Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How gunfighters aim

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How gunfighters aim

    I read an interesting article written by the Force Science Research Center. It was a study done tracking the eye's movement during a simulated gunfight (simunitions training).

    Here is the pertinent information:

    Somewhere across their training, practice, and experience, the successful ERT officers had learned what essentially is a reverse process: Their immediate and predominate focus is on the weapon carried by their attacker. With their gaze concentrated there, they bring their gun up to their line of sight and catch their sights only in their peripheral vision, a subtle "sight glimpse," as Lewinski terms it. "They have an unconscious kinesthetic sense to know that their gun is up and positioned properly," he says. "This is a focus strategy that Olympic shooters use," says Vickers, "and it is simpler, faster, and more effective."


    Here is the full text:

    Major new study: How your eyes can cast your fate in a gunfight
    Part 1 of a 2-part series

    A major new study by the Force Science Research Center for the first time has identified exactly how the "gaze patterns" of officers who are likely to win gunfights differ from those who are likely to lose them.

    Winners, it is revealed, tend to anticipate an emerging threat sooner, shoot to stop it faster and more accurately, and make fewer errors in judgment because of the unique way in which they watch a potential attacker's body as a deadly confrontation unfolds.

    A key finding: Those who win lethal assaults do so, in part, because they achieve target acquisition with their firearm in a way that is directly opposite of how most officers are trained.

    "This unique study shows that winning a gunfight involves more than just issues of action and reaction times," FSRC's executive director Dr. Bill Lewinski told Force Science News. "Where an officer is looking during an encounter, what kind of information he is picking up, and how he is processing it are also vitally important. An effective gaze control strategy can help officers minimize or defeat the action/reaction advantage that the suspect might otherwise have.

    "In short, an officer's performance can be impaired or enhanced by where his eyes and attention are focused in the midst of a deadly encounter."

    What the new study discovered about that phenomenon, Lewinski says, could have significant repercussions on law enforcement firearms training.

    The study was conducted by Lewinski and Dr. Joan Vickers of Canada's University of Calgary, a renowned researcher of the relationship between eye movement and athletic performance. They recently presented the first detailed report of their findings at the prestigious International Conference on Spatial Cognition in Rome.

    Their full paper, "Gaze Control and Shooting Performance of Elite and Rookie Police Officers During a Force-on-Force Encounter," will be posted on the Force Science website once it has been published in an academic journal. Meanwhile, FSN's 2-part series is the first disclosure to the international law enforcement community about the study's surprising practical discoveries.

    FORCE-ON-FORCE SET-UP.

    Field work for the research was conducted a year ago in the United Kingdom with the help of 24 police volunteers. Eleven were highly experienced, male veterans of an Emergency Response Team (ERT), seasoned in fighting terrorists among other assignments, with a median age of nearly 39. The rest were younger rookies (median age just over 30), 7 of them female, who had completed their pre-service firearms and simulation training and were considered "ready for the street." Both groups predominately were right-eye shooters.

    The research scenario, designed by Lewinski, was based on an actual incident. One at a time the volunteers were armed with a holstered Glock pistol fitted to fire a single Simunition cartridge and told they were on duty to "provide security" at an embassy office where intelligence had indicated an armed encounter would occur that day.

    About 20 feet in front of the officer being tested was a receptionist at a desk. Presently an adult male, playing the role of a civilian tourist, entered the room and engaged the receptionist in conversation regarding a problem with his passport, keeping his back to the subject officer.

    Initially the exchange was polite but as the receptionist proved not to be helpful the man became increasingly agitated. About 3 seconds before the end of the 1-minute scenario, his voice started to rise and he began cursing and slapping the table. Suddenly, in an explosion of rage, he yanked an object from under his coat and pivoted quickly.

    In most instances, the object was a handgun and he fired at the officer. But randomly he spun around only with a cell phone. The volunteers were not advised in advance of this "catch" switch. They were told only that they should "handle the threat" appropriately, using their handgun.

    "The suspect's dynamic turning and shooting unfolded very rapidly," Lewinski says, "and presented quite a challenge for any officer. We wanted to detect the clearest demonstration of operational differences, and that's why groups of the best and the least experienced officers were chosen."

    Each volunteer went through the scenario 7 times. According to the researchers, no significant change was noticed in their reactions with repetition.

    SOPHISTICATED MONITORING.

    During the scenario, each officer wore a light-weight, head-mounted apparatus with 2 sophisticated and highly sensitive computer-interactive components: 1) a small video camera that filmed the scene being played out in front of the officer from the officer's perspective, and 2) a mobile monocular "eye tracker" that used reflection off of the officer's cornea to precisely document his line of sight.

    Just where the officer's gaze was directed at any given split-second was overlaid on the digital image the camera was recording, in the form of a small red circle. In other words, exactly where the officer was looking, when he was looking there, in what sequence, and for how long were all captured in a continuous, time-coded format that allowed every location of his gaze to be noted and analyzed later.

    A separate video camera was placed in the room to photograph each officer frontally from head to toe as he experienced and reacted to the role-playing. These images were later synced with those from the headgear. (The data collection system, developed by Vickers, is called the vision-in-action method. Samples of the recordings will be posted on the Force Science website when the academic paper is posted. For more information, see Vickers' book, Perception, Cognition and Decision Training: The Quiet Eye in Action.)

    Keeping the scenario consistent across all officers, of course, was critical for comparison purposes. So the receptionist (played by FSRC executive Patricia Thiem) and the suspect (played by Lt. Lee Edwards of the Minneapolis PD) worked extensively with an acting coach, who trained them to maintain the same timing and mannerisms across repeated performances.

    The field recordings took 2 full weeks to complete; the subsequent analysis took months. Here are the most significant findings:

    SHOOTING PERFORMANCE.

    The ERT officers, considered the elite shooters in the study, strongly out-performed the rookies.

    • First of all, the ERT spent significantly less time assessing the situation before drawing their gun. On whole, they drew "well before the assailant began his pivot," Vickers reports. Most drew early and "held [their gun] at chest level before aiming." The rookies tended to delay drawing until about a second after his turn.

    • The ERT shot before the assailant got his round off 92.5% of the time, beating him by an average of nearly 180 milliseconds (ms). The rookies shot first only about 42% of the time and on average lagged behind the attacker by more than 13 ms. Responding "very poorly," the study says, the rookies essentially "reacted to his attack, rather than being ahead of him as were the ERT during every phase of the encounter."

    • The ERT hit the assailant nearly 75% of the time, compared to about 54%--"slightly more than chance"--for the recently trained rookies. ERT hits were in the upper torso (center mass) 62% of the time, versus about 48% for the rookies.

    • In more than 60% of their trials, rookies fired when the assailant brandished a cell phone instead of a gun, compared to only about 18% for the ERT.

    GAZE PATTERNS.

    Anyone would expect highly experienced elites to shoot better than rank novices, but what's impressive is the relationship that gaze and focus appeared to have to performance.

    As part of their meticulous analysis of where the test subjects were looking during the last critical 7 seconds of the scenario, the researchers tabulated 2 important factors: fixations (when an officer's gaze was stable on an object or location within a 3-degree visual angle for 100 ms or longer) and saccades (when the eyes moved rapidly from 1 fixed location to another for at least 66.66 ms).

    Among their discoveries, these are considered most meaningful:

    • The ERT officers tended to use fixations of only short duration early in the encounter, during their initial assessment and as the suspect began to pivot toward them. Then they used longer-duration fixations as they aimed and fired. "They needed less time to 'read' critical cues" and acquire external feedback information that "allowed them to prepare their shooting movements in advance and prevail over the assailant," the researchers explain. Thus the ERT "were ahead of the assailant in terms of their motor phases and gaze control across all phases of the encounter."

    • "The rookies used an opposite strategy and had long-duration fixations at the outset and shorter durations as they aimed and fired." In effect, "the rookies were behind" the suspect's actions and were "caught by surprise." They "used a reactive strategy where they acquired information at the last moment, which was inadequate both in terms of its content and timing for the extreme demands of the encounter."

    • "The ERT had a higher frequency of fixations than the rookies in all phases [of the scenario] except the aim/fire phase, when the ERT had fewer fixations to fewer locations than the rookies, indicative of greater focus and concentration as they aimed and fired."

    • The ERT increasingly directed their attention to the suspect's gun hand/arm as the scenario evolved. "They increased the percent of fixations to this location from 21% in the assessment and early pivot phases to 71% during the final 2 seconds. On hits, the ERT directed 86% of their final fixations to this one location, revealing a remarkable degree of focus and concentration under fire." And, the study explains, they had time for a final, undisturbed period of super-concentration that Vicker's calls "the quiet eye," which has been linked with high performance across many different genres of athletics. In this, their eye remained settled on a defined target location through trigger pull.

    • "The rookies did not show the same funneling of their attention to the assailant's gun hand/arm," the study points out. Early on, similar to the ERT, they concentrated a minority of their fixations there. But at the time the suspect aimed and fired, only 33% of the rookies' fixations were directed there, a modest and inadequate increase. And whatever quiet-eye time they exhibited was significantly lower.

    TELL-TALE SACCADE.

    Perhaps most startling, the officers' last abrupt shift of gaze before firing was found to be radically different between the 2 groups.

    • The rookie's final saccade, especially among those who missed when they fired, "occurred at the same time they tried to fixate the target and aim," the study reveals. At that critical moment in the last 500 ms, the rookies in a staggering 82% of their tests took their eyes off the assailant and attempted to look at their own gun, trying to find or confirm sight alignment as they aimed. "This pulled them out of the gunfight for what turned out to be a significant period of time," Lewinski says. Vickers adds: "On a high percentage of their shots, the rookies did not see the assailant as they fired," contributing to inaccurate shooting and the misjudgment of the cell phone as a threat.

    • About 30% of the ERT also looked at their gun, but their timing was different. Most of those gaze-shifts occurred before the officers aimed, "followed by the onset of their aim and fixation on the target and firing."

    FLAWED TRAINING?

    The researchers pose the possibility that the rookies' training may have contributed to their poor performance. They were taught pistolcraft "similar to how most police officers first learn to shoot a handgun: to focus first on the rear sight, then on the front sight, and finally on the target, aligning all 3 before pulling the trigger."

    "This is a very time-consuming process and one that was not successful in this study," Vickers says.

    Somewhere across their training, practice, and experience, the successful ERT officers had learned what essentially is a reverse process: Their immediate and predominate focus is on the weapon carried by their attacker. With their gaze concentrated there, they bring their gun up to their line of sight and catch their sights only in their peripheral vision, a subtle "sight glimpse," as Lewinski terms it. "They have an unconscious kinesthetic sense to know that their gun is up and positioned properly," he says. "This is a focus strategy that Olympic shooters use," says Vickers, "and it is simpler, faster, and more effective."

    As the assailant's actual attack got underway, the elite officers were zeroed in on a "weapons focus." That is, the ERT officers' "fixations were not directed to the assailant's centre of mass as he pivoted and fired, but to the weapon itself, which he held away from his body until the moment he fired. The ERT tracked the weapon as soon as it was visible, using a series of fixations. Because he was moving rapidly, it was only during the last few milliseconds that his centre mass presented a viable target."

    "This intense attentiveness to the weapon can have memory implications later on," Lewinski explains. "Now we have an empirical study showing why an officer who survives a gunfight may be unable to identify a perpetrator's face or recall other important details proximate to the shooting, such as the body position or turning action of the subject."

    Now that the study has documented important ways in which expert shooters behave, how can trainers best convey these elite skills to other officers? "FSRC plans to do more work with Dr. Vickers to identify answers to that question," Lewinski says. "But already, these findings suggest some important changes that will point us in the right direction."

    NOTE: The gaze pattern study was funded jointly by the National Police Federation of England and Wales and the Force Science Research Center.
    J. Wise

    AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

    "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

    Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

    sigpic

  • #2
    Very interesting study. Thanks for sharing.

    Comment


    • #3
      I find the description of the ERT guys to be similar to the way I aim. Eyes on target, gun comes up to my line of sight, peripheral vision picks up my sights and I fire.

      When I am out of practice, or I am taking a very long shot, I actually focus on and align my sights. Otherwise, the sights are just in my peripheral vision.
      J. Wise

      AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

      "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

      Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        A great drill to emulate this is to put a piece of black electrical tape on the rear sight of your handgun. Then do some close up shooting drills until your muscle memory has you putting all your shots on target using only your front sight. Take the tape off then do some high stress drills and moving & shooting drills. You will hit center of mass shots with a higher consistency and build your confidence. I don’t remember the name of this training, but I thought it was the next best thing after simunition training. Plus it builds a better platform for sims training and real life encounters.
        Last edited by Curly Bill; 10-10-2009, 01:53 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Good article. Pretty much a scientific approach at validating what is known and taught in quality combat shooting communities.

          We of course would expect some large differences in the way in which a new Officer might react to a stimulus as opposed to a seasoned and highly trained Officer. This comes down to several factors such as training, experience, and a willingness to draw a weapon. Many new Officers are more reluctant to even unholster their weapon. Then take into account that the more training one receives at any activity, the better we become at performing the act. We can train individuals what to look for, and how to assess and even how to combat shoot. However, training opportunity may be limited, and lets face it, some perform certain skills better than others. ERT / SWAT guys are generally picked because they already exhibit favorable skills / abilities and are usually seasoned officers already possessing much more training than a newer Officer. SWAT Officers are also generally allotted more time to train, and often in more realistic force on force, 360* environments. The great amount of repetition in force on force scenario's conditions the mind and response. The more you do, the better you become. Especially if there is a pain reinforced response (SIMS), to a less than stellar performance.

          The biggest thing we need to consider for the human response is how our reptile brain reacts under stress. The fight or flight response has many components. Even if we decide to fight, the reptile brain has already taken over and our human nature picked fight response, may not be the best response for that situation. In order to condition the reptile brain type of response, we need to first know it exists and is happening to us in the moment, then we need to rely on our trained mind to come up with a well trained and conditioned response. This may also combine with what may be considered instinct which varies amongst individuals. Very few can naturally fight the reptile brain response, but training can very much help. This is also what I believe the study calls the "quiet eye". It is a response that fights our natural reptile brain instincts, and allows us to better focus and respond in a much more favorable manner. Some might call it Zen.

          Of course we first need to learn the basic fundamentals to marksmanship, and often times initial training that Officers receive before hitting the streets is not too far ahead of that. Basically I would expect no different results from this study, but I do find the technical side of it interesting as it is right up my "lane" so to speak.

          Originally posted by jwise View Post
          I find the description of the ERT guys to be similar to the way I aim. Eyes on target, gun comes up to my line of sight, peripheral vision picks up my sights and I fire.

          When I am out of practice, or I am taking a very long shot, I actually focus on and align my sights. Otherwise, the sights are just in my peripheral vision.
          A good tactical shooting, or combat shooting style trainer, would wish to see a shooter gravitate to this type of shooting process. You may often see a highly skilled natural shooter, who has the ability to practice a lot, naturally progress to this or a similar style on their own. Some will gravitate to a true natural point shooting style.

          However training should progress from the basic marksmanship fundamentals, towards what is often referred to as "flash front sight" shooting, then you can often see the level of a true point shoot. However we always wish to stress at least catching a glimpse of the front sight covering the target (high center mass preferred of course). However there are those who gravitate to a true point shoot, with amazing accuracy and repeatability and this needs to be encouraged.

          We try to train a repeatable and consistent extension / grip / stance, which over time becomes a natural point of aim on a target, even in a dynamic situation. Basically being able to punch the weapon out and be on target in a CQB distance, each and every time without the use of a true sight alignment, or just catching a glimpse of the front sight as the pistol is brought up into the shooters line of sight. Bringing the weapon up to your head and not bringing your head down to the weapon. This causes a more repeatable point of aim, each time.

          When a shootable threat has registered, advanced combat shooters will be taking out the slack of the trigger (weapon dependant) as the weapon begins its punch forward. Often times, extremely accurate hits (7 yards or so) are easily accomplished prior to full extension and often times, without the use of either sight. The more straight the punch out, the better for accuracy and the sooner you can acquire a flash front sight. The more the weapon has to be raised or bowled upward, accuracy decreases and the longer it takes to acquire a flash sight picture. High draw and straight punch out.

          Good stuff, thanks for sharing.
          Last edited by Surf; 10-10-2009, 06:36 PM.
          The comments made herein are those solely of author and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency or other entity.

          Surfs Up on youtube!

          Specialized Services Group on Facebook!

          Comment


          • #6
            I find the data interesting, not surprising though. I've always believed in point shooting, and it was touched on during our firearms training, but is definitely something that is left to each officer to learn and practice on their own. I really think this can be accomplished best in an open range environment, where you aren't limited to lanes with big dividers on either side of you, which is a fantastic way to incorporate moving to cover as you're engaging your target as opposed to standing between the dividers, these are muscle and stress memory items that probably can't be learned any other way.

            I do feel there's one flaw with this scenario though. When you grab your sim gun, and put your face mask on, and everyone else has facemasks on, you are planning on shooting. I feel that the ERT officers having their weapons drawn and at low ready before the pivot is more likely due to the training environment as opposed to perceived lethal threat at that particular time.
            Last edited by FiremanMike; 10-10-2009, 07:43 PM.
            Seriously, the only reason I wanted to be a cop was so I could post anywhere on this forum.

            Comment


            • #7
              I feel that the ERT officers having their weapons drawn and at low ready before the pivot is more likely due to the training environment as opposed to perceived lethal threat at that particular time.
              I admit to making approaches on a traffic stop with my weapon drawn, held behind my trailing leg. My department was not anal about drawing weapons, unlike others that I have heard of, who require use of force memos every time they clear leather!
              J. Wise

              AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

              "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

              Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                Would be interesting to hear your opinions on how this speaks to the use of lasers.

                The ERT guys, with years of experience and muscle memory, could raise their weapon and have the sight alignment necessary for an accurate shot. Their hands and arms knew where to position the pistol so that the front and rear sights aligned properly without looking down at the weapon.

                Using a laser could be a great set of training wheels for people without that muscle memory. They allow the user to focus hard on the target and still, in their peripheral vision, have an instant apprehension of where their weapon was pointed.
                **Not a LEO**

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jwise View Post
                  I admit to making approaches on a traffic stop with my weapon drawn, held behind my trailing leg. My department was not anal about drawing weapons, unlike others that I have heard of, who require use of force memos every time they clear leather!
                  Oh, sure I have too and I'm not against that. What I'm saying is these officers had their weapons drawn and at low ready (per the article description) based on a verbal fight between two unknown parties, that part just seems a bit unrealistic, but maybe the actors were trained to give obvious and subtle visual cues that they were armed..

                  Originally posted by TimK View Post
                  Would be interesting to hear your opinions on how this speaks to the use of lasers.

                  The ERT guys, with years of experience and muscle memory, could raise their weapon and have the sight alignment necessary for an accurate shot. Their hands and arms knew where to position the pistol so that the front and rear sights aligned properly without looking down at the weapon.

                  Using a laser could be a great set of training wheels for people without that muscle memory. They allow the user to focus hard on the target and still, in their peripheral vision, have an instant apprehension of where their weapon was pointed.
                  When I bought my weapon light a few months ago, I could have afforded a laser/light combo but decided against it. The first reason is I'm a practiced point shooter. I'm not an expert by any means, but I feel comfortable and I put my shots on target with it. I didn't want to find myself become dependant on a laser, only to lose out on my shooting skills and be in trouble when the SHTF and my laser is down.
                  Seriously, the only reason I wanted to be a cop was so I could post anywhere on this forum.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by FiremanMike View Post
                    I do feel there's one flaw with this scenario though. When you grab your sim gun, and put your face mask on, and everyone else has facemasks on, you are planning on shooting. I feel that the ERT officers having their weapons drawn and at low ready before the pivot is more likely due to the training environment as opposed to perceived lethal threat at that particular time.
                    This is the biggest problem with SIMS. Guys do tend to react a bit differently as they are expecting a gunfight. We heavily use SIMS and often times for training we may "SIMS" guys up and not necessarily do any shoot scenario's the entire day. We try to keep em honest.

                    Originally posted by TimK View Post
                    Would be interesting to hear your opinions on how this speaks to the use of lasers.

                    The ERT guys, with years of experience and muscle memory, could raise their weapon and have the sight alignment necessary for an accurate shot. Their hands and arms knew where to position the pistol so that the front and rear sights aligned properly without looking down at the weapon.

                    Using a laser could be a great set of training wheels for people without that muscle memory. They allow the user to focus hard on the target and still, in their peripheral vision, have an instant apprehension of where their weapon was pointed.
                    What follows is only my opinion.

                    Just to be clear, I am not a fan of lasers as a teaching aid. I also believe that their use has very limited applications, but certain applications are a benefit. However, I will avoid discussing any possible pro's and con's to their practical use. I will say that I only feel that they should be used by those who have mastered the fundamentals, and then only in a limited practical application.

                    As for a teaching aid, the laser tends to ingrain the wrong habits. You start to teach a shooter to look for and rely on a red dot, which is invariably slower than a progression to a flash front sight type of shooting. I truly believe to do a shooter justice, they learn proper basic marksmanship fundamentals, which apply to all weapons systems, then progress them into advanced shooting and eventually combat shooting. Don't think that the use of a laser will magically give someone good muscle memory with a natural point of aim, type of punch out. When the conscious mind is hard at work, such as looking for a dot, the subconscious mind has a difficult time ingraining a task to make it a subconscious act. Of course we can argue that looking for a fixed sight on a weapon is the same deal, however using an iron sight forces us to use a very repeatable grip, stance, trigger control, heads up, weapon up to the line of sight, basic overall presentation of the pistol, to be able to obtain this sight alignment. Basically it re-enforces proper basic fundamentals. Often you will see shooters who begin to rely on a laser, to have poor basic fundamentals, and have very bad habits with their shooting as they can let the fundamentals suffer by placing a dot and hunting for it. Again one may argue that this is a good thing, that they can shoot from the hip, or right from the draw if necessary with good accuracy. However what happens if that laser dies at the wrong time, then what? Also an accomplished shooter can still learn to do those skills faster than someone who learns on a laser.
                    The comments made herein are those solely of author and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency or other entity.

                    Surfs Up on youtube!

                    Specialized Services Group on Facebook!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I shoot for the joy of it. It's a pleasurable experience for me to go to the range, which I do as time and funds allow. I'm by no means a professional. When I look at that study, I see two things.

                      The greater part of what made the ERT officers come out ahead was their ability to anticipate escalation and prepare themselves for violence. That's an experience and training issue that no hardware can help.

                      The novice policemen had accuracy issues in a high-tension, snap-shot. So would I. I don't practice those, in large part due to time constraints. Without joining IDPA (which would be cost and time prohibitive for a young student like myself) I'm at the range for slow fire, typically by myself. Cannot present from a holster. One drill I run is to get a man-sized silhouette, put several targets staggered quasi-randomly it, run it out to 15y, and listen to the radio in an earbud. When I hear a common word uttered I'll go from low ready to fire at the top target as soon as my sights line up, pop a shot at the next target in sequence, then drop to low ready again and wait. Sound like a terrible drill? That's all I got! I burn a half hour to an hour a week doing that with the .22. Get in one 4-5 hour range visit a week. I'm not going to be as prepared for a snapshot as a green policeman.

                      What really worries me is that they were unable to correctly identify the assailant's weapon or cell phone before pulling the trigger. This is in large part due to taking their eyes off the assailant to align their weapon. Bear in mind the novice shooters were already slower, on average, than the assailant. If I ever make that mistake carrying my firearm I could be charged with manslaughter or worse.

                      Do I practice with the laser? Not a lot. It's boring slow-fire. All the bullets go in the same hole, holding it up to cowitness with my sights or shooting 'from the hip' which for me means holding it with a bent elbow at chest level, like I'd just pulled from a holster. I do more dry fire with it cowitnessed to my sights than I do live fire.

                      I'm not at your level. I probably never will be. That's OK -- I'm not a policeman, much less a specialized responder. I'm going to tunnel vision. My adrenaline will be racing. The only time I've dealt with a lethal force situation was a home invasion before I owned any firearms, and I certainly wasn't as calm and collected as I'd like to have been. It just strikes me, as a civilian, as more beneficial to cater to my limitations than to try and become a SWAT cop
                      Last edited by TimK; 10-11-2009, 11:43 PM.
                      **Not a LEO**

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've seen officers with lasers shoot just as terribly as those without... I saw no benefit.

                        It doesn't fix poor marksmanship, but it may be a useful tool in your toolbox if you already practice good marksmanship...
                        J. Wise

                        AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

                        "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

                        Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          This is great!

                          When do we get to read part 2?
                          sigpic

                          "Po Po coming through!" all rights reserved DJS



                          'Do we really need 'smart bombs' to drop on these dumb bastards?'

                          http://www.snipercompany.com/

                          M16/AR15/M4 Armorer

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think lasers could be a problem if there are more than one officer engaged in a shooting incident. I don't know what the stats are for the % of shootings involving one officer vs two or more. During that fog of action, which laser point is mine? When our team tested them, that was one of the issues we encountered during live fire exercises. We nixed the idea and stayed with our shooting on the move, target aquisition and muscle memory exercises.
                            "...Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Good information. Basically shows that point shooting is a better way to train after the basics have been learned. I don't use sights under 15 yards with encounters that unfold in seconds...

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 2940 users online. 158 members and 2782 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X