Shooting too well???

[BTDT2]

Iowa - that's crazy that you even hit the timed drills - with all that gun power loading and lighting a fuse - there is no way you could get off enough rounds in time. That's beyond high master if you ask me!

MCAPO you must have missed the memo, Iowa now shoots one of these using percussion caps.

[tanksoldier]

I have heard, for years, that same line..."yeah, some plaintiff's attorney will bring up the fact a cop shoots DX and then wonder why he didn't 'shoot to wound' his client"

The problem isn't officer who shoot too well, it's officers who barely qualify. THOSE are the liabilities the departments are trying to avoid... the officer who can barely shoot and hits a bystander.

[Dinosaur32]

Bottom line is that an important reason behind all training is to limit the agency's liability. The job just wants to be able to say you were trained to State standards and any screw up is on you.

[CCCSD]

I never go to training. That way they can't hold my training against me.

[eagleI]

My PD quals are pass fail. My Academy (where I work) is scored. We no longer do "Top Gun" due to an OIS where the scrots attorney used it against the officer.

[stormz5192]

We use pass/fail. but I wish that our state would revamp the course to something a bit more useful and realistic than standing still and shooting at 25yrds, 15,10,7,5 and weapon retention. Maybe some moving targets, shooting on the move, ect.

[hemicop]

I'll defer to the guys & agencies that have more experience in this realm than I. I still maintain my opinion about my agency and add I guess some places & LEOs are luckier than I........

[Shush]

IMHO .... You should shoot as well as possible during quals. A lower passing score may be what interrupts your forward progression through the ranks. If it ever came up in court, its all about adequate articulation. Example:

Lawyer Schmuckatelli: "Officer Killshot, evidence shows that your fired 5 rounds, yet only 3 were recovered from the deceased. a 4th round was found lodged in the cellphone of my client, who was exercising their right to video what was perceived to be an officer brutality scene. A 5th round was recovered from the leg of our other client, who was innocently watching the scene unfold a full 3 feet away from the deceased. In addition, you scored 100 % accuracy on your firearms qualification course. It is our believe that our clients were targeted victim bystanders. With a 100% score, you don't miss your target. Can you explain the discrepancy between your range score and the result of this officer involved shooting?

Officer Killshot : "Yes I can."

Lawyer Schmuckatelli: "Then, please, for the jury, explain just HOW you can score 100% at the range, and yet completely miss not 1, but TWO shots when you felt it necessary to actually user your sidearm."

Officer Killshot: "Well, you see, whenever I go to the range - I don't have to duck and weave and be concerned about my own life as my targets shoot back at me."

"Lawyer Schmuckatelli: "no further questions, your honor. "

[BTDT2]

I got news for the OP & veterans here----they'll use it against you, IMO, depending on who you are.
I shot at & missed a violent, fleeing felon I witnessed comitting a crime (armed car-jacking) once. The Use of Force Board had (typically) asked what my target was. "The suspect." was my reply. They then asked WHERE on the suspect was I trying to hit. "Center of mass." Well, in their opinion since I had scored in the high 230/low 240 range (250 =100%) I should've been able to hit him so the shooting was found "out of policy" & I got suspended for 2 weeks. An appeal brought it down to 1 week.
At the appeal hearing the Hearing Officer asked both the IAD Sgt. & an ***'t Chief what the correct response should have been. Both said (& I'm not kidding!) "I don't know but not that!".
Now I imagine a good attorney would ask at what point IS someone passing or failing their qualification and the dept. would be backed into a corner--is 50% good enough? How about 60% or 40? I don't have problem with qualifying (naturally) I am of the opinion your score could be used against you.

I think it would be fair to say most if not all veterans here are aware that “who you are” plays a significant role in discipline. From your profile I assume you’re close to retirement, hopefully this suspension will not affect your retirement benefits.

[Carbonfiberfoot]

I got news for the OP & veterans here----they'll use it against you, IMO, depending on who you are.
I shot at & missed a violent, fleeing felon I witnessed comitting a crime (armed car-jacking) once. The Use of Force Board had (typically) asked what my target was. "The suspect." was my reply. They then asked WHERE on the suspect was I trying to hit. "Center of mass." Well, in their opinion since I had scored in the high 230/low 240 range (250 =100%) I should've been able to hit him so the shooting was found "out of policy" & I got suspended for 2 weeks. An appeal brought it down to 1 week.
At the appeal hearing the Hearing Officer asked both the IAD Sgt. & an ***'t Chief what the correct response should have been. Both said (& I'm not kidding!) "I don't know but not that!".
Now I imagine a good attorney would ask at what point IS someone passing or failing their qualification and the dept. would be backed into a corner--is 50% good enough? How about 60% or 40? I don't have problem with qualifying (naturally) I am of the opinion your score could be used against you.

This story makes me feel a little queasy. I'm sorry that you got punished for doing your job.