Discussion in 'Education & Training' started by MikeE, Feb 17, 2015.
FBI qual. test:
I'm going to have to try this. Any link to purchase the certified target?
Looks like it would be kind of boring...
Perhaps, but that's not the point. The idea was to create a piece of documentation that you can put in your training file that says 'I'm as qualified as local LEO/FBI'.
I think it's a really smart way to go.
I get the idea, I like it. I've coached a guy through his qualifier as a Reserve Deputy. Most of them are really simple. The baseline training. I just am always bored by them. No action.
i feel it would be best to have it witnessed and signed by a certified instructor.
who's to say my buddy and it just didn't set the target up and shoot it 60 times. and say yes, we did as described in the article.
I've done the equivalent of the state police qualification course through OFA here in Oregon as part of their Defensive Handgun 1 course. Shooting was from various ranges, drawing from concealed, standing, kneeling behind cover, strong hand only and weak hand only. They graded us on gold, silver bronze or no pass. I was one of several that got gold It was a fun test of my skills.
The big thing though is that none of it is under the pressure of someone shooting back at you.
That said, I wouldn't mind trying the FBI test too, looks like an interesting challenge as well.
For IDPA they have a classifier once a year which helps put you in your given ability group. That is very similar (and just as boring) to this type of FBI or LEO qualification course. The better you do, the higher ability group you are put in for competition. (Or something like that).
I've often researched the various classifier/qualifier courses for different LEO groups. I've even reviewed the Coast Guard one. To meet the basic (minimum) qualifications for many LEO organizations are really low. I've often chuckled when people equate LEO to being more qualified than an average CHL holder. There are always acceptations to the rule, but it has been my experience that the average CHL holders have as much if not more training than the average LEO.
Honestly, I think this should change on both fronts. If you carry a firearm, you should (not be forced) go out of your way to seek more training. To practice more than once a month in an active scenario.
Just a few thoughts...
You're qualified to be in the state legislature!?!?!?!
Another vote here for the OFA Defensive Handgun course, which was friendly enough for beginners to be happy with, but still challenging enough for the more practiced shooters. My only gripe with the class was that (because we were standing shoulder-to-shoulder) there was no way to move laterally while shooting, only forward and back. This FBI test looks even worse, simply drawing and standing like a statue, except for the barricade part. I don't know what I'll be doing in an emergency shooting scenario, but I'm pretty sure I won't be standing still.
I almost always take videos of my shooting practices, whether I'm alone or with a partner. I see a lot in reviewing them later that I wasn't aware I was doing at the time. That video seems like it would be pretty solid evidence of the speed and accuracy of your fire, even if the range might still be called into question. So if it's necessary to prove a point I could enter it into evidence, but it's a private recording that no one needs to know about unless and until it's needed for some reason.
Maybe I missed something, but Mr. Ellifritz said the "bottle area" on the target is worth one point per hit; how are the two smaller areas scored?
Hey, anybody else think that 25 yards is a little more than "moderate" range for a dinky CCW pistol? Or are my eyes that much older than the rest of youse guys'?
If I went 60% even in the 7 ring at that range I would be happy.
As long as a lib prosecutor with visions of running for D.A. doesn't decide to ask, "Sooo Mr. Xyz, just how long have you been a frustrated cop or G-man wannabe? How much practice does it take to be able to rapidly put that many bullets into a target that's shaped like a human silhouette?"
While I could see that as possibility, in speaking with instructors, it is generally understood that training, regardless of the silhouette shape, is a pretty solid benefit for the shooter/defense. I've been told to keep my documentation for all training available as it will be one of the critical pieces of information the defense would need in a defensive shooting case, should it go to court.
In fact, I could see the defense countering that argument and stating that their client has demonstrated proficiency with their weapon, and in so doing, protected others in the area from potential stray bullets - all landed exactly where they were supposed to go.
Either way, it's probably a good idea, from time to time, to get documented training from a professional instructor, just so you can back up your practice and training.
That target sure looks like a standard USPSA target.
FBI - from previous post | USPSA
You can download and print your own.
I shoot my Shield in IDPA. 35yds shots may be required match.
+ 10 yds minimum on steel - 6in circles, 8in, poppers (the 10yds is an IDPA safety standard)
Simulate longer shooting by reducing the size of your target. Appleseed uses 1-in targets at 25 yrds to simulate 400 yd shooting. (the math is close enough ( Go read some of Kimbers threads if you have further questions on that, please. ))
You can get 1/2 sized USPSA targets, or print them that way.
Now, can you hit a moving target while you are moving? That is a more important question.
Separate names with a comma.