Firearms Training with Glocks v Others in Generation X Mode

[Eaglearm]

I have seen some young FEDS and COPS that shoot and handle a Glock. Yet, put a revolver or another weapon manufacture in their hand and they are lost. Is teaching someone, having no skills, to shoot a Glock a way to bypass other weapon systems such as SIGS, Berrettas, etc.

I've spoken with some Firearms Instructors and they indicate that training someone to shot a Glock is easier. Yet, they do not teach other weapon systems. ;) I think this a bad practice.

When dealing with large volumes of Recruits be it Federal, state, or local and teaching at an equal rate (minimal standards so everyone can pass) of concept, are Agencies do more harm than good for their employees?

[FedRich]

The fundamentals are the same, regardless of the weapon system. If you jerk the trigger on the Glock at the 25 yd line, the effect will be the same if you had jerked the trigger on a Sig, etc. The only thing easier, IMO, about the Glock is the "Safe Action" which doesn't require decocking. Though the trigger pull is definitely lighter stock, it isn't much different than a DAO Sig, etc.

I agree that officers/agents should be exposed to different weapon systems, but not necessarily at the academy. For those students who have never fired a weapon, teaching them the fundamentals seems to be as much info as they can handle. FIs should give officers/agents the opportunity to fam fire other weapons after range qualifications or during in-service. We do this to a certain extent with long arms, and will probably do it more with handguns now that we have a list of approved off-duty weapons.

I can't speak to state/local firearms qualifications. At FLETC, the standard is not meant for everyone to pass, and many students have failed firearms or had to spend a lot of time after-hours practicing. The most important change I've seen in FLETC firearms training is the switch to reactive/survival shooting in certain programs, which I believe teaches the skills necessary to survive a deadly force encounter. This coupled with interactive scenarios using non-lethal training ammunition provides the student with the proper foundation to effectively use their weapon.

[FPS/SFI]

...I can't speak to state/local firearms qualifications. At FLETC, the standard is not meant for everyone to pass, and many students have failed firearms or had to spend a lot of time after-hours practicing. The most important change I've seen in FLETC firearms training is the switch to reactive/survival shooting in certain programs, which I believe teaches the skills necessary to survive a deadly force encounter.

I also love the reactive/survival shooting techniques now being used down there... but I would say that the course is still designed for an individual to pass... I mean, come on, that 70 percent standard is so easy, most people with average dexterity and eyesight could pass that after a three day drunk.

What I would really love would be if all FLETC students could get half of what we got in the Survival Shooting Training Program (SSTP). I did that course a year and a half ago, and I loved it.

[FedRich]

I've heard that SSTP is an excellent course. I'll have to put it on my FLETC training wish list :D

[ssween2]

We started off with a .357 S&W revolver loaded with .38+p rounds before we transitioned over to the Glock. In my mind that was the best way to do it.

[Eaglearm]

We started off with a .357 S&W revolver loaded with .38+p rounds before we transitioned over to the Glock. In my mind that was the best way to do it.

Kinda agree with you there. People should be trained Old School (not that it old fashion) then graduate to the New School.

[LA Express]

I've spoken with some Firearms Instructors and they indicate that training someone to shot a Glock is easier. Yet, they do not teach other weapon systems. ;) I think this a bad practice.

When I read your post, I thought you were asking about familiarization as opposed to shooting proficiency (big difference). Everyone else asked about exposing new shooters to non-Glocks in the context of shooting proficiency and I would agree with their opinions, but I would have no problem with exposing trainees to other weapons. Not to make them expert marksmen in different types of weapons, but simply to allow them to safely handle--or use their knowledge base to be able to FIGURE OUT how to safely handle--the various weapons they'll come across in their jobs. Whether they actually shoot them is another story, though I don't think a familiarization fire with other pistols to a limited extent would hurt. One day of academy range day should have the FIs bring in 10-30 different types of weapons and provide a demo on how to make each safe and how each works in very basic terms, regardless of what primary weapon they're using. No need to recall every detail, but in LE, most especially uniformed LE, you never know what you'll have to handle out there. I would personally approve of such a system (that approval plus ten cents will get you...well, thrown out of most reputable establishments).