Carry gun shooting proficiency - what's good enough?

[Chasbo00]

The IDPA Classifier is an excellent measure of pistol shooting skills. It's ninety rounds total. For those interested, here is a link describing it in detail.

http://www.idpa.com/classify.asp

[Kreutz]

I've been struggling to come up with an easy-to-do and measure standard that's a viable good enough measure for those of us who carry. It's intended to be a minimum standard one should be able to perform with their carry gun(s). I would appreciate any thoughts or comments you may have and especially the results if you give it a try.

Can you pull the gun and shoot bullets at whatever is trying to kill you?

Good enough for me.

[Rich]

I have to agree with Kreutz. I have come to realize that if I ever need to use a firearm for self defense...it is going to be up close and personal. I cannot imagine any senario where I would be in a shootout with someone a few yards away. If that were the case I would be trying to get the hell away from them. Obviously if you are in Law Enforcement its a totally different story. But no matter what the situation... you certainly need to spend a LOT of practice time with the firearm.

[tursiops]

I've got a problem with calling something like this a "standard." Too easy for some well-intended politician to take it and do the wrong thing with it.

I do like the "5" drill, but too bad it is not a 5 drill anymore with an 8 1/2 x 11 target!

I'd be more comfortable with a ladder sort of attainment scale....something that provides a metric against which one can improve. So, something bigger from a closer distance with no time limit, kind of a Level 1 Proficiency, which is all about unhurried accuracy. Then something smaller from a greater distance with a time limit, Level 2. Then something small (your 5"?) from a greater distance with less time to do it.

The point is to give people an escalating metric for improvement....

[Rualert]

I've got a problem with calling something like this a "standard." Too easy for some well-intended politician to take it and do the wrong thing with it.

I do like the "5" drill, but too bad it is not a 5 drill anymore with an 8 1/2 x 11 target!

I'd be more comfortable with a ladder sort of attainment scale....something that provides a metric against which one can improve. So, something bigger from a closer distance with no time limit, kind of a Level 1 Proficiency, which is all about unhurried accuracy. Then something smaller from a greater distance with a time limit, Level 2. Then something small (your 5"?) from a greater distance with less time to do it.

The point is to give people an escalating metric for improvement....

This is where I think the IDPA classifier COF comes into play, different distances, shooting from cover, shooting while moving, and from a still position. The changing distance makes what up close appears to be a good size target gets much smaller when trying the same one from 15 - 20 yards max range. At 5 yards that target looks big in comparison.

Just my 2 cents,

Casey

[tursiops]

This is where I think the IDPA classifier COF comes into play, different distances, shooting from cover, shooting while moving, and from a still position. The changing distance makes what up close appears to be a good size target gets much smaller when trying the same one from 15 - 20 yards max range. At 5 yards that target looks big in comparison.

Just my 2 cents,

Casey

Yeah, this is good, but not something most of us can do at a range. No moving, no cover, maybe not even drawing from a holster. So, different ranges/target sizes, different hands, rate of fire, that's about all you can vary.

[mamabearCali]

I have to agree with Kruetz. (and now I fall over from shock!)

I think we should all have our personal standards for what we carry. Mine is no rounds outside 10 inch circle and no FTF/FTE at 10 yards. However I sure don't want a standard dictated to me by some "do gooder" politician.

We all should practice, we should all strive to have 3 inch groupings. However if there is a minimum standard to be able to CC then it is just another thing that will keep the divorced mom with three kids from being able to keep themselves safe from a homicidal maniac. Another thing to make the second amendment into a privilege rather than an unalienable right.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Chasbo00]

This began in another thread as a follow on to the often given advice of carry the biggest caliber you can effectively control. So, what's considered effective control and how do you measure it? I tried to broaden this to the question of what's a good enough level of basic pistol shooting skills with one's carry gun and to come up with easy to apply measure (standard) that almost anyone could run on nearly any range.

It's pretty clear that most don't like idea of a minimum standard. Some have expressed a fear it could somehow be applied in a restrictive or limiting manner. Others stated that they don't think a minimum standard should apply to citizen gun carriers. I've been concerned about being able to accommodate non able bodied folks and the validity of the measure itself. I'm going to take the advice of some and see if I can modify this drill with at least three basic categories such as basic, intermediate and advanced and make it a drill rather than a standard.

My belief is that technical shooting proficiency with a handgun used for defensive purposes had two key components - accuracy and speed. So, a suitable drill needs to measure both of these things. Pistols are not powerful enough to be reliable at stopping a threat quickly with just one or two shots. To be a proficient, you need to be able to shoot multiple shots relatively quickly and with at least some level of control to maintain the necessary accuracy. What's the necessary rate of fire and level of control (read accuracy) needed? Well, who knows? I don't recall the source, but I clearly remember an account of two guys having a shootout in an elevator where both emptied their 5-shot snub-nosed revolvers and neither was hit. Another aspect is that one will not likely shoot as well when stressed with a real life-or-death situation as they do shooting a drill - some think performance will degrade by about half. What I'm going to try as a means to come up with the criteria for different shooter proficiency categories is vary only the distance while keeping the other aspects of the drill the same.

I asked my wife to shoot the drill as it stands now; start low ready, 5 rds, 5 yds, 5 secs, 8.5x11 inch target. A little background first. My wife is what I'd call a plinker. She likes to shoot and does pretty well with nearly any slow fire type shooting. She does not have a CHP and shoots with me about twice a month or so for usually for less than 30 minutes and only practices what she considers fun things. Although she is not in the least recoil shy, she prefers to shoot a .22. Here's how she did:

Starting with Smith and Wesson M&P 22 (.22 rimfire):
1st run: 5.23 Sec, Best split time 0.65, Clean, 5 of 5 rds in 5 in circle too
2nd run: 3.22 Sec, Best split time 0.45, Clean 3 of 5 rds in 5 in circle too
3rd run: 3.23 Sec. Best split time 0.33, Clean 4 of 5 rds in 5 in circle too
[She shot the first run cold; I asked her to shoot faster. The sheet of paper had a 5-inch circle in the center and since I had a shot timer and wanted as much info as I could get I used the shot timer rather than just a 5 second par time] For a plinker she did pretty well huh.

Next was a repeat with a Smith and Wesson full size 9mm (nearly the same gun based on size and controls)
1st run: 4.9 Sec, Best Split 0.50, Clean, One round nearly off paper
2nd run: 4.15 Sec, Best Split 0.64, Two misses
3rd run: 4.66 Sec, Best Split 0.67, One miss, within two inches of paper
Again, not bad for a plinker who does not practice shooting rapidly. These results, when compared to those with the .22 indicate that she needs to work on her grip some (her stance was fine). I did not try it; but I'm pretty sure if the target distance were 3 yards instead of 5, she would have easily maxed this drill.

Thanks for everyone input, I'll keep working on this and keep you apprised of how it's going.

[mamabearCali]

I don't disagree with your drill. I think it is a good one. May try it the next time I am at the range.

What I take issue with is "citizen gun carrier" is somehow different than "citizen" and requires further scrutiny by whomever is in charge of the gov't at the time. Firearms are dangerous tools. So are knives. So are saws. So are axes. So are post hole diggers. Each one of those has potential to be deadly. So should we have a safety class and qualification at Lowes before we purchase a compound miter saw? No, I don't think so.

We already have a class to keep people from killing themselves when they get their CHL if they have never held a handgun before. I see no reason to have the nanny state come in any further. Besides you give the gov't an inch they will eventually take a mile. Common sense qualifications once every 5 years turns into more difficult qualifications yearly, then they impose a fee (to offset the cost of the instructor at qualifications), then the fees go up cause they can, then you have to submit paperwork that your eyes are in perfect shape, then you have to have a psych eval.. I am not saying all of this would happen immediately or even at all, just that once you open Pandora's box, Katie bar the door.

The truth of the matter is that we have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. There is no asterisk at the top stating "only if you can shoot at X qualification."

I am not saying we should not try to be better all the time. I am not saying that we should not practice. I am just saying that we need not have a state mandated test to be a citizen who chooses to exercise his 2nd amendment rights.

[mk4]

^^^
agree, Christie.

there is nothing in 2A that speaks to qualifications, etc. it just says "...shall not be infringed." that said, i do feel a personal moral imperative to be well-versed in the operation and highly proficient use of my chosen defensive sidearm, along with any firearm i own. the key point is that i believe that it is a *personal* imperative, not a nanny-state, government-imposed imperative.

in reality, choosing some standard, 5yds-5rnds-5seconds, or whatever is likely to fall apart in a real life-and-death situation. 5 feet may be more likely. at that distance i'm not concerned about first-to-second shot splits or anything. i'm not at all likely to miss, either. i'm most concerned about stopping the threat, and if that means running the gun to slide-lock, then so be it. that's also why i carry what i consider to be a definitive defensive caliber and spare magazines.

i realize that shooting is a competitive sport to many and i respect that. to me, carrying a defensive sidearm is all about personal self-defense. i'm not interested in any competitive spirit. it's me (and mine) or the bad guy, and i'm extremely biased. the bad guy takes his chances at getting the 'horns'... .357sig horns.

[Chasbo00]

My use of the term citizen gun carrier was intended to mean not a cop, military, armed security guard, or some person required to carry a gun as part of their job. Those who carry a gun as part of their job should have shooting proficiency "standards." Sounds like I may need a better term for non-professional gun carriers.

[Chasbo00]

Here's the latest rendition of the drill. I may need to adjust the distances after some more input.


The Defensive Handgun Drill

Starting position is the low ready (pistol loaded and pointed down at 45 degree angle, safety off, trigger finger outside trigger guard)
Fire 5 rounds
Within 5 seconds
From a distance of 3, 7 or 15 yards
At an 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of paper
Repeat 3 times (15 rounds total)

Performance levels:

Advanced – From 15 yds, all 15 rds on paper, all runs 5 sec or less
Intermediate – From 7 yds, all 15 rds on paper, all runs 5 sec or less
Basic – From 3 yds, all 15 rds on paper, all runs 5 sec or less

[WRW]

My personal drill is to walk out back, fire on a 55 gallon drum 90 yards away, listen for the "tink", then walk back inside. I figure if I can keep a knife wielding thug from advancing from that distance I should be OK.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Chasbo00]

I tried to find a source where two guys had a shootout in an elevator and each shot their revolvers dry, yet no one was hit - no joy. Did find this though: