Essential, no. And I completely agree with the need to prioritize training. I would point out that a properly executed 4 count draw* lends it self to having the ability to re-holster briskly as needed.an essential skill to have for a LEO
* Our state academy does not teach the 4 count draw in it's 4 days of handgun instruction.
Last edited by Al T.; 07-06-2012 at 04:00 PM.
Put me in that camp. I've argued the evils of the speed re-holster for decades.Originally Posted by Sean M
"PLAN FOR YOUR TRAINING TO BE A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT REAL LIFE WILL BE A REFLECTION OF YOUR TRAINING!"
For the LEO's current and former, and trainers of LEO's:
No one can argue that on a whole firearms training for police officers is generally lacking and way sub-par. We're agreed on that. However, do you not agree that the dynamic, rapidly changing nature of uniformed police work necessitates a quick re-holster at times and therefore it should at least be discussed/trained to a certain degree? Just to be clear I’m talking about re-holstering in less than 1 second and at times while moving forward, sideways, backwards while holding onto a bad guy etc. Do y’all have a different definition of “speed re-holstering”?
I would not suggest that a new rookie in the academy should be taught lightning fast re-holsters the same day they are issued guns. But it seems that it should at least be in the curriculum or discussed to a certain degree. You just don't always have multiple seconds to cautiously re-holster in many situations.
I'm only suggesting that the ability to quickly re-holster is a valuable tool for the uniformed cop. I am a current uniformed cop by the way so everyone knows where I am coming from. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
By the way, could we just re-name the speed re-holster the "combat speed precision stowing of secondary/primary firearms" and move on? Then it sounds cool....
Last edited by Serpico1985; 07-07-2012 at 12:36 AM. Reason: spelling
The ability to holster the sidearm quickly is important, and without looking, blah blah blah. I will concede that, to an extent.
This is likely to be long and barely intelligible. Bear with me.............if you want to skip past the break, or the entire post, certainly feel free to do so. You are probably not missing much.
I would submit for consideration that many of the times where officers/deputies find themselves in a position where they have to quickly holster their firearm is preventable with the use of sound tactics and decision making prior to drawing and bringing the pistol into the equation. We all know plenty of TTP's and even agency policies that have our brave LEO's threatening suspects with firearms, even though there was nothing to really drive that posture.
UUMV/GTA as an example. A couple of HS kids cruising in big brother's car without his permission, who happens to be home from college with his POS beater starving college student car worth $500. He goes to make a late night snack run, finds it is not in the driveway, and files a report. Officer on patrol see's POS driving at wee hours of the AM, runs the tags, BOOM! Stolen car!!! Now we do a high risk/felony stop, guns drawn, and talking out the three 14 year old, bubblegum chewing occupants at gunpoint. 1 Crime, 1 violation. Unauthorized use of a motor vehicle valued at $500 dollars US, and operating a motor vehicle without an operator's license. Hardly justification for use or threat of deadly force. The only thing that even makes this a felony is that it is an automobile. The value of the car stolen, if any other object (besides a firearm) is only a misdemeanor. We have no information to indicate the occupants are violent. We have nothing other than it is a stolen car. (Scenario taken from actual situation)
If we are going to make an arrest on a cold burg for a $2000 stereo of a Taco Bell employee, do we go in guns drawn? That is a felony in most states, simply due to the value. (Scenario taken from an actual situation)
Yet, we draw and point guns at joy riding teenagers. Why? Because we do not know what we are going to deal with. We don't know the suspects are not escaped cons making a run for the nearest international border, or perhaps they just completed a home invasion robbery, rape, and arson. So as a LEO, we expect the worst in people. And prepare to protect ourselves by jumping up the Use of Force Continuum, even though it may not be the right decision or protective posture. By doing so, we bring our guns into situations where they were not needed, and suddenly, we have to put them away to go back down the UFC to protect ourselves physically, and legally.
It is generally accepted by courts and case law that a LEO is entitled to one step up in the UFC than he is presented with by his/her suspect(s), and we have the right to jump straight to DF if that is what is required. Yet, an officer at the tail end of a foot pursuit draws his/her sidearm in an attempt to intimidate the suspect into a non-violent surrender, yet the only resistance offered so far has been flight. Certainly depending on the original crime, or suspicion of a crime might lend me to elevate that posture. Say rape, murder, robbery, arson, etc. Or perhaps, if a repeat offender, and I know the suspect, and know them to be violent I might consider upping my UFC posture. But why go to guns immediately when Cap Stun, Taser, or other lesser means is what is actually appropriate, and necessary to resolve the situation? When we go to guns, we are left with having to put it away before we can get back to the task at hand.
Let's say I know the guy I am in a foot pursuit with, and based on previous encounters, I know he is not going to go quietly once he does finally get run down. He "might" have a weapon capable of serious physical injury, or death. But more likely is that he is going to swing for the fences with his prison honed right hook that can pop teeth out in one blow. Can I shoot him? Hardly. As he turns the corner down the alley that dead ends into the department store back wall, I don't grab my gun. Why would I? I can't actually use it...........other than to show that I have a gun. I'm a cop. He knows I'm a cop. Pretty sure he has it figured out that I have a gun. Don't need to whip it out and show him, just so I can try to put it away as he knocks out two more of my teeth this time. I grab a taser and some funny foam. He gets the verbal challenge, then some hot sauce or an electric light show when he fails to comply, specifics of circumstances determining the proper level of force. But at no point in this situation did he ever warrant being on the receiving end of the threat of deadly force. Having my gun out means I have to put it away before I can do anything else. Not exactly the most economical method to secure the arrest. (Scenario based on actual event)
Whew..............stay with me here.
Finally...........my position on "Speed re-holstering" actually has nothing to do with the LEO circumstances described above. That is simply my counter-position to the LEO's who tend to not differentiate between quickly putting their handgun away, and speed re-holstering, nor can they admit that they whip their peacemaker out at times when it is completely inappropriate to the situation, and counter-productive to the desired end state, forcing them into the emergency holstering of their pistol.
My position on speed re-holstering is as it pertains to post shooting procedures. There is absolutely NO reason that one (LE, MIL, CIV) needs to fire rounds, effectively employing deadly force, then quick draw McGraw their gun back into the holster upon completion of discharging their rounds.
Yet, that is what we see time and time again at the range, in practice, in training, which prompts these types of discussions. Drawing, shooting, and re-holstering as quickly as drawing. Sometimes even faster than the draw itself. Generally, the times I have witnessed said phenomenon, the speed re-holster's speed is directly proportionate to the speed of the draw. Faster the draw, the faster the re-holster.
I have only seen three people shoot themselves on accident. One was with a Mk19...........(I saw the entire thing unfold from start to finish and to this day cannot tell you how that happened so please don't ask me to try). The other two were from the shooters engaging their paper nemesis with a rapid presentation to the target, sending the appropriate number of rounds down range for that drill, then rapidly returning their pistol to the holster where they just as aggressively pumped one final round into their thigh.
The second shooter had this happen after being told repeatedly to STOP!!! There is no tactical advantage to this technique, it prevents proper post-shooting threat assessment, and is dangerous. He was one of those trainees who knew what he was doing. He had several years of HSLD firearms training, was un-teachable and un-reachable. When the shot rang out, and he screamed like a little girl, and continued to scream as the medic rendered aid, it was very difficult to stifle the snickers from the other shooters on the line.
Fortunately for him, the wound was simply soft tissue and he made a full physical recovery. However he could not recover from his jackassery, and he was stripped of his job, and sent looking for a new one.
As always, my standard disclaimer: I am not the tactics police, and I really don't care what TTP's, equipment, or weapons someone else chooses to use. It has nothing to do with me, and is not my problem. The opinions expressed are solely my own opinions, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employers, and are worth exactly what you paid for them.
$0.
Last edited by Odin Bravo One; 07-07-2012 at 01:07 AM. Reason: Typo's, spelling, grammar
You can get much more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.
Wait. Mk19... as in 40mm grenade launcher?
In all seriousness, great post and quite a bit more comprehensible than you seemed to think it'd be.
....Cap Stun
Dating yourself.
I was the first guy to get sprayed with that shit when we adopted it at our jail in '91.
Knew a guy who took a lap full of fragments when the round fired before it was chambered.One was with a Mk19.
Yeah, that Mk19..............right through the forearm.Wait. Mk19... as in 40mm grenade launcher?
As I said, saw it happen start to finish. No idea how it happened. Truly an amazing piece of uber-poor weapons handling.
You can get much more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.
My position is simple. All officers (and everyone else, for that matter) should learn to safely secure their firearm in a manner that does not increase the danger to themselves or others. When one attempts to secure the firearm at a speed that does not allow for that, then we have a problem. If your re-holster technique cannot be done safely then it should not be done, no matter what the speed.
"PLAN FOR YOUR TRAINING TO BE A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT REAL LIFE WILL BE A REFLECTION OF YOUR TRAINING!"
I know. Seems more and more often these days I find myself using terminology or phrases that are no longer popular in day to day speech.
It was bound to happen. We can't stay young forever.
I loved that stuff. Some of the local shitheads nick named me the "Preacher", because they knew if they ran, or otherwise created a problem with their arrest, I was very likely going to "Bless them" with OC.
You can get much more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.
Reply With Quote
