Shotgun qual dustup

[DDTSGM]

I think quals should be cold, for the reasons listed.

Slightly off-topic, but addressed in this thread, I'm also pretty set in my opposition of head shots on a qualification course, as opposed to drills.

My reasoning on this subject is based on the fact that in every venue I've appeared as an 'expert witness' whether it be coroner's inquest, grand jury, federal grand jury, district court or presentations to citizens groups, I've had to, at some point address why don't we shoot to wound in either the leg or arm.

I can get pretty long-winded if allowed, but essentially the answer is that there simply isn't the training time to teach officers to achieve such accuracy under the stress of an actual encounter.

In view of that, it has always seemed like having failure drills be a part of a qualification course would set the stage for someone to argue the point I was making.

Pretty sure I could clean it up in an inquest, unsure if I would have the opportunity in court, as that is pretty much dependent on the questions being asked by the attorney on my side during redirect.

So, drill failure drills all you want, but leave them out of quals.

There is a very remote possibility I'm full of shit, though.

[Le Français]

Looking from outside, two questions:

1) what percent fail the qual? If the qual is challenging enough to be relevant, I assume some percent have to fail.

2) what are the consequences of failing -- laughed at, fined, benched, dismissed, or retrained and retested?

I have often learned a lot more from things I got wrong than from things I got right.

1) I am not an FI and haven't kept track of the percentages. I've seen it happen several times over the past year, for example.

2) Haha, fined? Do you know of an LE agency that fines people for failing a qual once? Failures are offered an immediate retest. Additional training before the retest is also an option.

[Le Français]

Slightly off-topic, but addressed in this thread, I'm also pretty set in my opposition of head shots on a qualification course, as opposed to drills.

My reasoning on this subject is based on the fact that in every venue I've appeared as an 'expert witness' whether it be coroner's inquest, grand jury, federal grand jury, district court or presentations to citizens groups, I've had to, at some point address why don't we shoot to wound in either the leg or arm.

I can get pretty long-winded if allowed, but essentially the answer is that there simply isn't the training time to teach officers to achieve such accuracy under the stress of an actual encounter.

In view of that, it has always seemed like having failure drills be a part of a qualification course would set the stage for someone to argue the point I was making.

Pretty sure I could clean it up in an inquest, unsure if I would have the opportunity in court, as that is pretty much dependent on the questions being asked by the attorney on my side during redirect.

So, drill failure drills all you want, but leave them out of quals.

There is a very remote possibility I'm full of shit, though.

I've argued a bit differently: Since the sole acceptable purpose of using deadly force in LE is to stop the immediate threat posed by the person against whom force is used, we do our best to put the bullets where they will have the highest likelihood of effecting that result. As I've said elsewhere, the fact that this often causes mortal injury is regrettable, but that's where technology puts us at the present time.

[TGS]

Just curious why they went 25 vs 50? Was that influenced by OCONUS ranges ? I ask because most US LE ranges are 50 yards.

Our rifle qual starts at 100 but it’s frequently shot at 50 using a 50% reduced size target.

Great question. OCONUS is a whole other can of worms, and because of the difficulties in trying to standardize a worldwide policy, the policy is simply a fam-fire once per year (not even an actual qual). Some do more. One of the members here used to organize near monthly multi-gun matches between his personnel and a SOF unit with a permanent rotation in country, which obviously represents the high end and is extremely uncommon.

Domestically, I think the given LE ranges may depend on the state and their course of fire. We didn't have access to a 50 yard range when I was posted at NYC, and the police range we shot at was 25 yards. Even if 50 yards are available, there's many, many more 25, so it's just all around logistically easier.

@GJM, not sure if you're trying to get a general idea or not, but here's some info about my agency if you're interested:

A qual failure gets an immediate retest. If failed the 2nd time, the agent's gun is seized and they're reported to their supervisor. At that point they go onto a formal PIP and have to go through remediation before allowed to retest.

As they can no longer fulfill their LE duties, they should also lose their LEAP (Law Enforcement Availability Pay), which represents 25% of their base salary. I'm not sure of how that notification happens, and whether it's likely or unlikely to happen (i.e if it's up to their first line supervisor who might not care).

[HCM]

Great question. OCONUS is a whole other can of worms, and because of the difficulties in trying to standardize a worldwide policy, the policy is simply a fam-fire once per year (not even an actual qual). Some do more. One of the members here used to organize near monthly multi-gun matches between his personnel and a SOF unit with a permanent rotation in country, which obviously represents the high end and is extremely uncommon.

Domestically, I think the given LE ranges may depend on the state and their course of fire. We didn't have access to a 50 yard range when I was posted at NYC, and the police range we shot at was 25 yards. Even if 50 yards are available, there's many, many more 25, so it's just all around logistically easier.

@GJM, not sure if you're trying to get a general idea or not, but here's some info about my agency if you're interested:

A qual failure gets an immediate retest. If failed the 2nd time, the agent's gun is seized and they're reported to their supervisor. At that point they go onto a formal PIP and have to go through remediation before allowed to retest.

As they can no longer fulfill their LE duties, they should also lose their LEAP (Law Enforcement Availability Pay), which represents 25% of their base salary. I'm not sure of how that notification happens, and whether it's likely or unlikely to happen (i.e if it's up to their first line supervisor who might not care).

We are similar.

DNQ gets one more opportunity sometime that day. It doesn’t have to be immediately but no more than 2 attempts total.

DNQ twice and the gun is pulled or if a POW their authority to carry it. They have to complete 8 hours of remediation before they can re-test.

For admin reasons we normally give them a 2 week pay period to remediate and qualify before decertification of their 25%.

[Rick R]

Looking from outside, two questions:

1) what percent fail the qual? If the qual is challenging enough to be relevant, I assume some percent have to fail.

2) what are the consequences of failing -- laughed at, fined, benched, dismissed, or retrained and retested?

I have often learned a lot more from things I got wrong than from things I got right.

As “Qualification” is exhibiting proficiency in the necessary skills for an LEO in the use of a firearm as defined by their State/agency/jurisdiction and not training, no well trained officer should fail. But dealing with real people who age, have medical issues, stress issues or just don’t practice is the norm and failures occur.

We laughed at/with you, told you everything would be fine, had you sit on a bench while we finished up with everyone else, then we tried to retrain your self defeating thought process and finally retested you on the course again. With problem shooters you often need to go case by case to determine why. We did “death by qual course”, or sent them home with instructions to come back the next day, or we scheduled a day of remedial training the week after the week of quals for problems, and one “them” (I can play pronoun games too) I sent home with instructions to see their doctor. Diagnosed with extremely high blood pressure they got it under control and went back to qualifying first time every time.

We never lost anyone due to failure, everyone had previously qualified at the state academy so was capable. It just took firearms instructors acting as mechanics on worn equipment.

[Coyotesfan97]

My old M4 qual started at 100 yards with 10 shots. If you didn’t have a LPVO you shot five rounds with your red dot five shots irons. At seven yards we had a planned empty gun/transition to handgun with two rounds CM. You’d better put your safety on before you slung the M4. Now I can’t remember if it was a DQ or a lesser penalty. They wanted your rifle on safe anytime it was slung.

[DDTSGM]

I've argued a bit differently: Since the sole acceptable purpose of using deadly force in LE is to stop the immediate threat posed by the person against whom force is used, we do our best to put the bullets where they will have the highest likelihood of effecting that result. As I've said elsewhere, the fact that this often causes mortal injury is regrettable, but that's where technology puts us at the present time.

I don't see where we differ in any respect regarding the intended use of lethal force.

I'm simply concerned about the potential for a defense/plaintiff's attorney to advance the thought that if officers are expected to be accurate enough to deliver head shots as a part of qualification, they ought to be able to shoot to wound in the arm or leg or shoot the gun out of the guy's hand.

[psalms144.1]

I always did quals as the first event of the day, cold. There were a bunch of reasons for this, including but not limited to:

1. The qualification is such a BS standard that 95% of our shooters could pass it in their sleep
2. The 5% who couldn't pass it cold, shooting it first gave me the opportunity to coach and correct them without it appearing that I was singling them out as problem children
3. When those 5%ers didn't show up, we could be done with quals in 10 minutes, and spend the rest of the day doing actual firearms training

Shooting a record qual at the end of a rigorous training day is not something I would do for any non-specialty team. For specialty teams guys, I'd still let them know what the schedule of events was, so they wouldn't be surprised by a qual at the end of 8-hours of running around shooting shit with kit on.

When I was running the protective detail at USSOCOM, MY standard was 100% hits, or you failed the qual. No pass = no travel, so dudes who were a little lackadaisical about qualifications got REAL serious about it after a dude got bumped from the 12-day advance trip to Paris...

[HCM]

I don't see where we differ in any respect regarding the intended use of lethal force.

I'm simply concerned about the potential for a defense/plaintiff's attorney to advance the thought that if officers are expected to be accurate enough to deliver head shots as a part of qualification, they ought to be able to shoot to wound in the arm or leg or shoot the gun out of the guy's hand.

Like most things this is a 2 way street..

If you don’t train / qual headshots a defense / plaintiff’s attorney can potentially argue shooting their client in the head showed some malicious intent to “murder” or “kill” rather than stop.

As a counter to this in our pistol qual the two specific head shots at 7 yards are a “failure to stop / body armor /cover” stage.

The evolution is two to the body one to the head from the holster followed by the same from a high ready position.