Accuracy Standards In Firearms Training

An accuracy standard is paramount during firearms training and qualification. However, we must ask if these standards adequately prepare officers to succeed in deadly force encounters.

A qualification course is scripted with many knowns, while a deadly force encounter is an unscripted affair with many unknowns. Passing a qualification course does not ensure success in a gunfight. Qualifications have a set number of rounds with known time standards. Officers can memorize these fire courses. Generous scoring areas encourage “tricks” to gain hits.

What are the differences between Qualifications and Deadly Force events?

Target/Threat Size

Qualifications:

With their large scoring areas, it is possible to fail with several fundamentals and still hit an acceptable area. So, in an officer’s mind, they are shooting correctly. Additionally, most of these are two-dimensional, full-frontal targets.

Deadly Force Encounter:

The threat (s) do not want to be shot. They may change orientation, shape, and size, making themselves harder to hit. This can happen multiple times during an event, forcing the officer to adjust how they see and use their sights.

 

What it will take

Qualifications:

These have a set round count. Officers may be required to load their firearms in a certain manner.  As a result, after firing those rounds, the officers know they are done.

Deadly Force Encounters: 

How many rounds?  No one knows.  I know of one OIS where the officer shot and missed. The officer was successful because the bad guy gave up. There have also been events where one party took numerous hits and kept fighting.

Movement

Qualifications:

The target will be in the same place at a set height the entire time.  They will not react to the officer’s presence or hits.  Often, only a minimal amount of movement is required on the officer’s part.

Deadly Force encounters: 

The threat reacts to the officers’ presence. They will attempt to avoid being hurt, flee, or assault the officer.  Moving threats are harder to hit, and yet many agencies do not train on them. A stationary, full-size target doesn’t prepare officers for moving threats.

 

When to shoot

Qualification:

Officers know they will shoot when they step up the line.

Deadly Force Encounters:

Officers don’t know when an encounter will turn into an OIS.  As the situation develops, any contact can shift from no force to deadly force.

 

Number of Targets

Qualifications:

There is a set number of targets. Once a target has been shot, officers need not worry.

Deadly Force Encounters:

There can be multiple threats. Just because one is hit doesn’t mean it’s out of the fight. Also, they can cease being a non-threat during the confrontation.

How can we assist officers in being successful?

 

Improving Performance

The “fix” is not complicated.

Our emphasis should be on training, which should include higher accuracy standards. Officers will become accustomed to the higher level required. For example, when conducting a reloading drill, pay attention to shot placement before and after the reload. Discuss their performance with them.

 

Example of a Passing the Qualification

(Note: While the referenced course of fire has been modified, the accuracy issue is still there.)

The Course Of Fire

 

Florida used the B-21-E target for state qualifications for academy and in-service officers. There is a 4-inch circle in the center of the chest. The circle allows officers to strive for a higher accuracy standard. However, traditionally, the entire torso and head are scored. All hits on the torso count the same (the coattails do not score). On a human, not all hits are the same.

I shot the same course using a higher accuracy standard:

Then I shot the COF using more of the scoring area allowed by the state.

Regardless of who shot these targets, there would be no difference in how they scored/evaluated.  However, one is a more accurate shooter.

 

Solutions

So, what can be done?  Some agencies mandate a specific target for their qualification courses of fire.    Because of that, the target cannot be changed.  If this is the case, consider modifying the targets for your agency with a smaller scoring area and use them for training.

Offer an award or reward for those who achieve a certain number of hits inside the area.  Make it a requirement for members who want to go to specialized units (tactical teams).  If the agency’s order is large enough, I have found that target manufacturers will create or modify targets. For one manufacturer, it was 2000 targets. If your agency cannot meet those numbers, the instructor can modify the targets or create a smaller scoring zone. You can use adhesive targets or even adhesive shipping labels. These come in various sizes (4×4, 3×5, and 4×6) and can be applied to any target quickly.

I developed two targets that complement each other. One has 4″ and 8″ circles on the silhouette’s chest (picture 5), and the other has 3″ and 6″ circles (Photo 6).

Depending on the training being conducted, the instructor can choose between the smaller or larger circles. With a rifle, the distances can be adjusted. Shooters can adapt their speed to the size of the circles. Additionally, there are a variety of shapes around the edge of each target that can be used for various purposes.

Conclusion:

Training is where improvements in shooting ability can be accomplished without the stress of passing or failing during a qualification. Each instructor should examine their organization and develop accuracy standards to meet their needs and training goals. Once established, these standards should be evaluated and adjusted over time. Raising accuracy standards will increase an organization’s performance in training, qualifications, and on-the-street activities.

 

(Editor’s note: In this article, the author’s emphasis is strictly on accuracy concerns.)

Author’s Biography

Kevin N. Williams is a retired police officer with 28 years of service.  During that time, he was a patrol officer, mountain bike officer, airport officer, firearms instructor, and the Department Rangemaster.  Also, he has attended and continues to attend numerous training courses centering on firearms.  He participates in competition shooting, including ICORE, USPSA, ICORE, and carbine matches.  Kevin served on active duty in the Army in the 82nd Airborne Division as a platoon leader, attending Airborne, Ranger, and Jumpmaster schools.  After active duty, he served in the Florida Army National Guard in the 53^rd Infantry Brigade in staff positions as an Executive Officer and Company Commander.  In retirement, he has worked as an expert witness in firearms cases.