trigger&

In that DotW, people had to fire accurate shots starting on sights and on trigger (as an exercise of shooting mechanics, not as a recommended tactical procedure.) Some people reported their specific times. I skimmed the thread just now, and it looks like those times ranged from about 0.15 to 0.49. With just a little instruction and practice, I think all or nearly all of the posters in that thread could be be hitting As from ready at 7 yards in under 0.50 seconds if they couldn't do it already, and I bet a bunch of them can. Actually, that might make a good DotW itself...



So what about this, BBI? Just looking to hear more about what you do/your experience/etc. Thanks!

I actually intended to see my own differences at the range today but got distracted by something shiny and forgot to work it in. So, as a followup question, the guys who can plug that circle in .50 from a low ready, how fast are they from sights lined up on target? Are the hits the same? More telling, can they do the same under stress and while distracted? Differences that are tiny in a stress-free admin setting with no movement, ample lighting, no decision making, etc. MAY be multiplied when you're in the proverbial dark alley outnumbered 2:1, etc. Maybe not. But my point is admin tests prove admin performance. In LE speak, they are lead information only. A place to start, indicative, but not proof.

o clarify something with you, are you advocating for pointing a gun directly at someone, with finger in register, before the decision to fire has been made? (At least in some circumstances - I know you don't mean universally all the time.) Or do you also mean finger on the trigger too? If you mean the latter, and I am betting you don't, then what about the ND risk? If you mean the former, which I am betting you do, what I am saying is that there is essentially no time gain to that at all. Has your experience been different? Have you found that you are much or any faster to engage from on target/finger in register vs off target/finger in register?

No, finger off the trigger. Not that it's a great idea at any time, but particularly with the lighter and shorter pull weights of today's typical duty gun too much risk there. I understand this is a sliding scale, nobody is talking about every inth degree of speed regardless of risk, nor is anyone talking about zero risk being possible. Reasonable minds may differ, and situations differ, but I'd have to see some very solid evidence that no time and no accuracy is given up in a questionable situation from on target vs low ready.

FWIW, I tend to use a high ready with the sight under my right eye (field of vision wise, obviously, not actually indexing on my cheek) as I find it quicker and more instinctive to present from that position then a low ready.

[BehindBlueI's]

My experience has been the polar opposite. The only place the above statement seems to be true is in the media and television.

I would concur. The few exceptions have been people who are great in a crisis but suck at admin, or who've had alcohol related issues. God knows they aren't alone in that regard, and I'd be hesitant to pin alcohol abuse as a 'veteran issue'.

[Dagga Boy]

The real test is to use half the Rogers test. Have some one with a gun at low or lower end contact ready finger in register and give a shot/no shoot input. Check time for single solid hit off only the shoot indicator. Do the same with gun lined up on the impact area and check. I think you will find you give up little, and gain a lot of assessment time and vision working from a locked in low where you only have to make a single rapid move from low to eye line.

[Dagga Boy]

I would concur. The few exceptions have been people who are great in a crisis but suck at admin, or who've had alcohol related issues. God knows they aren't alone in that regard, and I'd be hesitant to pin alcohol abuse as a 'veteran issue'.

I have found that many of the just out of the military folks have often got the drinking stuff out of the way, while the just out of college who have never seen bad things tend to use alcohol as a means to cope. I stopped drinking when I became a cop and used the range as my shrink. I was unique. Alcohol abuse and in later years prescription drug abuse are some deep issues in LE and become inappropriate coping mechanisms. Again, many of the combat vets have better figured out coping at an earlier age. It is a huge benefit of having a young person who has seen death, decapitation, and people burned to death and figured out how to deal with that. Most young people out of college who live at home with their parents are ill prepared for what we see daily in LE.

[BehindBlueI's]

The real test is to use half the Rogers test. Have some one with a gun at low or lower end contact ready finger in register and give a shot/no shoot input. Check time for single solid hit off only the shoot indicator. Do the same with gun lined up on the impact area and check. I think you will find you give up little, and gain a lot of assessment time and vision working from a locked in low where you only have to make a single rapid move from low to eye line.

I intend to give it a go. Will add in high ready as well.

[cclaxton]

I apologize to any military veterans for my statements about suitability for law enforcement. I am repeating what I read and I am working to find out where so I can cite the references. However, to start I did find this study:
https://www.bja.gov/Publications/IAC...urningVets.pdf
I will continue to research where I found the other references.
I am sure there are many military veterans who are serving as LEO's with great distinction, and I mean no offense.
Cody

[Mr_White]

No, finger off the trigger. Not that it's a great idea at any time, but particularly with the lighter and shorter pull weights of today's typical duty gun too much risk there. I understand this is a sliding scale, nobody is talking about every inth degree of speed regardless of risk, nor is anyone talking about zero risk being possible. Reasonable minds may differ, and situations differ, but I'd have to see some very solid evidence that no time and no accuracy is given up in a questionable situation from on target vs low ready.

That is what I thought you meant and just wanted to clarify that. Thanks.

I actually intended to see my own differences at the range today but got distracted by something shiny and forgot to work it in. So, as a followup question, the guys who can plug that circle in .50 from a low ready, how fast are they from sights lined up on target? Are the hits the same? More telling, can they do the same under stress and while distracted? Differences that are tiny in a stress-free admin setting with no movement, ample lighting, no decision making, etc. MAY be multiplied when you're in the proverbial dark alley outnumbered 2:1, etc. Maybe not. But my point is admin tests prove admin performance. In LE speak, they are lead information only. A place to start, indicative, but not proof.

That's where I equivocated a little in the earlier post, in that I have not robustly researched the answers to those specific questions. My belief about the answers to those questions comes from a combination of: I was trained that way, that's what I've experienced for myself and in training others, that's what authorities such as FSRC, my own very experienced mentor, Bill Rogers, Chuck Haggard, and nyeti have all asserted (yell at me if I am incorrectly citing any of you!) I'm pretty sure nyeti quoted Scott Reitz on this point as well. The Rogers Shooting School also has no shortage of instructors and students with extensive experience in the field.

Some of my training experience is piecemeal to the discussion we are in now - like the engagement time for on sights and on trigger. That's not something that I accumulate a subjective/objective sense of from classes. I've tested it for myself at times before, we saw more people's numbers in that DotW, and the times are also known because Larry Vickers, Ben Stoeger, nyeti, and Wayne Dobbs all have used the 'command fire' type of drill in classes, or suggested relevant times in published works. But I don't have all my students do it and then record the times, nor have I set up a stress test or FOF scenario in order to measure it, or looked at accuracy differences finer than an A/-0 zone at 7 yards.

It's settled enough in my mind from all of that, that I've never really wanted to test it extensively. Everything I've seen on this in training has matched what I've been told by a number of highly experienced people. That makes me believe that it isn't going to fall apart for real world use and the dynamics are essentially the same as what I have seen for myself in the training/practice/competitive environments.

That is how I know what I think I know.

FWIW, I tend to use a high ready with the sight under my right eye (field of vision wise, obviously, not actually indexing on my cheek) as I find it quicker and more instinctive to present from that position then a low ready.

Here is how a few ready position engagement times break down for me. This is all for an A/-0 zone hit at 7 yards in the training context.

Low ready/contact ready/threat ready (gun is already extended, and at least barely off target): ~0.35

Retracted/high ready (gun is not extended yet): ~0.60

SUL/indoor ready (yeah I know lots of people hate this one): ~0.90

There is a definite speed hierarchy to those ready positions for me.

[Dagga Boy]

On time and ready.....we also found the high ready significantly slower in our testing protocol.

On the vet thing....The IACP...and looking at many who were on the board....give me a break. Most of those folks have not been in a police car in a couple decades and were not good at it when they were. Want to find out about vets in LE....ask your experienced senior FTO's who have had a lot of trainees. Most of your "Chief types" are very proud of their college degrees (often from a buy a degree mill) and think hiring a bunch of academics like themselves is great and most look down on and are dismissive of military service like the remarks made by Joe Biden years ago that if you are a loser in school you go to Iraq. I ll stand by my actual experience of a bunch of police executives who are generally clueless about the actual realities of street police work. The way to the top is not through graveyard patrol, the range, or the FTO program.

[BehindBlueI's]

Here is how a few ready position engagement times break down for me. This is all for an A/-0 zone hit at 7 yards in the training context.

Low ready/contact ready/threat ready (gun is already extended, and at least barely off target): ~0.35

Retracted/high ready (gun is not extended yet): ~0.60

SUL/indoor ready (yeah I know lots of people hate this one): ~0.90

There is a definite speed hierarchy to those ready positions for me.

If our range is open next Friday, I'm going to try it cold and see what the differences are for me. Our taught "low ready" is at the "feet" of the target, if it were to actually have legs and feet. I've been wrong before, so I'm always willing to give something new (to me) a try and see how it pans out.

The high ready for me isn't the fastest, by the way. It's the most intuitive for a "surprise" target. I get better hits when the sight is already lined up under my strong eye and I just have to bring it to the target. Low ready is great if I know where the target is and am squared up to it. It's less great looking for the target. I should probably clarify that a bit, but high ready was more of my "searching" ready position, low ready or on target my "found you" position.

[cclaxton]

On time and ready.....we also found the high ready significantly slower in our testing protocol.

On the vet thing....The IACP...and looking at many who were on the board....give me a break. Most of those folks have not been in a police car in a couple decades and were not good at it when they were. Want to find out about vets in LE....ask your experienced senior FTO's who have had a lot of trainees. Most of your "Chief types" are very proud of their college degrees (often from a buy a degree mill) and think hiring a bunch of academics like themselves is great and most look down on and are dismissive of military service like the remarks made by Joe Biden years ago that if you are a loser in school you go to Iraq. I ll stand by my actual experience of a bunch of police executives who are generally clueless about the actual realities of street police work. The way to the top is not through graveyard patrol, the range, or the FTO program.

I take back what I said about vets and I take your word for it DB, perhaps with one question:
There does seem to be enough evidence that Combat Veterans who suffered from PTSD may have difficulty. Would it be logical they should take longer to transition and ensure they get a regular psychological evaluation?
Cody