USPSA as a skills development tool for LE

[GJM]

New guy in our squad at the USPSA match. Turns out, he is active duty LE, and reserve SWAT at a major metro agency. He came out because he found their training and quals very low level, and wanted to test himself. Good shooter, good gun handling, accurate, but slow by gaming standards. His initial reaction was “wow, you guys shoot fast.” Super nice guys, and he said he hoped to shoot two matches a month as a way to work on pure technical shooting. He was shooting his duty G4 17, but with Taran basepad extended magazines, in Limited minor.

[03RN]

I'm no cop but this has been very interesting. I do work part time at a local indoor range that has quite a few local cops qual at. I wish more of them would compete.

I just started competing this year. I did some idpa and ipsc in highschool but that was 15 years ago. My 1st 3 gun comp this spring I was in the top 25%. I'm glad I've found my way back to competing as it's a great tool.

While I don't think it's ideal for training tactics you are shooting, moving, and communicating (range commands before/after the course of fire). All of which carry over. A slow fire kd qualifier doesn't replicate combat either, neither do 3 mile runs, etc

[DMF13]

It is about how to most efficiently learn to press a trigger with time pressure, which I believe is 80-90 percent of what is required to shoot well. I really do think everything else can be taught fairly easily, but it is trigger pressing that the shooter has to learn mostly on their own.

+1

My biggest problem in shooting well is trigger control. My friends and coworkers biggest problem with shooting well is trigger control. Cranking up the pressure to shoot fast just magnifies any problems with trigger control for all of us.

When instructing at work and someone asks about trying to make improvements I'm constantly trying to get them to work on trigger control.

Some will put in the time to work on the boring fundamentals, including trigger control. Some won't.

I'm passionate about shooting well, but that doesn't bother me. Here's why:

Yes, firearms are an important part of being a LEO. Same is true for defensive tactics. Same is true for report writing. Same is true for testifying. Same is true for legal training. Same is true for interviewing. Same is true for . . . well you get the idea.

Cops must balance doing the actual work, with training, and having a personal life.

So while it would be great if we could all train to the level of being the next Dave Sevigny with firearms, or the next George St Pierre with DT, or the next Sam Alito with law/caselaw, etc, etc, we have to meet those other commitments. That's not possible.

My job (which is just an additional duty) is to make sure everyone is safe with their firearms, and trains to a certain minimum standard. When possible I will encourage additional training. Some will want to do that, some won't. It's a win for me, and the other FIs, if we can get people to dry fire a couple times each week. A HUGE win if we can get them to shoot a couple of USPSA and/or IDPA matches, to see how much room there is for improvement.

A big problem is many people who are passionate about firearms want everyone else to also make that their highest priority, and get upset if they don't. Maybe some of those folks post on forums such as this? Then again, some who are passionate about DT also want everyone else to also make that their highest priority, and . . . well you can see where I'm going with that.

Some will want to do more with firearms, and I, and the other FIs, try to help them with that. However, if they've prioritized something else, but are safe and reasonably competent with firearms I'm OK with that too.

[DMF13]

Regarding whether shooting USPSA (or IDPA) for skill development is a good idea , I certainly think it is, including for cops.

This guy sums up the "Competitor" v. "Tactical Shooters" debate very well (Hell it's part of the video title!):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmcXPc8qGic

[Lon]

This guy sums up the "Competitor" v. "Tactical Shooters" debate very well (Hell it's part of the video title!):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmcXPc8qGic

Love this quote From the video: “I doubt most people would want to get in a gunfight with me.” Having seen him shoot in real life many times I would tend to agree.

[Peally]

Love this quote From the video: “I doubt most people would want to get in a gunfight with me.” Having seen him shoot in real life many times I would tend to agree.

To be fair I wouldn't want to get in a gunfight with a D class guy either, their shots are like artillery, everyone loses

[JodyH]

To be fair I wouldn't want to get in a gunfight with a D class guy either, their shots are like artillery, everyone loses

If I'm wearing my plate carrier give me a GM over a D every single time.
Two alpha I mock thee.
Delta delta ouch my balls.

[olstyn]

If I'm wearing my plate carrier give me a GM over a D every single time.
Two alpha I mock thee.
Delta delta ouch my balls.

How quickly do you think the GM will figure out that 2A to the body didn't have the desired effect and transition to the head? Some of them might do it before the D even gets off the first shot at your balls.

[heyscooter]

Regarding whether shooting USPSA (or IDPA) for skill development is a good idea , I certainly think it is, including for cops.

This guy sums up the "Competitor" v. "Tactical Shooters" debate very well (Hell it's part of the video title!):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmcXPc8qGic

I present to you another take. Yes this is stereotypical, yes I'm sure all of us have seen this in way or another in real life, and yes it's hilarious.

https://youtu.be/iYGFDZkTWCk?t=14s

This thread is interesting, as it is unveiling the complete opposite pardigm of what I have been exposed to throughout my career in LE. I know there are LE competition shooters posting here and they see this as much as I do, but let me provide my thoughts.

In my opinion, the deficiencies that competition shooters see in LE shooters is really more a reflection in the training methodology that an organization is delivering, and what impression that makes on people in Law Enforcement. That methodology is affected by a lot of factors, but I would say one of the biggest is time that organizations get to train an entry level employee. PPC train up courses that most LE agencies now run are limited in their time as they schedule out all the curriculum necessary for a trainee to pass. If that curriculum focused strictly on fundamentals of shooting, I would wager that more LE employed shooters would probably have a better base in entering competition shooting. There are other modules in a training program that will get attention. I'm talking about concepts such as judgement based shooting, force on force, and other aspects that (as the OP stated) will not really give the trainee the concept of, say, speed being a factor. If you have entered LE, just gone through the minimum academy level training, and are relatively new around firearms, the methodology that was introduced to you is going to stick to you in so many ways that makes it very difficult to break out of. It's basically a big fat training scar in comparing it to competition. This resonates the most:

LE officers/firearms instructors generally fall into the "big fish in a small pond" trap. They can outshoot everyone in their agency, but at best they may be comparative to a C class level shooter. Then they get put in a position to write policy and training curriculum for their department and they just don't know what they don't know.

My last program review had a HQ guy's mind blown because it was his first time seeing a PACT timer. And that is a prime example of the issue that LE organizations exhibit - They are unwilling to change, and when change is warranted you end up in the situation like the above.


I think this has been alluded to in the thread, but the cultures and personalities matter way more in how LE treats shooting. The other LE contributors have seen plenty of this no doubt. But part of the stigma I'm talking about has very much to do with the pressure that is put on officers. If you were told every bullet has a lawyer attached to it, you will be dissuaded from pulling the weapon out in the course of your official duties. What part of that would make you want to train to be higher than the standard so you're not worried about lawyers magically appearing out of nowhere when you have to engage a life safety threat? Statistically speaking, this also eats away at the amount of people that will expose themselves to competition. The personalities don't help the image either; We've all seen the wannabe Doc Holiday officer/agent/deputy challenging every other novice shooter to some sort of skill test, supremely confident that their selfies with their TQ-15s and smiley faces on their almost near perfect qual score target has prepared them for anything because there is no other than the methodology that was given to them in USBPI in Artesia.

It's not pretty, but it exists. Luckily I think this is slowly changing. Lots of people are starting to see the benefit of competition (which has been well covered here), so the more people that may have to rely on their pistol to save lives, the better.

[Bob-C]

The LE people I shoot matches with cover the whole spectrum of shooting skill. I know of a local multi-division GM, some just starting, others somewhere between those two ends of the spectrum. A lot of them didn't shoot any more than non-LE guys before they got into matches. The ways things are done in USPSA are different from academy and routine department training, so they have to adjust, which most successfully do.