Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 82

Thread: USPSA as a skills development tool for LE

  1. #11
    If as the OP states USPSA for LE development tool is the objective or intent then there has to be considerations in multiple areas. Score has to be adjusted if the shooter is using duty gear, using cover more carefully,not doing a walk through or pre planning movement and locating targets and any other factors that have an effect on performance. Comparing the performance of a regular USPSA shooter to a new LE shooter is going to be skewed and LE scores are going to be poor in that comparison. If however the is a comparison of regular USPSA shooter and LE shooter who is also a regular USPSA shooter and both are using the same parameters then a more accurate assessment can be achieved. Having a LE category where there are no walk throughs, you must use duty gear, and cover must be used more carefully for all those that compete in the category would be a good step toward adjusting realities of performance and a better training/practice/testing method.

    That said any LEO could gain improvements in participating with any equipment in any class with skills and gun handling but less overall crossover of application for regular LE use than a LE class with more closely regulated skills.equipment and procedures.

    I have seen the same poor LE performance in driving when participating in Autocross and trackdays. I can't say racing because I don't know any other LEOs racing to compare with regular competitors. This is with equipment being equal (i.e no one was using police cars) but again what relevance does Autocross and Trackdays driving have with regular,pursuit and emergency response driving? Not a huge amount but the base skills may be there. This is more relevant because LEOs drive, make emergency runs and get in a lot more pursuits than they ever will get into shootings/gunfights. As others have stated in this thread and others LE admin. prioritize training and what is trained differently than others believe they should and the line officers pay the biggest price for this unless they use their own time and money to seek out their own training/practice.

    IPSC,USPSA,IDPA,GSSF and other competition are part of the solution to improvement in firearms skills but primarily a smaller part if parts aren't adjusted for closer tie to actual LEO use. They are more accessible than force on force or 270-360 degree simulators which would be even better for training/practice/testing LEO skills. Paintball,airsoft,VR and video games can play a part as well.

  2. #12
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    During the winter months, one of the local monthly matches I shoot is near the border, and attracts quite a few LE and military types new to competition. I have seen enough to form some impressions. By and large, these are muscular, athletic young men, with an interest in shooting. Some are shooting duty firearms like the P2000 LEM .40, and others shooting things they feel more shootable. Today for example, within this contingent I saw a P2000 LEM, Glock 19, Glock 19 direct milled for a DP Pro, CZ P10-C and a CZ P09. Lots of expensive support gear by Ares, and similar companies.

    In terms of match placement, excluding one dedicated LE shooter, the new LE guys are shooting 20-40 percent of the match winner. So what is going on. Their stances look good, and they are definitely some of the physically strongest guys at the match. They do lots of aiming, and actually spend too much time aiming. Their main problem, though, is trigger control. OK on close open targets, but heads, partial and especially targets with no-shoots are a big problem. If I was a hostage, I would not want to be standing below the bad guy the LEM shooter is targeting, or standing to the left of a bad guy, when the good guy is right handed and has a Glock. Even with targets nailed to stationary wood slats, no shoots are getting shot two or three times, when in proximity to a shoot target.

    Also, once these guys start shooting they seem to loose track of everything besides the target in front of them. As a result, they approach new target arrays with one or two cartridges in their pistol, and nearly 100 percent shoot to slide lock. Some have problems with the slide stop, and time after time, shoot dry without realizing it before getting a click. They almost all holster way too fast, without a sense of where their body is, and what a potentially dangerous maneuver is holstering a loaded gun.
    ^^^ Mirrors my observations almost exactly.

    Here's what I've observed (most the ranges I compete at are within 1 hour of FLETC and the last match I attended was at Fort Bliss).
    Two of the best shooters I know are USBP FLETC instructors.
    Ones a high M (flirting with GM) and the other is a high A (flirting with M) Limited shooters, both shoot STI's in USPSA.
    Their stagecraft and gunhandling definitely reflect their classifications.

    The majority of USBP guys I've shot with were really solid on muzzle and finger safety, excellent safety awareness while the gun was out.
    Proactive gunhandling is not in their vocabulary, they react to everything. If there's a activator popper and a drop turn array they'll invariably run dry immediately after the activator and not get a shot off on the DT.
    The guys who put the rounds downrange through their LEM P2000's like the BORTAC guys are really fast and accurate, solid C shooters on classifiers (mostly slowed by the duty holster and especially the mag carriers otherwise they'd be B's).
    The guys who don't put in the range time suffer from "El Snatcho".
    They all have really bad habits when it comes to re-holstering. It's pretty obvious that their training/qualifying is rushed on the re-holster side of things because nobody takes the time to relax before slamming the gun back into the holster.
    The USBP guys are all excellent rifle shooters, I cannot remember a single one of the dozens I've shot with who wasn't solid with his M4. Kudos on their carbine program.

    When it comes to local LE and Mil guys...
    The few good ones are usually really, really good. The rest are usually fair to poor shooters and horrible gunhandlers (about like the general population I guess).
    It seems to be feast or famine on the PD/Mil side.
    The worst thing about local LE and Mil is their complacency.
    Their safety violations aren't due to ignorance, quite the opposite in fact.
    Their safety violations are often due to arrogant complacency which is far worse than just ignorance.

    On the BP side of things I think it's a reflection of their training and qualification procedures where the emphasis is on a safe static line of shooters being qualified to a mediocre accuracy standard with generous time constraints.
    On the PD/Mil side there's too much "I'm the only one professional enough..." attitude.
    Last edited by JodyH; 11-13-2017 at 12:38 PM.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  3. #13
    Member Sal Picante's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SunCoast
    Quote Originally Posted by octagon View Post
    If as the OP states USPSA for LE development tool is the objective or intent then there has to be considerations in multiple areas. Score has to be adjusted if the shooter is using duty gear, using cover more carefully,not doing a walk through or pre planning movement and locating targets and any other factors that have an effect on performance. Comparing the performance of a regular USPSA shooter to a new LE shooter is going to be skewed and LE scores are going to be poor in that comparison. If however the is a comparison of regular USPSA shooter and LE shooter who is also a regular USPSA shooter and both are using the same parameters then a more accurate assessment can be achieved. Having a LE category where there are no walk throughs, you must use duty gear, and cover must be used more carefully for all those that compete in the category would be a good step toward adjusting realities of performance and a better training/practice/testing method.
    In my respectful opinion, I don't agree:

    I think that removing all the tactical/etc aspects and focusing solely on gun-handling and shot placement levels the playing field considerably and removes ambiguity. I.e. you either shoot and hit the targets reliably or you don't (and get penalized). In the past 10 years running a larger club, we've seen a lot of officers compete. Most get into at at a casual level. They recognize the game for what it is and try to learn to run the pistol subconsciously. I've rarely heard it to actually be detrimental to actually street performance for the average beat cop, but I'll admit that my data set is fairly small.

    I guess what I'm trying to say, in summary, is that USPSA and IDPA are what they are: They're venues to experiment with gun handling and get good trigger time with "skin in the game". Trying to bend it to some "no walk through", "use cover", subjective thing is where it becomes useless: what are the benchmarks? What constitutes an acceptable run? (This is famously the beef with IDPA rules: cover calls, etc...)

  4. #14
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by octagon View Post
    If as the OP states USPSA for LE development tool is the objective or intent then there has to be considerations in multiple areas. Score has to be adjusted if the shooter is using duty gear, using cover more carefully,not doing a walk through or pre planning movement and locating targets and any other factors that have an effect on performance. Comparing the performance of a regular USPSA shooter to a new LE shooter is going to be skewed and LE scores are going to be poor in that comparison. If however the is a comparison of regular USPSA shooter and LE shooter who is also a regular USPSA shooter and both are using the same parameters then a more accurate assessment can be achieved. Having a LE category where there are no walk throughs, you must use duty gear, and cover must be used more carefully for all those that compete in the category would be a good step toward adjusting realities of performance and a better training/practice/testing method.
    We get a lot of LE participation in our "local rules" "Concealed Carry" matches (think freestyle IDPA) where the disadvantage of using duty gear is minimized.
    The good competition shooters are good competition shooters no matter their LE/Mil/Civ status.
    The biggest breakdowns I see on the LE side is again reacting to the gun/scenario/targets instead of being proactive.
    Jumping around a corner with the slide locked back on empty is a common occurrence (when you consider they do get a walk-thru and they know there's going to be targets around that corner, it's even worse).

    I think it's just a reflection of the LE training/qualification methods.
    A lot of doing everything "by the numbers" (our range is next door to the LE range and I hear the "1... 2...3... FIRE!... scan... holster up..." commands all the freakin time).
    I understand the need for "by the numbers" because it's pretty much a requirement when it comes to running a safe static firing line.
    Perhaps there should be more dynamic live fire training like the old Hogans Alley?
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Pepperoni View Post
    In my respectful opinion, I don't agree:

    I think that removing all the tactical/etc aspects and focusing solely on gun-handling and shot placement levels the playing field considerably and removes ambiguity. I.e. you either shoot and hit the targets reliably or you don't (and get penalized). In the past 10 years running a larger club, we've seen a lot of officers compete. Most get into at at a casual level. They recognize the game for what it is and try to learn to run the pistol subconsciously. I've rarely heard it to actually be detrimental to actually street performance for the average beat cop, but I'll admit that my data set is fairly small.

    I guess what I'm trying to say, in summary, is that USPSA and IDPA are what they are: They're venues to experiment with gun handling and get good trigger time with "skin in the game". Trying to bend it to some "no walk through", "use cover", subjective thing is where it becomes useless: what are the benchmarks? What constitutes an acceptable run? (This is famously the beef with IDPA rules: cover calls, etc...)
    You read and understood what I posted wrong and misinterpreted what I said. Nowhere do I say or infer that competition as currently done is bad.wrong or unhelpful to a LEO participating in any class with any gear. I only clarified that it can be more beneficial if the competition is more reflective to street realities to the LEO. On the street you don't get a walk through, you use a duty holster and duty gun with duty ammo. You should be using cover to maximum effect and you don't know how many,where or what position or difficulty the target(threat) is going to be. In regular competition with a walk through and regular competition gear you lose this ability to stay closer to actual use. To have a better training value keep it closer to reality.

    PPC,Bullseye and other forms of competition can offer some skills benefit to a LEO as well just less and less the farther they get away from what a LEO is actually likely to face in a street encounter. Any competition can be used to augment training none should be used to replace it.

  6. #16
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by secondstoryguy View Post
    I can hit the range at work, get some good trigger time in, and be done in several hours...with almost all that time being behind the gun running drills. If I spend the time to go to a match I'm getting about 10 minutes of actual shooting if that.

    Do you think spending an entire day with only minutes being actual shooting is worth it from a time management standpoint?

    I've heard some say that they occasionally attend matches as a skill assessment and to stress test their techniques which sounds like a better plan.
    The advantages of shooting competitions are you're shooting a "problem" someone else came up with. It's very easy to fall into the "training masturbation" trap when you shoot by yourself or even with a small group of friends, you setup a lot of drills you're good at so you get to go home feeling good. Sucking at a stage in a match usually means you haven't been training/practicing the skills required for that particular stage (because you suck at them and it's no fun to suck at something). I hate reloads. I don't practice reloads nearly enough. My scores on stages with multiple reloads reflect that.
    I have trouble letting myself shoot something other than an A, my times reflect that when the stages are up close and the speed/accuracy balance tilts to favor speed.
    Competition gives me a good evaluation of my strengths and my weaknesses and forces me to address them if I want to place better.
    It also gives me ideas for drills and training to help address those deficiencies and evaluate my progression.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Austin,TX
    Well said, that makes sense. How often do you shoot matches?

  8. #18
    Member Peally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    If you use USPSA to train using cover and tactics, you're doing it wrong.
    Semper Gumby, Always Flexible

  9. #19
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by octagon View Post
    I only clarified that it can be more beneficial if the competition is more reflective to street realities to the LEO.
    I think it's rarely beneficial to mix tactics into competition, mainly because every competition problem is solved with the gun.
    If every problem is a gun problem, then make the competition all about getting the gun out, hitting the targets and running it efficiently.
    If you want to test tactics then something along the lines of ECQC evolutions is far better.

    Either way, USPSA is shooting skill testing not training or practice and ECQC style evolutions are tactics evaluations not training or practice.
    Last edited by JodyH; 11-13-2017 at 01:15 PM.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  10. #20
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Illinois
    I find it hard to wrap my head around the fact that many LEOs rarely do any more shooting than their (progressively easier) range quals....

    And yet if you inject a single USPSA you are kilt in da streets.

    Competition. Not even once.


    But in all seriousness, I'm not a LEO and only a lowly CCW guy who sandbags C-class, but I have the sneaking suspicion that internalizing a trigger press/sight picture necessary to hit a target under time pressure is the benefit of a rapid fire shooting game.

    That's something you don't get from Bullseye or just plinking. That's a USPSA/IDPA/ICORE/3G specific skillset because of their respective scoring systems, which are time based. Those systems birthed the ever famous Enos quote of "see what you need to see.". Meaning, see the appropriate sight picture to get the good hit...but don't over do it. This gives the shooter the incentive to find out how coarse their sight picture and trigger pressure is allowed to be at speed, based on the target they're shooting. This level of self knowledge is probably a good thing for someone who carries a gun for a living.

    Especially compared to the cop who shoots 100 rounds per year.

    It's never bad to get trigger time, but I suspect the most benefit is reaped by those who want to win. Because those guys are pushing the limits of their processing speed with regard to sight alignment, sight picture, and trigger control, and who have spent a lot of time refining their grip and thus their recoil control.

    Of course, the big thing is getting experienced instructors with verified creds to teach you...but this discussion is kinda fixated in the USPSA skills that are useful for the streets. The other USPSA skills may be less transferrable IDK...a draw from a DOH holster is different from a retention holster, a reload from a closed top mag pouch isn't the same as a magnetic Limited mag rig. Use of cover, and other tactical stuff is outside my lane. Still...being competitive and driven in a "real fight" is probably better than being passive.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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