Pressure shooting

[loki09789]

I noticed a thin response to the competetive shooting thread, but as a spin off of that:

For those who shoot regularly, competetive or not, how do you induce stress or pressure so that you are preparing for the type of shooting you expect to be doing in the 'real deal'

Example:

Trap/Skeet shooters simulate the competition events to prepare for the real deal.

LEO use stages of fire that require magezine changes with time pressure, low light....

I hunt, so I tend to try and emphasis accuracy shooting on slow and fast targets because of the walking/running deer issue. How? Back to the trap/skeet shooting. It isn't perfect because of the spread shot, but it does address leads and holds. I can focus on point accuracy in static range shooting. Because of the lack of facilities and money, I don't know if my lead and hold training combines with my accuracy shooting until I am drawing a bead on the deer, but I do the best I can with what I got

 

[Tgace]

How my instructors induce stress in firearms training...

-competition (the stress of getting beat)
-time limits (beat the clock)
-fines (on my SWAT team there is a $1.00 fine for each round that misses a human target)
-simunitions (theres NOTHING like getting shot at to induce stress), it has been suggested that paintball guns can provide this, but the advantage of simunitions is that the weapons are exactly like the real thing in terms of appearance and operation and can be holstered, manipulated, reloaded and employed like the real thing.

 

[Akula]

I was hoping for a better response for the competitve shooting thread, but oh well.

When practicing for competitions, I try to simulate as much as possible the actual events. This would include everything from light levels, a shot timer, audio levels, and so on. The only thing missing is the referee. This way, when the events happen, I feel very prepared for them, and therefore, relaxed, not stressed. As for scores during practice, I treat each round of 20 shots as an individual score, and compare to previous scores and see who 'wins'.

I'll also keep a log including everything so that trends can be discovered. Even items such as wearing glasses or contacts, which shoes, what clothes, what was for breakfast and so on. If you're curious, I get around 2% higher scores wearing glasses versus contacts, 1-2% higher wearing low cut hiking boots. I guess these come more to the point of reducing, not inducing stress and pressure.

When shooting long distance, I put a lot of emphasis on the cold shot. For me that pressure not only helps me focus, but the results of that shot often sets the tone for the rest of that session.

 

[loki09789]

Yeah, I was hoping for more posters on that thread too. I like your cold shot emphasis. In any real deal application, but especially SD situations that is the decisive shot....

I treat sparring along these lines too. I focus on 'winning' the first 30 seconds of sparring contact. I figure if I win that first contact, it is similar to the first clash of a real fight. After that it is a chance to experiment with stuff and enhance aspects of my fight skills.

Paul M

 

[Tgace]

I was hoping for a better response for the competitve shooting thread, but oh well.

When practicing for competitions, I try to simulate as much as possible the actual events. This would include everything from light levels, a shot timer, audio levels, and so on. The only thing missing is the referee. This way, when the events happen, I feel very prepared for them, and therefore, relaxed, not stressed. As for scores during practice, I treat each round of 20 shots as an individual score, and compare to previous scores and see who 'wins'.

Hmmm...sounds a lot like scenario training to me. We got into an in depth discussion about the importance of scenario training in self defense on another forum here. Im all for it.

I'll also keep a log including everything so that trends can be discovered. Even items such as wearing glasses or contacts, which shoes, what clothes, what was for breakfast and so on. If you're curious, I get around 2% higher scores wearing glasses versus contacts, 1-2% higher wearing low cut hiking boots. I guess these come more to the point of reducing, not inducing stress and pressure.

When shooting long distance, I put a lot of emphasis on the cold shot. For me that pressure not only helps me focus, but the results of that shot often sets the tone for the rest of that session.

Sounds like excellent prep. work to me. I would only add the obvious statement that when it comes to the "real thing" you better be prepared to fight in whatever situation/clothing/eyewear/etc. you have.

 

[Akula]

Sounds like excellent prep. work to me. I would only add the obvious statement that when it comes to the "real thing" you better be prepared to fight in whatever situation/clothing/eyewear/etc. you have.

True, that portion was strictly relating to target practice, and shooting in competitions. When it comes to a self defense situation, I agree, be prepared for whatever your circumstances are.

I treat sparring along these lines too. I focus on 'winning' the first 30 seconds of sparring contact. I figure if I win that first contact, it is similar to the first clash of a real fight. After that it is a chance to experiment with stuff and enhance aspects of my fight skills.

For the Modern Pentathlon, in the fencing event, this is the way we fought. The bouts were to the first touch only, with a 60 second clock. There were no follow up points, just the next person in line to fight. It made it interesting because you got very different attacks than regular fencing where you go to 10 or 15 points.

 

[OULobo]

-simunitions (theres NOTHING like getting shot at to induce stress), it has been suggested that paintball guns can provide this, but the advantage of simunitions is that the weapons are exactly like the real thing in terms of appearance and operation and can be holstered, manipulated, reloaded and employed like the real thing.

When you say simunitions are you talking about "Airsoft" type stuff?

 

[loki09789]

For the Modern Pentathlon, in the fencing event, this is the way we fought. The bouts were to the first touch only, with a 60 second clock. There were no follow up points, just the next person in line to fight. It made it interesting because you got very different attacks than regular fencing where you go to 10 or 15 points.

Off topic, but I noticed that your profile mentioned systema. I was curious if you found that it blended with your fencing - off the piste - well or not. Systema, what little I know of it, seems to move alot like FMA's and softer kenpo movment styles.

 

[Tgace]

When you say simunitions are you talking about "Airsoft" type stuff?

No, the simunitions company makes weapons, and conversion kits that fire paint pellets. Function like real weapons, feel like real weapons (some are converted real weapons). They fire, function and eject brass.

 

[Akula]

Off topic, but I noticed that your profile mentioned systema. I was curious if you found that it blended with your fencing - off the piste - well or not. Systema, what little I know of it, seems to move alot like FMA's and softer kenpo movment styles.

The quick answer is a qualified yes. When engaging your opponent in fencing, you can feel the energy and intent transmitted through the blade and/or body movements, and as in systema, work with the energy from there, not against it. The only slight negative part in the blending is that when you are fencing you are working in a very linear approach, whereas in systema, or any other art for that matter, the movements can be more lateral and circular. I sometimes fall into this trap at systema practice, and forget I can move to the side or around my training partner.

I have also found that systema is helping out with my shooting as well. With the breathing and relaxation, the scores have been improving. Before I started systema, I already knew about the importance of being relaxed when you are on the firing line. After I started, I began to realize all the tension I still had in my form that I hadn't noticed before. Get the tension out of your shooting form, and the 10 ring gets a lot bigger. This can tie into my earlier post in this thread about reducing stress and pressure for competition. When you can minimize the effects of these items, things just start to fall together.

 

[MJS]

I noticed a thin response to the competetive shooting thread, but as a spin off of that:

For those who shoot regularly, competetive or not, how do you induce stress or pressure so that you are preparing for the type of shooting you expect to be doing in the 'real deal'

Example:

Trap/Skeet shooters simulate the competition events to prepare for the real deal.

LEO use stages of fire that require magezine changes with time pressure, low light....

I hunt, so I tend to try and emphasis accuracy shooting on slow and fast targets because of the walking/running deer issue. How? Back to the trap/skeet shooting. It isn't perfect because of the spread shot, but it does address leads and holds. I can focus on point accuracy in static range shooting. Because of the lack of facilities and money, I don't know if my lead and hold training combines with my accuracy shooting until I am drawing a bead on the deer, but I do the best I can with what I got

VERY interesting thread!!! I've had discussions with people on this topic in the past and have gotten mixed results. My thread was based on 2 weapons- the gun and the knife, and which is the better weapon in a SD situation. I always went with the knife, due to the fact that its easier to hide, quicker to take out, easier to hide while holding in your hand, and it does not require you to aim or take up a stance in order to use it. I was against the gun, due to the fact that you mention here----how many people who are really "into" guns, can actually say that they train under stress, in low light and against something that is moving??? IMO, not that many. LEO and military did NOT count, due to the fact that they rely on their gun alot more than the average civilian does.

Mike

 

[Rich Parsons]

No, the simunitions company makes weapons, and conversion kits that fire paint pellets. Function like real weapons, feel like real weapons (some are converted real weapons). They fire, function and eject brass.

I like this idea.

 

[Tgace]

Im not aware if they are available to the civilian market, but heres their site....

http://www.simunition.com/index.php

 

[loki09789]

I always went with the knife, due to the fact that its easier to hide, quicker to take out, easier to hide while holding in your hand, and it does not require you to aim or take up a stance in order to use it. I was against the gun, due to the fact that you mention here----how many people who are really "into" guns, can actually say that they train under stress, in low light and against something that is moving??? IMO, not that many. LEO and military did NOT count, due to the fact that they rely on their gun alot more than the average civilian does.
Mike

MJS,
I would take the other side of this issue and say that the gun is the better weapon (Let's just stick with sidearms/pistols for this discussion) for many reasons.

Firstly, pistols are very easy to conceal and, I think quicker to aquire because of the holster. Fishing through your pocket for a blade will take just as long if not longer from my experience. For SD, concealing the weapon is the last thing I want to do, I WANT the bad guy to know that I am armed are willing to use that weapon, regardless of type, because it might get him to leave me alone. Concealing any weapon until you use it is an ambush and hard to defend in court. Knives don't require 'aiming' but they do require accuracy and focus. Plus the resultant damage/effect of a knife is not the ballistic damage, hydrostatic shot and audible stunner that a pistol shot can produce with much less effort relative to a knife. Also, pistols can be fired from as many varied stances or positions as any well delivered knife attacks. Check out Masaad Ayoob's relationship with West Coast KALI people to make a whole SD approach. As far as what other people who shot do, I really don't care because that only gives guys who do participate in pressure shooting the edge. There are many good practical competetive and SD programs out there that you can take home and use just like you can learn forms and drills for knife work.

My biggest reason for the gun as superior, though, is shear public perception. If you are a stand up guy, with a registered firearm, licensed user, regular practice/SD/Practical pistol league shooter, familiar with the USE OF FORCE/DEADLY FORCE laws in your area and maybe even have an NRA safety course certificate or two in your portfolio, you will look more credible in the average jury members/LEO/Attorneys perception than the 'knife freak' with over $500 invested in military and 'fighting' knives, along with hours of 'chop sockie' training.

I interviewed a local prosecuting attorney once for my MA school newsletter years back who was taking my instructors program at the community college, and the above is based on his imput for the article, not just my perceptions.

Can't ignore the other 'fight' of the court room. Remember, justified use of force is a defensible stance, not a judgement call for the cops on the scene. If you are covered in blood standing over a guy with a crusty knife in your hand, you will be questioned and possibly arrested UNTIL you can prove justified force. Same goes with a gun in the equation, though.

 

[MJS]

MJS,
I would take the other side of this issue and say that the gun is the better weapon (Let's just stick with sidearms/pistols for this discussion) for many reasons.

Firstly, pistols are very easy to conceal and, I think quicker to aquire because of the holster. Fishing through your pocket for a blade will take just as long if not longer from my experience. For SD, concealing the weapon is the last thing I want to do, I WANT the bad guy to know that I am armed are willing to use that weapon, regardless of type, because it might get him to leave me alone. Concealing any weapon until you use it is an ambush and hard to defend in court.

Guns are quicker?? How many people aside from LEO do you see walking around with a gun on their side?? I dont know where you live, but where I'm from, that is something that I've never seen. If the gun was concealed under a jacket, and a knife was clipped to my belt, are you honestly telling me that you could get your gun out before the knife was deployed?? As for the concealing, I was referring to a criminal using the knife. Also, as for concealing the weapons...keep in mind, that not every situation is going to warrant you pulling a gun or knife, so that is even more reason to use extra caution before pulling it out. Also, a gun has to be aimed. How many people practice against a moving target, in low light, under the stress of combat??? My guess would be not that many. You dont need to aim a knife like you would a gun.

Knives don't require 'aiming' but they do require accuracy and focus. Plus the resultant damage/effect of a knife is not the ballistic damage, hydrostatic shot and audible stunner that a pistol shot can produce with much less effort relative to a knife.

Knives require being accurate??? LOL!LOL! Come on man. A knife can be effective on any part of the body. You can give a knife to a 3y/o and they can be dangerous if they dont want to give it back to you.

Also, pistols can be fired from as many varied stances or positions as any well delivered knife attacks.

Yup, and in order for it to even be effective, it has to be pointing at its target, whereas a knife, no matter how its held, can cut you.

Check out Masaad Ayoob's relationship with West Coast KALI people to make a whole SD approach. As far as what other people who shot do, I really don't care because that only gives guys who do participate in pressure shooting the edge. There are many good practical competetive and SD programs out there that you can take home and use just like you can learn forms and drills for knife work.

I'm sure there are many programs that are available for the public to take. The question is, how many actually take them???? Your average "Joe" will most likely take a basic gun class at the local range, and that'll be the end of it, aside from the occassional target practice. Its all a matter of how much you want your training to grow.

My biggest reason for the gun as superior, though, is shear public perception. If you are a stand up guy, with a registered firearm, licensed user, regular practice/SD/Practical pistol league shooter, familiar with the USE OF FORCE/DEADLY FORCE laws in your area and maybe even have an NRA safety course certificate or two in your portfolio, you will look more credible in the average jury members/LEO/Attorneys perception than the 'knife freak' with over $500 invested in military and 'fighting' knives, along with hours of 'chop sockie' training.

Just had a cop/suspect shooting in a city in the state that I live in. The first thing out of the guys family was, "Why did they have to kill him? Why didnt they just mace him?" I get the impression that anyone who owns a gun, has a permit, etc. thinks that they can just pull it out any time they want. Not the case. As I said above, the situation has to warrant the gun being pulled out. Even cops are required to use as much force as whats being used against them.

Sure is a gun going to look better than a knife? Probably. But the fact of the matter is, is that they are BOTH deadly weapons.

Can't ignore the other 'fight' of the court room. Remember, justified use of force is a defensible stance, not a judgement call for the cops on the scene. If you are covered in blood standing over a guy with a crusty knife in your hand, you will be questioned and possibly arrested UNTIL you can prove justified force. Same goes with a gun in the equation, though.

Let me ask you this. If your life or the life of a loved one depended on it, would you pick up a knife and use it?? I sure know that I would. If someone breaks into my house at 2am, I'm going to pick up anything I can, be it a knife, gun, stick, chair, etc. and I'm going to use it! Period!!! I didnt invite this guy into my house, so he deserves what he gets. I guess it'll have to get sorted out in the court.

Mike

 

[Tgace]

The way I see it, if the knife was a "superior" weapon, Id have one on my duty belt instead of a Glock… The "problem" with the gun is improper training and a belief that having a gun means you only need to train marksmanship skills and no unarmed ones. If incorporated into a good CQB system the gun is as effective close up as a knife.

The knife is an offensive weapon by nature, you have to make contact, slash and stab to make it work. The gun can be used defensively by gaining distance, getting cover and using the range advantage to deliver force when necessary but still be a creditable threat at range. The important thing for the operator to learn is to survive the contact range fight, gain distance and get cover. This is an important distinction when it comes to the court battle that will inevitably come after a deadly force situation.

The problem with ANY weapon is who has the intent and initiative? If you have a knife (sheathed) and I have a gun (holstered) and I decide to shoot you and you aren’t expecting it, I’m going to have the advantage because you are going to have to catch up with me (basic OODA stuff). If you already have a knife in your hand and are within 21’ of me and I decide to attack, you have the advantage of already being armed. Id be willing to bet that if you had a knife in your pocket and I had my G27 in a good holster, with my jacket on and unzipped and I was AWARE of you as a threat, I could beat you to it. If you had the knife ready in your hand, it would be a different story. This all cycles back to; tactics, awareness, conditioning, mindset and preparedness being more important than weapons, techniques or styles of martial arts.

The bottom line is that if you are LEGALLY JUSTIFIED in using deadly force it really dosent matter if you use a rock, knife, gun, rocket launcher or tac-nuke to the penal law sid of the house. The civil law side can be a different story.

 

[MJS]

The way I see it, if the knife was a "superior" weapon, Id have one on my duty belt instead of a Glock… The "problem" with the gun is improper training and a belief that having a gun means you only need to train marksmanship skills and no unarmed ones. If incorporated into a good CQB system the gun is as effective close up as a knife.

The key word here is on your duty belt. And that was just my point. As I said before, you only see LEO with guns exposed, not your average everyday citizen. As for a good CQB system...and thats my point exactly. How many "Average" people do you see doing that? Now, compare that number to a LEO. As for it being effective up close---you still have to be aiming it at the person for it to be effective. The knife can cut you regardless of how its held.

The knife is an offensive weapon by nature, you have to make contact, slash and stab to make it work. The gun can be used defensively by gaining distance, getting cover and using the range advantage to deliver force when necessary but still be a creditable threat at range. The important thing for the operator to learn is to survive the contact range fight, gain distance and get cover. This is an important distinction when it comes to the court battle that will inevitably come after a deadly force situation.

Sure the gun has a huge advantage due to the fact that it has that reach advantage. The problem is getting that distance.

The problem with ANY weapon is who has the intent and initiative? If you have a knife (sheathed) and I have a gun (holstered) and I decide to shoot you and you aren’t expecting it, I’m going to have the advantage because you are going to have to catch up with me (basic OODA stuff). If you already have a knife in your hand and are within 21’ of me and I decide to attack, you have the advantage of already being armed. Id be willing to bet that if you had a knife in your pocket and I had my G27 in a good holster, with my jacket on and unzipped and I was AWARE of you as a threat, I could beat you to it. If you had the knife ready in your hand, it would be a different story. This all cycles back to; tactics, awareness, conditioning, mindset and preparedness being more important than weapons, techniques or styles of martial arts.

You mention having your jacket unzipped. I'm sure in this case you're referring to the LEO role. But what about the "Average" citizen? Goes back to that concealment thing again. There was a video out. If I remember the name correctly it was 'Surviving edged weapons.' Pretty much geared to the LEO, but it showed how quickly the guy with the knife could close on the guy armed with the gun. Having that distance is an important factor. Unfortunately, its not always an option.

The bottom line is that if you are LEGALLY JUSTIFIED in using deadly force it really dosent matter if you use a rock, knife, gun, rocket launcher or tac-nuke to the penal law sid of the house. The civil law side can be a different story.

Good point. However, just because the LEO has a gun, it doesnt make it ok for them to use it in every situation. Considering that there are other options, such as mace, baton, and less lethal weapons such a a taser, pepperball gun and bean bag gun, even the LEO has to be more aware of what they do in a situation.

Mike

 

[Tgace]

The key word here is on your duty belt. And that was just my point. As I said before, you only see LEO with guns exposed, not your average everyday citizen. As for a good CQB system...and thats my point exactly. How many "Average" people do you see doing that? Now, compare that number to a LEO. As for it being effective up close---you still have to be aiming it at the person for it to be effective. The knife can cut you regardless of how its held.

Yes, but with a knife you HAVE to get up close. While many LEO shootings occur up close its because we have to get up close to talk with, apprehend and/or search people. When I am aware of a person as an armed threat, Im at a distance behind cover.

Sure the gun has a huge advantage due to the fact that it has that reach advantage. The problem is getting that distance.

Yes,thats why the gun should be viewed as a tool like any other, it should be incorporated into a fighting "system", but if you cant get distance, you should be aware of placing obstacles between you and your threat...cars, trees, fences, tables etc.

You mention having your jacket unzipped. I'm sure in this case you're referring to the LEO role. But what about the "Average" citizen? Goes back to that concealment thing again. There was a video out. If I remember the name correctly it was 'Surviving edged weapons.' Pretty much geared to the LEO, but it showed how quickly the guy with the knife could close on the guy armed with the gun. Having that distance is an important factor. Unfortunately, its not always an option.

No, I mean in a civillian mode...with my Glock in its fobus holster, with my street jacket over it, unzipped, aware of you as a threat and you with a weapon concealed somewhere. And in that movie...they show Dan Innosanto hacking up cops in a scenario. I say that the cops were either: a.set up for failure and/or b. incorporating bad tactics. I believe the scenario was a suspicious man in a closed building. The cops approached close to talk with the suspect and got whacked. Now either a. the scenario wasnt explained clearly (i.e.this is a burglar...theres a forced door... theres a stolen car out front....etc.) or b.the cops used poor tactics in this scenario by entering a possible burglary in progress call alone and trying to interview the suspect. Its an example of tactics being important, not the superiority of a weapon or style.

Another gun/knife aspect is the agressiveness,speed and strength issues required in a knife attack, not everybody has the qualities to pull it off. Almost everybody can pull a trigger. If you were being attacked by a person with ANY weapon and you didnt have a weapon already in your hand you are going to get struck before you can get to it...its not about weapons, its about OODA loop. If I get killed by a knifer, its not because the knife was "better" than my gun. If I had a knife too would I have had a better chance??? I dont think so. (Awareness, mindset, conditioning, tactics, weapon skills)

Good point. However, just because the LEO has a gun, it doesnt make it ok for them to use it in every situation. Considering that there are other options, such as mace, baton, and less lethal weapons such a a taser, pepperball gun and bean bag gun, even the LEO has to be more aware of what they do in a situation.
Mike

Im not clear on your point here... I never said they did. But LEO's need these tools because we have to apprehend people as a part of the job. Civillians should be focused on survival and escape.

 

[loki09789]

My take on your position is that you are more critical of the responsibility and quality of gun training more than the weapon itself.

Again, I don't care what other people do in training, and I don't care about the comparison between the 'gun community' vs the 'knife community' because I think that it doesn't really exist.

I do know how I train, and I would train with a pistol using the same principles and goals as I would with any other weapon.

Let'st just compare weapons based on range, both in the hands of a well trained effectively developed, and responsible user:

At grappling range, if there is no time for deployment, both weapons become a liabilty, because now the issue of weapon retention comes into play. You will have to devote some of your fighting assests to preotecting/retaining the weapon. BUT, if the knife is deployed at grappling range, the threat of hurting yourself is higher than with a gun simply because of the grip control of a pistol over a knife. Both weapons can be used to hit, but the damage of a knife at this range will not "STOP" the attacker as quicly as the damage caused by the pistol, I am talking complete range of possibility here NOT the stopping power of cal. or the opponents ability to fight on. Side by side, the gun has more potential stopping power than a knife will ever have.

Working out the max effective range, the knife - as an effective fighting weapon - stops at physcial contact range. The pistol continues to be effective at farther ranges, thus allowing the user to have more time and distance.

Your point about what you have seen is different from what is possible for realistic, solid SD pistol training.

Your question about if I would use a knife to defend my family or loved ones, He** yes, but if there were a choice between gun or knife, which would you choose? What would you tell to a 5' petite woman if she asked you which weapon was the best choice for her? I would say gun.

Any weapon has to be part of a total SD system. Students are responsible for their training, and there are crappy students in any school. But, weapon vs weapon comparison only, the gun wins for me.

 

[MJS]

Yes, but with a knife you HAVE to get up close. While many LEO shootings occur up close its because we have to get up close to talk with, apprehend and/or search people. When I am aware of a person as an armed threat, Im at a distance behind cover.

True. But how can you tell if the suspect is going to be armed?

Yes,thats why the gun should be viewed as a tool like any other, it should be incorporated into a fighting "system", but if you cant get distance, you should be aware of placing obstacles between you and your threat...cars, trees, fences, tables etc.

Good point!

No, I mean in a civillian mode...with my Glock in its fobus holster, with my street jacket over it, unzipped, aware of you as a threat and you with a weapon concealed somewhere. And in that movie...they show Dan Innosanto hacking up cops in a scenario. I say that the cops were either: a.set up for failure and/or b. incorporating bad tactics. I believe the scenario was a suspicious man in a closed building. The cops approached close to talk with the suspect and got whacked. Now either a. the scenario wasnt explained clearly (i.e.this is a burglar...theres a forced door... theres a stolen car out front....etc.) or b.the cops used poor tactics in this scenario by entering a possible burglary in progress call alone and trying to interview the suspect. Its an example of tactics being important, not the superiority of a weapon or style.

Well, I'm not sure of the quality of the movie..I didnt script it, I just watched it. IMO, the point that they were showing is that the gun with the knife closed the distance at a quicker pace. The suspect was advancing forward, which in turn gave the LEO one more thing to do in addition to taking out the gun, aiming on that moving target and finally shooting.

Another gun/knife aspect is the agressiveness,speed and strength issues required in a knife attack, not everybody has the qualities to pull it off. Almost everybody can pull a trigger.

I agree to a point. In the movie, it was showing a guy (Inosanto) who has exceptional knife training. I dont think though that you need to be on his level to use a knife effectively. Even if you watch prison movies...and yeah, its still a movie, but the idea is still there. Its amazing as to how quick these guys can take someone out with a shank.

Im not clear on your point here... I never said they did. But LEO's need these tools because we have to apprehend people as a part of the job. Civillians should be focused on survival and escape.

My point was on the part where you said Legally Justified. I realize that a gun is part of the package with a LEO. However, the rules dont change for them. They still have to be legally justified in using that gun just like a civilian would. I'm sure that after countless wrongfull shootings, that would be the reason for the less lethal weapons that many depts. use today.

Mike