Florida Concealed Carry banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,202 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,715 Posts
Interesting... and the article is 10 years old.

“We are not teaching officers to shoot accurately at the speed of a gunfight before they graduate from academy training,” Lewinski declares. Much more instruction and practice is needed to prepare them to deal with rapidly unfolding, dynamic, high-threat encounters.”

In the recent study, he explains, “the elite officers were able to read danger cues early on and anticipate the suspect’s actions ahead of time so they could stay ahead of the fight. They knew where a gun was likely to appear and were focused there before it did. So they were able to get protective rounds off sooner than the suspect and sooner than the rookies.
And 10 years later, most rank and file officers still do the annual static qualification test, right?

At the moment of firing, the elites tended to have full concentration on the suspect’s weapon. Many of the novices, because they were searching for their sights, did not even see the suspect himself when they pulled the trigger.
aka "Threat focused?" :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,715 Posts
From the preceding article: https://www.forcescience.org/2009/10/major-new-study-how-your-eyes-can-cast-your-fate-in-a-gunfight-part-1/


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.”
Bingo...

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.”
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
26,332 Posts
Point shooting is one tool in the box. The time and distance equation dictates when to use 1) point shooting, 2) flash sight picture, and 3) full reference to sight alignment/sight picture, all of which are still "aimed fire!" As Bob says, one doesn't necessarily know all the values of that time/distance equation until the gunfight is over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,302 Posts
“We are not teaching officers to shoot accurately at the speed of a gunfight before they graduate from academy training,” Lewinski declares. Much more instruction and practice is needed to prepare them to deal with rapidly unfolding, dynamic, high-threat encounters.”

Because leo's wouldn't qualify and be able to work otherwise. Insteading of raising the bar/standards, the academies/state has determined it's less expensive to train officers adequately in preparation for street encounters.

“A gun is a tool, and officers need to be so practiced with it that the mechanics of using it become automatic and unconscious.

Flawed, if you're unconscious, you're not firing a firearm. It's subconsciously, not unconsciously. :dunno

Training to a gunfight level may well require more time and money than is currently allotted, Lewinski concedes. But departments should ask themselves a tough question, he says: “What level of liability are you willing to accept with your training?

That answer has been obvious for decades at academy training and subsequent "in-service" yearly quals

Note: Our thanks to Sgt. Craig Stapp, a technical advisor to the Force Science Research Center and firearms training supervisor for Tempe (AZ) PD

Tempe's swat unit is a joke, I've watched them train alongside Phx and mesa swat at a private local range a few times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,715 Posts
[/B]
“A gun is a tool, and officers need to be so practiced with it that the mechanics of using it become automatic and unconscious.

Flawed, if you're unconscious, you're not firing a firearm. It's subconsciously, not unconsciously. :dunno
LOL! Good catch!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
26,332 Posts
“A gun is a tool, and officers need to be so practiced with it that the mechanics of using it become automatic and unconscious.

Flawed, if you're unconscious, you're not firing a firearm. It's subconsciously, not unconsciously. :dunno
LOL! Good catch!
Yup. Noted that poor choice of words, too by the PhD (pile it higher and deeper) researcher from the United Kingdom. :grin
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top