Predictions

[WobblyPossum]

An instructor at a different site said "red dots are a passing fad."

That’s what they said about red dots on rifles 30 years ago. Must be a really long fad. I’m sure the passing part is right around the corner.

[DMF13]

. . . but it's gonna take some work and some growth on the part of instructors . . .

This has the potential to be a very big problem. As already mentioned on this thread, I'm hearing things from people, who are FIs, that show they clearly haven't tried to understand PMOs. Some folks express surprise that I'm putting in my own time/money to learn about using PMOs, and tell me it's a waste, because "they'll send us to a class for this." It falls on deaf ears when I explain it's ridiculous to think we can do a 2 or 3 day class, and turn around the next day, expecting to effectively teach it to others.

An instructor at a different site said "red dots are a passing fad."

That sentiment is shockingly common.

[Kyle Reese]

Having dots on duty guns won't fix individual laziness or institutional indifference. Officers who give a fuck will shoot better, because they're going to take ownership of their training and, in turn, their individual performance. Officers who view the duty pistol as an item to be grudgingly toted on their duty belt because it's a requirement of the job probably won't shoot any better than they do now. Pistol Mounted Optics will not correct poor interface with the pistol, suboptimal trigger manipulation or pre-ignition movements.

Now, quality dots, a training staff who is well versed in the art of the dot (and can convey the attendant concepts to the masses), and cops who give a fuck? That's a recipe for success, IMO.

Just my 2 cents.

Was wrapping up a class and we got to talking about.........dots on pistols. Students were suckling at the teat of "Red dots are awesome" and I asked some questions.

1. When everyone's got a dot on their duty gun...will gunfight hit ratios be the same, worse, or better?

2. When everyone's got a dot on their duty gun....will qual scores be the same, worse, or better?

Not many answers, some foot shuffling and loss of eye contact.

If the gear isn't helping officers, how can it be any good?

[AMC]

There are a bunch of related, but separate discussions to be had about this topic. Are red dots a fad? No.....thats just silly at this point. The trend is strongly in favor of this new technology, and will remain so. Are they going to completely revolutionize shooting? Probably not. Though I'm strongly of the opinion that a dot can help you to train better and smarter, and thereby improve performance faster, that requires knowledge and commitment both on the part of the user and the instructor. Those are qualities sorely lacking in most LE Firearms Instructor cadres.

I'll again be that guy and state the obvious. Though I think dots are here to stay, the road is going to be rocky and difficult, because most LE Firearms Instructors don't know much about shooting, and care even less. They'll embrace 'Transition Training' only because it brings overtime. In the meantime, for many years they're going to be teaching the dot mostly incorrectly, because they're going to try to fit it into their existing 'understanding' of training.

Yes, there are exceptions to this general rule. Those are largely due to programs driven by dedicated individuals who are able to create a sustainable culture. Those agencies almost always also have an existing culture of excellence overall. Ask me how it goes when your agency doesn't have such a culture.

I think ultimately the dot CAN lead to a revolution, when people start to.understand there's a better way to train and understand shooting. I just think it's gonna take some time.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

This is a naive question, I grant you. If you look through the many OIS videos, can one discern the actual proportion of those entail bringing up the gun to using whatever sights that the gun is equipped with? Those with interest in firearms probably do use them but non interest officer?

It might be hard to see. If the sights are not used, then the discussion takes a different direction.

[Erick Gelhaus]

This is a naive question, I grant you. If you look through the many OIS videos, can one discern the actual proportion of those that entail bringing up the gun to using whatever sights that the gun is equipped with? Those with interest in firearms probably do use them but non interest officer?

It might be hard to see. If the sights are not used, then the discussion takes a different direction.

Because of the above, if an agency is going to adopt, issue them, I advocate for three things - everyone goes through the transition training, no one is mandated to carry an optic, & regular sustainment dry practice in briefings for multiple months.

But these days, I just teach.

[AMC]

This is a naive question, I grant you. If you look through the many OIS videos, can one discern the actual proportion of those entail bringing up the gun to using whatever sights that the gun is equipped with? Those with interest in firearms probably do use them but non interest officer?

It might be hard to see. If the sights are not used, then the discussion takes a different direction.

The technology as it is employed by the vast majority of agencies doesn't really allow this. Most agencies mandate the BWC to be worn somewhere on the center chest. This doesn't allow a visual representation of what the officer has in their field of view exactly, much less what they are actually focused on. The head-mounted cameras such as the Axon Flex(?) show a better perspective, but it's still not one for one.

What the cameras do show is the officers level of emotional control and their weapon manipulation ability. They'll also show a fast, efficient presentation and controlled fire. I think overall trends will start to.show themselves, but I dont know that anyone has collated this type of data yet.

[BobM]

Because of the above, if an agency is going to adopt, issue them, I advocate for three things - everyone goes through the transition training, no one is mandated to carry an optic, & regular sustainment dry practice in briefings for multiple months.

But these days, I just teach.

I’ve been retired about 2 1/2 years. Tonight I was visiting one of my former officers. He showed me his recently issued M&P/Holosun. He’s so far refused to carry it as there has been no transition training. He said all they’ve been doing is annual qualifying. I was getting them on the range 3-4 hours quarterly. The officer currently in charge of the training is very unmotivated and generally clueless. Very frustrating to see.

[john c]

I'm glad to hear that scores stayed up. I have concerns that we will see a bump in scores, due to effect of additional training, for the transition, followed by a drop later. We saw that in our SIG to Glock transition.. Initially scores were higher, after a 3 day transition training, but a year later average scores were back to the same level as before. So its to good hear that might not be true during our PMO transition.

I'm also hoping we devote at least 16 hours to the transition. I'd prefer 24, but one of the reasons we've been delayed in getting PMOs, is concern over the time, and money, needed to do the transition. The 24 hour transition class we had for.going from SIGs to Glocks is often cited in those debates.

The irony is I think we could have/should have spent less time on that transition, but the.transition to PMOs would.justify that time.

My agency's transition course was/is 20 hours over 2 days at the range. We were cut loose a bit early each day, so it was probably closer to 18 hours, including an hour each day for lunch. I felt that 16 effective class hours was fine for the transition.

[HCM]

Having dots on duty guns won't fix individual laziness or institutional indifference. Officers who give a fuck will shoot better, because they're going to take ownership of their training and, in turn, their individual performance. Officers who view the duty pistol as an item to be grudgingly toted on their duty belt because it's a requirement of the job probably won't shoot any better than they do now. Pistol Mounted Optics will not correct poor interface with the pistol, suboptimal trigger manipulation or pre-ignition movements.

Now, quality dots, a training staff who is well versed in the art of the dot (and can convey the attendant concepts to the masses), and cops who give a fuck? That's a recipe for success, IMO.

Just my 2 cents.

The fact is most LE do “qualifications” not training.

The 8/16/24 hours of “RDS Transition training” is an opportunity to do actual training and address grip/draw/presentation/ Interface/grip etc. etc. I’d say maybe 25% of our “RDS transition” was directly related to RDS and the remainder were fixing “shooting” issues.

I believe this ^^^ plus the fact we shoot quarterly (frequency / recency) being why we’ve mostly sustained our gains.