"Two to the chest, one to the head" Really?

modernninja · Jan 12, 2012

unfortunately, they still teach hearts and minds (two chest-one head) in a body armor drill format...like was said before, it's just an execution drill if you actually do pull a real life headshot off...only guaranteed to get you an extra long prison sentence. As a Law Enforcement Instructor, we often teach the groin shot as a substitute in order to assault the pelvis and bring the person down more quickly...body armor doesn't reach that far down and its a much larger target than the head.

modernninja · Jan 12, 2012

drew_acid said:
You completely validated my comment!! The so called "trained professionals" are supposed to be prepared to use deadly force, but most only qualify once a year under no stress at 70%. So it is a valid statistic compared to the CCW citizens level of training. It would be interesting to see the stats of citizen hits.

How many average Joes take training seriously??? Most attend the minimum mandatory class for their CCW and seldom much else. They have a false confidence in their permit.

Those like you (and me) that train are in the minority when compared to the numbers of permit holders. The frequency of attending serious training would be an interesting poll to take outside of MD in shall issues states...

By law, police are required to train more than twice a year to satisfy minimum training requirements. As far as average joes taking training seriously, sometimes training is simply having fun. People always assume training has to be accomplished with a determined scowl on our face and a miserable disposition. Sometimes training is composed of plinking at a good friend's 40 acres or taking out paper targets in the living room with an airsoft, or one of my favorites, a good afternoon of paintball wars.

When I got my Law Enforcement Instructor cert I was one of three private police officers(i.e. armed security). Two out of three of us fired better than about ninety percent of the actual police officers there. The amount of time you spend on the range does not determine how good of a shooter you are, but the amount of QUALITY time you spend on the range does. Notably, one of the worst marksmen on the range, and an individual who was asked to leave the second day was a member of a swat team.

The determinant factor? IF shooting is something you enjoy doing, and something which you can make fun, you'll likely continue to do it and become very good at it. Majority of police officers who go to the range look at it as part of their job, a troublesome chore to be completed, instead of a chance to hurl a few free rounds downrange. If, for you, happiness is a warm gun, you are likely to excel at using that gun. Do what you love and love what you do...that's all I'm saying.

drew_acid · Jan 13, 2012

modernninja said:
By law, police are required to train more than twice a year to satisfy minimum training requirements.

I don't know what law you are quoting, but police training requirements are mandated by state or federal agency. Not all are the same.

Some require annual requals with 70% while there are specific requirements in some federal agencies to requal monthly with 80%. Some require the officer / agent to requal with their off duty weapon, others don't. Course of fire / difficulty varies as well.

The main point in this thread says it all - Two to the chest, one to the head" Really?

While it is very tacticool to teach this, imho it’s more effective to focus on the big parts of the body and shoot until the threat is neutralized. There are very few average police and even less average Joes that while under the extreme duress of having to fire their weapon will successfully complete one to the head.

.

mercop · Jan 13, 2012

The problem agencies ruin into is that they qualify twice a year, but the Supreme Court has held that qualification is not training.- Georg

FrankOceanXray · Jan 13, 2012

Where does it say that for the Supreme Court?

joppaj · Jan 13, 2012

mercop said:
The problem agencies ruin into is that they qualify twice a year, but the Supreme Court has held that qualification is not training.- Georg

I'd agree with that. I fire 120 rounds a year to qualify. That's all the shooting that they require me to do.

drew_acid · Jan 13, 2012

So just to cover yourself occasionally qual at 240 instead of 300.

That way when you have to do a 2 & 1 you can claim a 240 day..... Must have thrown one high.... :lol2:

No worries with the "head" shot then. :innocent6:

modernninja · Jan 15, 2012

drew_acid said:
modernninja said:

By law, police are required to train more than twice a year to satisfy minimum training requirements.

I don't know what law you are quoting, but police training requirements are mandated by state or federal agency. Not all are the same.

Some require annual requals with 70% while there are specific requirements in some federal agencies to requal monthly with 80%. Some require the officer / agent to requal with their off duty weapon, others don't. Course of fire / difficulty varies as well.

The main point in this thread says it all - Two to the chest, one to the head" Really?

While it is very tacticool to teach this, imho it’s more effective to focus on the big parts of the body and shoot until the threat is neutralized. There are very few average police and even less average Joes that while under the extreme duress of having to fire their weapon will successfully complete one to the head.

.

Click to expand...

City of Canton v. Harris (1989), Zuchel v. City and County of Denver (1993), Belcher v City of Foley (1994), Brown v Gray (2000), Young v City of Providence (2005) are all references to the subject of deliberate indifference in regards to failure to train police officers. All of these fall under Title 42 USC Section 1983 which covers Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights.

Essentially what it says that if the officer is not properly trained, (with the minimum stated elsewhere(can't remember where offhand, any help anyone?) being minimum of twice a year, they, and their agency can be held liable in regards to any damages that may occur as a result of insufficient training, such as might occur when an officer improperly uses his/her use of force continuum to deprive a person of life, liberty or property, and yes, as mercop states, qualification is NOT training.

Now, with regards to what was stated before about most police officers not shooting well, it can be partially understood by the fact that our society expects them to keep that weapon holstered and to resolve problems without using it. In an ever more violent society, this is slowly becoming impossible. When a police officer is involved in a shooting, his/her weapon is taken from him automatically, he/she is automatically suspended from duty, whether the shooting was justified or not, he/she is automatically determined (albeit for a good reason) to have possibly made a mistake in their use of force, and about a hundred armchair quarterbacks get to essentially decide his/her fate, from psychologists, internal affairs, defense and prosecution attorneys, a judge and finally, 12 random people who may or may not have a clue as to what he/she has to endure daily on the streets.

With all of that as a precursor to how you prepare for the possibility of having to use force in a real situation with a target that is firing back at you, it is no wonder that many of these officers have a natural fear of their weapon, not for it being a piece of steel that sends little pieces of lead downrange, but because every round fired in self-defense and in defense of justice has about 50 people attached to it who will second guess you to death. This is why, the first thing I do whenever I begin any type of firearm instruction, after safety rules of course, is to find a way to get the student to learn to relax and learn to be comfortable with what their weapon represents, in terms of all of those things. Anyone heard the quote of better to be judged by twelve than carried by six? It carries a lot of weight in putting things into perspective at the time that you put that weapon in the hands of a person with all that weight on their mind and it simplifies things. Also, if you maintain purity of intention (i.e. always shooting to stop the threat and forgetting about the James Bond mentality of shoot to kill), if you ever go to court for a shooting, it shouldn't be you sweating on the stand, but whoever trained you to shoot.

Two to the body one to the head is useless and completely inconsistent with the use of force continuum, but it flies because people like to be, as you said, tacticool. This is why I prefer to teach to shoot at the groin area for body armor drills, which also helps to alleviate another common training problem, that of developing tunnel vision because you're trying to hit the smaller target instead of the fairly large target that is presented to you. When we went through the instructor development school, the instructor did both drills on our first day, and then scored hits. Out of ten rounds on each target, the average headshots missed was 5 out of 35 instructor trainees (of which 20 were certified at the end of the week). The average groin shots missed was 1. That should tell you enough, but if anything, it's much easier(and quicker), even if you are off to the left or right as a result of common shooting errors, to drop a few rounds in the groin than it is to bring them up for a headshot.

modernninja · Jan 15, 2012

BTW, you are partially right with regards to who sets the standards...agencies and jurisdictions do tend to set their own standards (Secret Service does train and qualify once a month with each weapon (pistol, shotgun, subgun). However, the twice a year thing came from a supreme court precedent for a minimum universal standard for law enforcement. Again, can't remember the precedent, so any help is appreciated.

C45P312 · Jan 17, 2012

I'm coming a couple days late on this thread but i practice 2-chest 1-head drill not for the reason of scenario base training, but to go from a high probability target to a low probability target. Being able to slow down and speed up when need be allows me to balance speed and accuracy. It teaches me my limits and what i would need to practice on.

mercop · Jan 17, 2012

Force on force training can change your reaction to a solution.- George

booker · Jan 21, 2012

cowboy321 said:
Other than police officers and usa troops in Combat who is wearing body armor? Or is this just an interesting argument for the heck of it.?

Some gangs, especially Latin gangs in California, New Jersey, and Florida, have been known to wear various forms of light body armor.

Some of them are/have enlisted in the USMC, do their four years, and bring the tactics back to their gangs, teaching them how to manipulate their weapons, how to set an ambush, and how to react when ambushed.

There's even the old prison trick, duct tape a few phone books or magazines around your torso to protect from being shanked. Would provide minimal protection from calibers up to 9mm as well, depending on the thickness and angle of incidence.

The game has changed, it's a dangerous world.

3rdRcn · Jan 21, 2012

booker said:
Some gangs, especially Latin gangs in California, New Jersey, and Florida, have been known to wear various forms of light body armor.

Some of them are/have enlisted in the USMC, do their four years, and bring the tactics back to their gangs, teaching them how to manipulate their weapons, how to set an ambush, and how to react when ambushed.

The game has changed, it's a dangerous world.

They aren't just joining the Corps, they are also getting into the Army as well.

Rattlesnake46319 · Jan 21, 2012

3rdRcn said:
They aren't just joining the Corps, they are also getting into the Army as well.

Been doing it for the better part of the past decade. Get themselves training and time downrange, plus a chance to tag a T-wall or two.

modernninja · Jan 21, 2012

Rattlesnake46319 said:
Been doing it for the better part of the past decade. Get themselves training and time downrange, plus a chance to tag a T-wall or two.

And yet, with gangs accounting for more than 50 percent of the violent crime in this country, we will spend a hundred times more money chasing after only a few people half a world away who stand the dubious chance of inflicting harm upon our society. Seems like our priorities are a little off...then again, the gangs aren't really sitting on large deposits of oil for our cars (iraq) or lithium for our cell phone batteries (Afghanistan)

Rattlesnake46319 · Jan 21, 2012

modernninja said:
And yet, with gangs accounting for more than 50 percent of the violent crime in this country, we will spend a hundred times more money chasing after only a few people half a world away who stand the dubious chance of inflicting harm upon our society. Seems like our priorities are a little off...then again, the gangs aren't really sitting on large deposits of oil for our cars (iraq) or lithium for our cell phone batteries (Afghanistan)

Priorities. Besides, there's more paperwork involved when you shoot a gang member.

mercop · Jan 23, 2012

You wanna know the definition of a bad day? It is when you are attacked by a gang banger and double tap him in the chest only to find out he is wearing body armor, and having been trained to do so you start to squeeze off a round on his head, and just before it cracks realize he is wearing a ballistic helmet and shield. But alas he forgot his ballistic cod piece.

I know of one police involved shooting where the BG was wearing armor. Do you really think it happens often enough to actually have a drill for it...c'mon.

Their is way to much time spend on training for what "could" happen while the things that are most probable get little to no attention.
- George

drew_acid · Jan 23, 2012

mercop said:
You wanna know the definition of a bad day? It is when you are attacked by a gang banger and double tap him in the chest only to find out he is wearing body armor, and having been trained to do so you start to squeeze off a round on his head, and just before it cracks realize he is wearing a ballistic helmet and shield. But alas he forgot his ballistic cod piece.

I know of one police involved shooting where the BG was wearing armor. Do you really think it happens often enough to actually have a drill for it...c'mon.

Their is way to much time spend on training for what "could" happen while the things that are most probable get little to no attention.
- George

Great comment - we what if what could happen ad nauseam and often forget reality

wilcam47 · Feb 22, 2012

-Mil-Surp-Phreak- said:
All I could think about was the scene from "Collateral"

outstanding video clip!!

DrunkUncles · Feb 22, 2012

Center mass until magazine is empty, eject empty, insert fresh mag, lather, rinse, repeat.

"Two to the chest, one to the head" Really?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Professional Cat Herder

Professional Cat Herder

Kreuzritter

Banned

Ultimate Member

Sheepdog

Kreuzritter

Professional Cat Herder

Professional Cat Herder

Member

Banned

Active Member

RIP

Curmidget

Professional Cat Herder

Curmidget

Banned

Kreuzritter

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics