Beyond Accuracy — Improving Officer Performance

This article is an un-planned follow-up to last week’s piece on [a way] to increase accuracy standards in training – by shrinking the available scoring area.

Regardless of what I might think about social media in its current state, some beneficial discussions are occurring in that space. Several of them can address concerns about law enforcement training. Some are humorous, while others can get nasty in terms of targeting. Regardless, they aim to improve officer training while enhancing the performance of those officers when they must use deadly force against another human being.

 

No Cop Left Behind

To the best of my knowledge, retired Texas cop Wayne Dobbs—currently the western U.S. law enforcement representative for Aimpoint USA—coined that phrase. Unfortunately, it accurately describes the state of training in many parts of our country.

How?

Targets that have scoring areas that are far too large. Times that are so overly generous, allowing even the ineptest to “pass.” Static training plans that lack even minimal movement off a line of attack – never mind using cover.

This also applies to defensive tactics (or arrest and control), but that is a topic for another time and writer.

How We Got Here

By its very nature, the police world is a para-military environment. No, I don’t buy into the phrase “the militarization of policing.” However, our uniforms, organization, and training – especially firearms training – all have very direct ties to what was historically done in the military.

For safety and control reasons, we have laid out our ranges in a linear fashion. The targets must be on the same line, and no shooter can be ahead or behind them.

What Can We Do

One of the areas I will give to the POST (Peace Officers Standards & Training) training in my old state is emergency vehicle operations (EVOC). The material and the tasks have radically evolved over the last several years. The SMEs in that field looked at what was happening in the field – on the highways, the roads, and the streets. Where were cops having issues? How and why were we crashing cars? With that information, they developed courses that addressed those concerns.

It turned out many of our crashes happened during very low-speed driving—maneuvering in narrow, tight confines. So, the involved instructors developed slow-speed courses that required you to move the patrol vehicle (car or SUV) into and out of narrow spaces, driving both forward and backward while turning oneself to see out the rear window and using the mirrors—when appropriate.

They have also included exercises that simulate pursuit driving. The last time I had to attend driver’s training, the culmination exercise was a multiple-vehicle pursuit. That pursuit included the suspect vehicle we were chasing as well as at least one clueless yet uninvolved motorist. Physically, the course included straightaways and turns, switchbacks, stop lights and signs, and many of the other impediments found on the road.

Back to the range

Stationary, static shooting has a place. That place is working on the foundational skills one needs – gripping the firearm, bringing it into action from the ready or the holster, employing the sights, manipulating the trigger, and keeping the firearm in action – whether one is clearing a stoppage or reloading it. Once the mechanics have been taught or refreshed, should we be taking a much closer look at the practical application side?

Closed versus Open Loops

Rather than conducting sustainment training in pre-planned chunks, maybe we should find ways for our students to apply skills they’ve learned to solve unexpected problems. For example, usually, we tell them to set up a stoppage and have them practice clearing it. What if a classmate randomly loaded dummy rounds into their magazines? Not only would they have to address an unplanned stoppage of the weapon, but how they handle trigger control and pre-ignition issues can also be evaluated.

Analyzing

With the amount of body-worn and dash camera footage as well as surveillance video, “we” are getting a pretty good idea of what is going on during law enforcement encounters. Does that footage depict events taking place in ways that are similar to what we are doing on the range? If not, are we adjusting our training so that it is more consistent with what is happening?

What has been recorded by the camera in your agency’s events? Others nearby? Or if your area does not have many of these events, what can you determine is commonly occurring elsewhere?

Can the training be adjusted to drive the outcomes we would like to see? Officers making use of cover – by having cover available on the range so they will move to it? A shooter creating distance while delivering accurate fire in a short period of time? Or a cop breaking contact and getting to a more advantageous position by moving away and then posting at that spot to deliver accurate fire? Even something as simple as making them drop whatever they are holding if it won’t help them win the gunfight, like a cell phone or pen and notebook.

Implementation

Rather than trying to recreate an entire event, take it in pieces. Work on the skills, then make it a drill. Start with the stoppage, then add in the movement away, next address moving into a position of advantage, before finally, how to deliver accurate hits quickly. As those chunks are better engrained, your students can put them all together.

 

Once the skills are present, plenty of readily available practical shooting competition stages can be adapted to or used as a template for these drills.

Final Thoughts

Yes, we need to continue to improve accuracy. However, we also need to prepare our students to perform in these events by improving shot placement when movement is involved and increasing their awareness of the suspect’s actions and environment. Performance is more than just speed; it is about producing better outcomes.