Gun Ignorance from John Farnam

[PaulD]

I still don't understand why he didn't just reach down and throw the car out of gear... or turn off the ignition.

It was discussed but the car was a loaner and had a push button starter. To shut if off while driving means keeping it pressed for 3-5s. Throwing it in neutral would have been perfectly viable though.

A trained driver should know that.

 

[M1911]

One more instance of The Thin Blue Line - they simply CANNOT stand any criticism of their own. Sorry, guys - you do a needed job, but you really need to take off the blinders when it comes to one of your own who's an idiot or incompetent.

Perhaps I've missed it, but I don't see anyone here who is defending her (and other police officers with poor firearms knowledge and skills). I think we all agree that people like her will likely fail if they ever get in a gun fight, and that they are far too likely to have an ND.

That said, most cops simply won't ever get in a gunfight during their career, and statistics show they are more likely to get killed in a car wreck than in a gunfight.

No, I'm not saying that training and standards shouldn't be higher. They should.

 

[M1911]

Would you pay a carpenter who didn't know if his Bostich needed 3" framing nails or 1" finish nails?

A carpenter uses his bostich all day long, most every day. Most cops seldom take their guns out of their holsters.

 

[Admin]

A carpenter uses his bostich all day long, most every day. Most cops seldom take their guns out of their holsters.

Well that there just proves how professional they are.

If you don't exercise a perishable skill well you'll just get paid a lot of money to be a LEO, and retire after 20 years.

 

[drumenigma]

Stuff like this just scares me and I know it's not the first time I have heard something similar. There needs to be some serious up-training for LEO like this. How can you carry a pistol day in and day out and not know more than the name of the company that made it?

 

[Jaxon]

It seems that pride in what you do and being able to effectively use the tools you're given to do the job has seriously decreased over the last decade. Discretion is done away with, for the most part, and the strict letter of the "law" (re: policy/regs) is adhered to in a CYA environment because PC/Diversity/whatever rules the day and not common sense.

There is no defense for this officer not knowing, at least the basics, of her service weapon. I'd be surprised if she actually qualified with it.

 

[M1911]

It seems that pride in what you do and being able to effectively use the tools you're given to do the job has seriously decreased over the last decade.

Actually, having spoken with the firearms instructor in a Metrowest police department, I think police training has gotten significantly better over the last couple decades.

When he first joined the department, they were using revolvers. But during their annual qualification, they were prohibited from using their speed loaders because "that was cheating." Needless to say, that sort of silliness has been banished from their range.

With many departments doing active shooter training, force-on-force training, and having patrol rifles in each squad car, I think they are better off than they were 10 years ago.

Are they where they should be? Most aren't, particularly larger cities. To put it a different way, if you think it is bad now, well, you should have seen it back in the day.

 

[Len-2A Training]

A carpenter uses his bostich all day long, most every day. Most cops seldom take their guns out of their holsters.

That is the excuse they use. Many do feel that they don't need to do anything more than "required" with firearms. I've lost track of how many LEOs that I have offered to host at my local gun clubs to practice, on their schedule, no cost to them (but ammo) . . . not one has ever accepted my offer.

That said, there are a ton of LEOs that are members of BR&P and many of them do practice regularly. However, these guys are known to be "gun people" who happen to be LEOs.

Well that there just proves how professional they are.

If you don't exercise a perishable skill well you'll just get paid a lot of money to be a LEO, and retire after 20 years.

Sad, not really funny. But too true.

Stuff like this just scares me and I know it's not the first time I have heard something similar. There needs to be some serious up-training for LEO like this. How can you carry a pistol day in and day out and not know more than the name of the company that made it?

~30 yr old story: A very good friend was an active LEO, FFL (shop in garage beside his house) and commercial reloader for local PDs (back then we used these rounds for qualification shooting). He told me of a Boston PO that came to his shop since the Boston PO was told that he'd have to qualify (after many years) and he couldn't get the gun out of the holster. Sid told me he had to cut the holster off the gun, then use a mallet to open the cylinder (BPD carried .38Spl revolvers back then)!! The rounds were corroded in the cylinder.

Probably 20 yrs ago, a ranking LEO (department will not be named) was issued .38Spl Chief's Special (2" bbl). The PD had just converted to 9mm Beretta 92FS and everyone had to qualify. Said ranking officer told me that it was the first time he had shot and received a qualifying score in many years!

It seems that pride in what you do and being able to effectively use the tools you're given to do the job has seriously decreased over the last decade. Discretion is done away with, for the most part, and the strict letter of the "law" (re: policy/regs) is adhered to in a CYA environment because PC/Diversity/whatever rules the day and not common sense.

There is no defense for this officer not knowing, at least the basics, of her service weapon. I'd be surprised if she actually qualified with it.

It's sad, but when our PD converted to the M&P 45 recently I asked a ranking officer how he liked it and his opening comment was talk to the other officer (a good friend and LE Firearms Instructor) as the officer I was talking with knew nothing about guns (including the one on his hip). He's really a good guy and good cop, but since the chief is anti-gun and does nothing to impress gun-handling skills on his troops, other than what is mandated as minimum under MGLs, you can't expect much more from the officers themselves unless they are gun people and understand the importance of such practice. Those of us here, whether LE or not, are "gun nuts" whereas most LEOs don't like guns or barely tolerate the need to carry one on the job.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Actually, having spoken with the firearms instructor in a Metrowest police department, I think police training has gotten significantly better over the last couple decades.

When he first joined the department, they were using revolvers. But during their annual qualification, they were prohibited from using their speed loaders because "that was cheating." Needless to say, that sort of silliness has been banished from their range.

With many departments doing active shooter training, force-on-force training, and having patrol rifles in each squad car, I think they are better off than they were 10 years ago.

Are they where they should be? Most aren't, particularly larger cities. To put it a different way, if you think it is bad now, well, you should have seen it back in the day.

Yes training has gotten better, but only within the past few years. In 2000, when I last qualified with MPTC, it was the same as it was when I joined the PD back in the late 1970s.

BTW, it was strongly suggested (might have been mandated, don't recall) that we use speedloaders for qualification and carry at least back ~1980 or so. I recall since I was shooting a Colt and S&W "owned" the LE market, the only place I could get Colt speedloaders was to go to Lew Horton's in Framingham a few days before our qualification.

So what you were told about speedloaders was some insanity w/in a particular PD and not "normal" policy by most PDs!

 

[Jaxon]

With many departments doing active shooter training, force-on-force training, and having patrol rifles in each squad car, I think they are better off than they were 10 years ago.

Are they where they should be? Most aren't, particularly larger cities. To put it a different way, if you think it is bad now, well, you should have seen it back in the day.

With decreased budgets, I can't imagine that "many departments" are doing anything more than the annual qual, that itself being pretty much a sleep walker could pass. Having a patrol rifle in each cruiser doesn't make them "better off" then they were 10 years ago.

Where they should be, is where they should be. Not almost, or nearly there, or getting there. Real life sucks, as we've seen recently and things change in a hearbeat. It is bad now, it was bad "back in the day", but at least we gave a tinker's damn.

YMMV

 

[clinotus]

Since when does a Chiropractor start asking questions about caliber, carry, and addressing techniques for carry? Really? I thought most in the medical profession were stanch anti firealarmists. Whats that info got to do with anything?

 

[GSG]

One does not need to know the size of the engine; even the gas is usually obtained at the department pump. A competent cop still must know how to DRIVE the car, including pursuit and evasive driving.

A competent cop should also know the model and caliber of her/his gun in case additional ammo is needed on-scene. And a cop who carries the gun and mags on the same side is almost certainly not properly trained.

But there's the rub, isn't it? The department provides gas, all she has to do is pump it, because she doesn't fuel the PD cruiser on her personal time. The department provides the gun and ammo, and all she has to do is shoot it at the PD range with the ammo they give her, because she doesn't shoot it on her personal time.

It's flawed logic, of course, to anyone who knows or cares anything about guns (i.e., people on gun forums). But most cops don't have a firearms lifestyle.

A competent cop should also know the model and caliber of her/his gun in case additional ammo is needed on-scene. And a cop who carries the gun and mags on the same side is almost certainly not properly trained.

Agreed 100%. They should also have more than just the ammo in their mags in their cruiser.

About the guns and mags on the same side, some departments have policies on how their equipment is carried (firearm on "strong side," Taser/baton on the "weak" side, to avoid another BART-style shooting). If this is one of those 5 foot tall 110 pound female cops I see around, her waist might not be very big, which wouldn't give her much room on the duty belt. Pistol, two pairs of cuffs, can of OC, baton, radio, flashlight, rubber gloves fills up a duty belt quick for someone with a 34 inch waist, nevermind someone with a sub-28 inch waist. For sure, ammo on the same side of the gun on the duty belt with a semi auto is a poor choice, but again, there's more to this than just shooting. It might be that she carries them strong side or not at all.

Yep. GSG you make a good point but like Keith said, you have to know what you're doing with the tool. Something as simple as caliber is the same as diesel or unleaded. She didn't know. She shouldn't be an LEO. Pretty simple.

I don't doubt it. I've told cops to their face "You're going to get killed" or "You need to spend more time at the range" or (to the cop who had a bad interaction with a violent scumbag he arrested while at dinner with his family) "You need to carry off duty more, and buy a little snub nose if it's all you can hide."

Larry Jupin was a gun guy, and Jason Rivers, his killer, almost never went to the range outside of his time in the military. Some of Larry's closest friends have remarked to me how if there was anyone on their PD who should've prevailed in a gunfight, it was Larry. He had all the skills and know-how, but in the dark at night against a guy with a stolen revolver he fought and lost. He survived longenough to make it to the hospital where he got to see his family and friends one more time before he died an ugly and drawn out death.

Cops look at things like that and think "What's the point?" You and I might recognize that sometimes sh** happens in gunfights, and life isn't fair, but that's no excuse not to train. Cops see things like this and get discouraged, or some see it as further proof that time on the range won't do anything to save your life in the field.

Again, I'm not defending people who take a job that means spending most of their life fighting and then get out of shape and lazy and don't hone lifesaving skills. I'm saying that either through apathy or failures in training or stupidity or all of the above, some cops do not and will not care about guns.

On more thing. Should our soldiers stop knowing about their rifles or pistols because they are more likely to be blown up by an IED? Seriously I can't stand the way you guys knee jerk defend this b.s. ignorance.

No, soldiers should know plenty about their rifles. But depending on which figures you believe, 40-60% of coalition deaths in Iraq (about half) are caused by IED's. But is this reflected in training? Is half of the weapons training in basic and infantry school about identifying and avoiding IEDs? I wouldn't know, I've never been to either, and I wouldn't defend foolish soldiers who don't take it upon themselves to learn anything about IED's other than what the Army/USMC tells them about them in training.

But with that said, what percentage of soldiers spend their personal time training for dealing with IEDs? I'm willing to bet it's a small number compared to the total number in the field.

Some nice straw man arguments there. She doesn't need to know the engine size unless she's going to be ordering repair parts - totally different than not knowing what ammo your gun takes. Same as if she didn't know the brand - not needed to perform her job. Knowledge of how her gun works and what it fires? Needed.

Funny, she's not ordering repair parts for the gun. The armorer might even clean it for her, depending on the department. Another issue sometimes overlooked is how females are treated differently in training on PD's, let off easy.

There's a police firearms instructor training video that shows Peggy Parks at the range qualifying with her department. It was treated like a big joke, she couldn't hit the target stand, and she just acted cute and giggly the whole time, and the firearms trainer shook his head and laughed like it was funny.

After she was killed her PD trainer retired and has never instructed anyone on the range again after the guilt he felt for his glaring failures in training her to protect her life. He speaks at seminars now for trainers, after showing the video of his failure.

If she's not a gun person to begin with, and she sucks with big heavy revolvers on top of that, and her teacher fails her as a student, where is she left? What are her chances in the field? We know that answer already.

One more instance of The Thin Blue Line - they simply CANNOT stand any criticism of their own. Sorry, guys - you do a needed job, but you really need to take off the blinders when it comes to one of your own who's an idiot or incompetent.

I'm not a cop. I hope to be someday, I'm pursuing that now. And I'm not wearing blinders, I'm a very gun guy, and at the last firearms training I attended I helped out some people who needed it, offered help where I could, and shook my head at a few idiots. But what can I do? You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

A trained driver should know that.

We keep coming back to this training issue.

That said, there are a ton of LEOs that are members of BR&P and many of them do practice regularly. However, these guys are known to be "gun people" who happen to be LEOs.

The above training I mentioned was taught in part by a 30 year veteran LEO who'd been in a few shootings. He said how you shouldn't always believe what every "gun guy" on your department tells you. They'd tell him when it rained to put a lot of oil on his revolver to keep it from rusting. He did, and in his first shooting, he pulled the trigger 5 times and only got two shots off because of all that excess oil fouling 3 of his rounds.

Again, let a story like that get around a gossipy PD..."Those gun guys almost got him killed, don't listen to them."

It's a two way street.

 

[GSG]

what?

Sorry, I did a lot of typing there. When he first started as a cop, some of the "gun guys" on his department would tell him when it rained to put a lot of oil on his revolver, to keep it from rusting, especially the cylinder. All the oil he was dumping on the gun on rainy days (it rains a lot here in Florida) fouled some of his primers, seeped into the cartridges and made them duds.

 

[Coyote33]

Why is she carrying a firearm that she knows nothing about?

Seriously you can defend and deflect the ignorance all you want, if you're going to be an LEO you better be able to drive and you better know about the firearm you are carrying.

If that was a solider that made that comment you guys would be all over it. But it's an LEO and "oh my god they have so many other things to worry about".

It's pathetic.

"What motor does it have?" "I don't know. It's a Ford. Crown Vic!"

Isn't this sort of similar?

 

[Coyote33]

Kind of funny, now that I read the rest of the posts on this. I am not saying they ARE similar, but that that might be the thinking (or lack thereof).

 

[GSG]

Kind of funny, now that I read the rest of the posts on this. I am not saying they ARE similar, but that that might be the thinking (or lack thereof).

And here I was, thinking you were mocking me.

 

[Jaxon]

Since when does a Chiropractor start asking questions about caliber, carry, and addressing techniques for carry? Really? I thought most in the medical profession were stanch anti firealarmists. Whats that info got to do with anything?

The weight of the gun and ammo, where it is carried, which may be the cause of back pain (I can attest to that). Only a more knowledgeable practitioner would know to ask these specific questions.

Cops look at things like that and think "What's the point?" You and I might recognize that sometimes sh** happens in gunfights, and life isn't fair, but that's no excuse not to train. Cops see things like this and get discouraged, or some see it as further proof that time on the range won't do anything to save your life in the field.

I'm sorry, but while I can't speak for any cops today, I can speak for most of the ones I knew and worked with "back in the day" and I call BS on this.

Cops get discouraged cause another buys the farm? Seriously? Then perhaps they should choose another career.

 

[fsusoldier]

This falls along the same lines as some soldiers who are content with their "60%" qual scores and feel the need to give me $h!t about wanting to score my 40 out of 40 on the qual. Being a Soldier and a LEO I like to be proficient at things that may someday save my life. And then there are the guys on the PD that their waist size is larger than their height and they have the nerve to criticize me for watching tactical videos to improve my knowledge.... These are the people that will have my back on the street and the battlefield... AWESOME... I personally try to get out to the range at least twice a month with my service pistol and carbine, which IMHO is still not enough...

 

[M1911]

So what you were told about speedloaders was some insanity w/in a particular PD and not "normal" policy by most PDs!

I didn't intend to imply that it was normal policy at most PDs, but instead that this type of silliness was typical.

The officer at this particular metrowest department has moved his department away from the typical "square range" training. He includes movement drills, transitions from baton strikes to handgun, low light, etc. Is it enough? Probably not. But it is likely a far sight better than it was previously.

 

[Bill Nance]

I think you are misinterpreting both my comment and pbearperry's. Is it a good thing that so many police officers are ignorant about firearms in general, their service pistol in particular, and are woefully undertrained in markshanship? No, not at all. It is terrible.

But since most of them won't ever get in a gunfight during their career, I have to agree with pbearperry -- good driving skills and hand-to-hand are more likely to keep them alive than good shooting skills. 35% of officer fatalities are due to traffic accidents.

No, I'm not saying police shouldn't have better firearms training. They should. But for most, the probability that they will ever have to use their firearms skills is very low.

I have to disagree with you here. It wasn't her lack of shooting skills that was the issue. It was her complete ignorance of the firearm itself. She may never need to fire that weapon but she will have it drawn and pointed at someone with a finger on the trigger many many many times.

I could give a rip about her injuring herself while unloading it but she's a real menace to anyone she's pulling over on a felony stop, a great many of which turn out to be the wrong person and they are released right away at the scene.

She should be taken off the street and put into hardcore training immediately and if she doesn't make a 100% turn around she should be fired. She's a menace to everyone out there.

 

[M1911]

I have to disagree with you here. It wasn't her lack of shooting skills that was the issue. It was her complete ignorance of the firearm itself. She may never need to fire that weapon but she will have it drawn and pointed at someone with a finger on the trigger many many many times.

That's just not true in many departments. I'm not defending her ignorance. Really, I'm not. I'm just saying that most police officers don't point their guns at a lot of people in the course of their careers.

 

[Bill Nance]

That's just not true in many departments. I'm not defending her ignorance. Really, I'm not. I'm just saying that most police officers don't point their guns at a lot of people in the course of their careers.

Maybe if it's a town of 500 people and she's Barney Fife. Anywhere else, even a small town with say 3000 residents she will be making felony stops on occasion. That means weapon drawn. Over the years, that's a lot of stops, each one a potential disaster from her incompetence alone. It just gets worse the larger the city if she's on the streets.

 

[law dawg]

As a career LEO, she needs to know about her gun. She needs to know how to shoot, fight, pursue a car, do the paperwork, testify in court, learn her work area, handcuff, etc.

She doesn't need to be an expert in any or all of it, but she needs to be competent in all of it. She *has* to be competent.

 

[Jaxon]

That's just not true in many departments. I'm not defending her ignorance. Really, I'm not. I'm just saying that most police officers don't point their guns at a lot of people in the course of their careers.

Did something change over the years? I find that statement completely without merit.

 

[M1911]

Did something change over the years? I find that statement completely without merit.

Around seventy percent of police departments in the US have less than 5 officers. The majority of the US is not Dorchester.

 

[ochmude]

As a career LEO, she needs to know about her gun. She needs to know how to shoot, fight, pursue a car, do the paperwork, testify in court, learn her work area, handcuff, etc.

She doesn't need to be an expert in any or all of it, but she needs to be competent in all of it. She *has* to be competent.

This brings up the question of what defines whether or not an individual is competent with a firearm. I'm thinking about my time in the Marines, and I can confidently say that your average (non-0311) Marine doesn't know a whole heck of a lot about firearms, at least not compared to your average "gun guy". A lot of Marines I knew didn't really know exactly what 5.56 meant and had no clue what sort of ammo they used, other than it was painted green on the tip. I remember one instance while deployed where I walked into the COC in the morning and the 3rd watch was having an argument over how many times the rifling went around in the barrel. They were holding the barrels up to lights and trying to count. No one, enlisted or officer, had ever heard the phrase "twist rate" and I actually had to explain it to everyone. Even I didn't know nearly as much about firearms when I was on active duty than I do now that I've been a NES member for awhile, and I was considered the "gun nut" of my platoon because I had a real LTC.

Now, that being said, only 2 or 3 guys in my platoon didn't consistently shoot expert on the range. All of us has been through shoot houses and combat marksmanship training and force-on-force with simunitions and all sorts of other training. We all knew a great deal about how to use our issued weapons, and performed very well with them. So I guess a good summary question would be, if you can safely and accurately employ your issued firearm, does it really matter if you don't know that 5.56 is a metric measurement and .223 isn't?

 

[wolfhook]

I asked a local Provincetown officer what she carried:

Me: What do you carry?
Her: Glock.
Me: A Glock 22?
Her: No, 40.

 

[mikem317]

I asked a local Provincetown officer what she carried:

Me: What do you carry?
Her: Glock.
Me: A Glock 22?
Her: No, 40.

Was it this guy?

 

[securityboy]

As a LEO instructor (and obviously a "gun guy") let me throw in my 2 cents...
I see 2 issues with "her" story, the not "really" knowing what she carried and the apparent lack of training/concern about never trying to reload from her spare mags...

1st off with regard to not knowing the model caliber etc of what she carried, that is no big deal, honestly, no different than me not knowing $hit about the engine size/oil wieght used in the cruiser I drive around in every shift...As long as she knows how to properly operate the pistol I wouldn't care much if she didn't know the intimate details of the pistol,but it would be nice if she did...

The other issue, there is no excuse for. She (all officers) needs to know not only how to shoot, but how to reload (both strong hand and support hand), practice incapacitation drills, etc.

But on to a couple things mentioned by others...
It was mentioned by someone that carrying mags on the same side is "wrong"...there are argements on both sides (haha), but I tell "the guys" find what works best for them and if it does violate dept policy go with it. (that can be strong side/support side, mags verticle or horizontal) if it works for them it isn't "wrong"...

It was also mentioned that she may need to know the caliber of gun in case additional ammo is needed...well to that I will say the same thing I have told officers who ask about on-scene "mag interchangablity/swaps"...they just had 40 shots to get the job done, and didn't, why should you give them your ammo

 

[Jaxon]

Around seventy percent of police departments in the US have less than 5 officers. The majority of the US is not Dorchester.

An interesting factoid percentage; and even if accurate, has no bearing on the topic in question nor a valid response to the previous post. It still has no merit.

The bottom line is the officer in question is in a position that is obviously beyond her ability and she should seek another less dangerous one.