NY Times Story of NYPD Marksmanship Under Pressure.

[arnisador]

I just posted this on FMAT...a fascinating NY times story on marksmanship as it actually happens for NYPD officers:

A Hail of Bullets, a Heap of Uncertainty

AFTER almost every high-profile fatal shooting by the police, a flurry of questions follows hard on the hail of bullets. Premier among them is, Did they have to kill him?

This often implies a more subtle subtext that goes to the heart of police training: Is there a middle ground? And is it possible to shoot to wound?
The answer, law enforcement officials and experts agree, is no, but not because the only alternative is shooting to kill.

While popular culture has embedded both extremes — the hardened mantra of “shoot to kill” and the benevolent private eye (think Barnaby Jones) who expertly inflicts only a flesh wound — the truth is that neither practice is a staple of police guidelines. In fact, the most likely result when a policeman discharges a gun is that he or she will miss the target completely. So an officer could no sooner shoot to wound than shoot to kill with any rate of success. In life-or-death situations that play out in lightning speed — such precision marksmanship is unrealistic.

This is a very interesting article, with some great graphics, about the realities of shooting by police. It analyzes every shot fired in a given period and how many hit, including the oft-cited but rarely-remembered fact that about about half of all shots at close range still miss (57% of all shots fired within 6 feet of the opponent missed in this review). Definitely recommended reading.

 

[SFC JeffJ]

I wonder if any part of these studies ever take into account which officers go to the range on their own, and which go to the range the bare minimum times required.

Do you have a link to the rest of the article?

Jeff

 

[Cruentus]

I just posted this on FMAT...a fascinating NY times story on marksmanship as it actually happens for NYPD officers:

A Hail of Bullets, a Heap of Uncertainty


This is a very interesting article, with some great graphics, about the realities of shooting by police. It analyzes every shot fired in a given period and how many hit, including the oft-cited but rarely-remembered fact that about about half of all shots at close range still miss (57% of all shots fired within 6 feet of the opponent missed in this review). Definitely recommended reading.

This is absolutely true, and a fact that brought me to where my training is today. Most fatal police shootings occur under 15 feet, with over 50% of these shootings occuring within 3 feet. The hit rate among police nationally ranges between 12-17% on any given year (and usually in the low end of that range).

Then, a trainer for the California Hwy patrol was brought to my attention. He is retired now from the dept., and mainly teaches now. His name is Lou Chiodo: http://www.gunfightersltd.com/

Anyhow, he was able to bring the hit rates of the CHP between 70-85% with his training methods. I thought, man, these cops must be training for hours and hours longer then everyone else. So, I did a few of his workshops. Nope. They don't train for any greater length of time then anyone else. It all had to do with WHAT they are training in. It was the training method, and only training what works in an actual fight, and looking at objective data to measure results that made all the difference.

I have since applied this lesson to every aspect of my training today.

 

[arnisador]

I wonder if any part of these studies ever take into account which officers go to the range on their own, and which go to the range the bare minimum times required.

I wonder that always! Training helps (we hope?).

Do you have a link to the rest of the article?

Ooops, I thought it was there:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html

I edited the post.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

There is no salvation without dry practice.

 

[Cruentus]

I wonder if any part of these studies ever take into account which officers go to the range on their own, and which go to the range the bare minimum times required.

Jeff

I haven't seen anything where that data has been calculated. I would be curious, though.

The key to develop a good, pragmatic method (whether it be shooting or hand-to-hand) is to have the movements coincide with what is natural for the human body to do under stress. The more natural the movements are, the easier it is to retain, and therefore the more likely that the training will not fall apart under stress even with minimal practice.

Of course, the ideal would be to practice more. But then, one can practice what is natural more often and receive even greater benefits. We find that this is better then having to practice something over and over again that is not very natural at all. If it is not natural, one will find the movements difficult to learn, and once learned difficult to maintain without constant practice.

And this is where we find the disconnect between the martial artist or the competition shooter and everyone else. The martial artist or competition shooter is very passionate about what they do, and willing to practice for years and years making certain skills work for them. Then, because they are the 'experts,' they try to transfer their knowledge to normal people (many who may be in a dangerous profession where the skills are needed) who are not going to practice or be as passionate as the instructor. Not to mention, someone who is in law enforcement will need their skills to work by their next shift, not after years and years of training. So the skills they learn from the 'expert' that would take months or years of dilligent training to perfect end up being completely useless. Add these dynamics to the disconnect from the 'real world' that many instructors have, and you really have a recipe for some disasterous training methods that can get people killed.

Anyway, I digress. It would be nice to have data on those who actually practice more often; but I think such data would be difficult to collect.

 

[Grenadier]

This article:

http://www.marylandcops.org/Articles/Shootout.htm

might help give another insight into the situation, and especially one regarding point shooting.

 

[Cruentus]

This article:

http://www.marylandcops.org/Articles/Shootout.htm

might help give another insight into the situation, and especially one regarding point shooting.

Nice insight. Some of the data I have seen has been slightly different (mostly due to the way it was compiled) but it all adds up to the same conclusions.