Last week I touched on leadership as it pertains to standards and the importance of maintaining them. When it comes to firearms, I would say that SWAT guys generally run their weapons better than the rank & file officers of the department. However, I sometimes see teams that are wrapped around the axle when it comes to a score and/or scoring rings.
As I write through this, bear in mind that this is meant to be a conversation, not a lecture from on high, so please don't beat me up for poor grammar or the order in which it comes out.
Qualification courses. Invariably when guys start talking about weapon proficiency they will attempt to quatify skill based on a score. If I told you I always shoot 100% with handgun and rifle, how impressive is that? Well it depends on what that 100% is. If the course of fire is a single round @ 3 feet in 10 minutes, shooting a 4'X8' piece of plywood, that ain't so impressive.
I am a proponent of a scored qualification with set time frames for different drills. I believe that this allows me to evaluate potential training needs. However the qualification course should be changed frequently (You decide) so that training isn't geared to the course. If guys are only training to pass or max the course, are they really pushing themselves to get better?
As an example, take your current qualification course and without telling anyone, mix up the stages of fire. Same course, but make the last thing they normally shoot be the first, the stuff in the middle goes to the end, etc. Tell your shooters that you have developed a new course that you want make the qualification course. Tell them it's alot harder. Have them shoot it and then solicit feedback. My guess, and indeed my experience doing this, is that the shooters will tell you it's more difficult and in fact their scores will be lower than normal.
My opinion is that officers who have shot the same course of fire over & over have been trained to pass a course. When the circumstances are different or unexpected, their true proficiency will come out. I watch officers perform Tap-Rack and reload drills like champs when they know it's coming, how do they perform when they get the unexpected malfunction. How fast are they on a speed reload when they know it's coming versus when they don't? The qual. course is a measure, but it should not be the standard.
This requires more work and effort on the part of the instructor, but hell, peoples lives are the only thing at stake. Maybe a little extra work on your part is the least you can do. When I teach my rifle instructor course, I have the guys shoot a qualification course. I generally do not tell them what their score was. The course is a measure for me to determine if they are performing at a minimal level. I run them through a bunch of timed drills and stress drills that are designed to take them out of their comfort zone. These drills will make you shoot faster and operate the gun faster than most guys have done in the past. The point is to make them push themselves to the extreme. Once that is known, they can slow down and make better hits. Once the hits are better it is time to push again. This is a never ending cycle because EVERYONE should be pushing themselves to get better, not meet a predetermined MINIMUM standard.
Instructors have the responsibility to prepare students for combat, I have yet to see or hear about an officer involved shooting that mimicked a range qualification. The ultimate qualification will come from a trained sociopath, are you and/or your students ready?
As always, feel free to e-mail me with your comments and questions. Be good, to be safe.
