quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

They fire 50 rds some 6 at 5 yds 6 at 7 yds etc out to 25 yds 50 need to hit a standard FBI silhouette .

quote:

They are provided one box (50 rds) per month.

quote:

As for time spent It is whatever they need.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

They fire 50 rds some 6 at 5 yds 6 at 7 yds etc out to 25 yds 50 need to hit a standard FBI silhouette .

So you're telling me they only need to actually hit a standard silhouette 35 out of 50 times?
Yes
Please tell me this is after a few miles at a dead run, at least?
No
I thought we were talking about 35 hits to vital organs and no misses, out of 50 rounds, at 25 yards. That would equate to some basic competency with a firearm.
Hits on the arm don't count

quote:

They are provided one box (50 rds) per month.

600 rounds per year is barely enough to maintain the skills to hunt with a rifle at close range (under 100 yards).

quote:

As for time spent It is whatever they need.

I hope you mean they get paid for whatever amount of training they need,
No they are allowed to use thae range whenever they wish but have to pay for anything over 50 rds a month

not that they get unlimited time when taking the qualifying tests?
The test is timed
It's widely recognized that the 60 hrs a regular cop here gets as a minimum is way too low for up to one encounter per year.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

Wow, that's really abysmal. I've heard people say it's bad, but never imagined it would be that bad.

Glad to hear you scored well yourself.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

I'm torn on what to think of the New York police because with the crowded sidewalks in NYC, it can't be easy. But part of me also thinks that had this situation been engaged differently, it might have ended differently.

In all fairness to the police, they were alerted by a citizen who witnessed the killing, they had no cover when he drew the gun, they had no knowledge of his intent, nor of how many rounds were in the weapon. I wonder how it could have been engaged differently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

They don't know he's done killing but I just think this is ironic just after one poster harped on "the only ones who should be allowed to carry are HIGHLY TRAINED police". Im sorry but these guys are 15 year vets and werent showing that they wre highly trained.

Hindsight is 20/20 but follow someone until bystanders arent at risk. You KNOW he is willing to shoot so surveilance until you can confront him without endangering citizens (yaknow those you are suppose dto protect and serve).

I keep hearing that noone should be able to carry because the police are "TRAINED PROFESSIONALS".

Im sorry but a lot of civilians would have done a better job. Im just glad none of the innocents were killed by those who were supposed to protect them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

They don't know he's done killing but I just think this is ironic just after one poster harped on "the only ones who should be allowed to carry are HIGHLY TRAINED police". Im sorry but these guys are 15 year vets and werent showing that they wre highly trained.

Hindsight is 20/20 but follow someone until bystanders arent at risk. You KNOW he is willing to shoot so surveilance until you can confront him without endangering citizens (yaknow those you are suppose dto protect and serve).

I keep hearing that noone should be able to carry because the police are "TRAINED PROFESSIONALS".

Im sorry but a lot of civilians would have done a better job. Im just glad none of the innocents were killed by those who were supposed to protect them.

This is a perfect example. Handguns have been banned in NYC for 100 years. So, clearly, bans work amazingly well.

The police, whom some people think should be the only people with guns, failed miserably. They created a haphazard shoot out. (They're currently adding up the number of rounds fired by police and it's not looking like it will be a number that makes them look good.)

The anti's side of the fence sounds like chirping crickets right now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

They don't know he's done killing but I just think this is ironic just after one poster harped on "the only ones who should be allowed to carry are HIGHLY TRAINED police". Im sorry but these guys are 15 year vets and werent showing that they wre highly trained.

Hindsight is 20/20 but follow someone until bystanders arent at risk. You KNOW he is willing to shoot so surveilance until you can confront him without endangering citizens (yaknow those you are suppose dto protect and serve).

I keep hearing that noone should be able to carry because the police are "TRAINED PROFESSIONALS".

Im sorry but a lot of civilians would have done a better job. Im just glad none of the innocents were killed by those who were supposed to protect them.

This is a perfect example. Handguns have been banned in NYC for 100 years. So, clearly, bans work amazingly well.

The police, whom some people think should be the only people with guns, failed miserably. They created a haphazard shoot out. (They're currently adding up the number of rounds fired by police and it's not looking like it will be a number that makes them look good.)

The anti's side of the fence sounds like chirping crickets right now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

They don't know he's done killing but I just think this is ironic just after one poster harped on "the only ones who should be allowed to carry are HIGHLY TRAINED police". Im sorry but these guys are 15 year vets and werent showing that they wre highly trained.

Hindsight is 20/20 but follow someone until bystanders arent at risk. You KNOW he is willing to shoot so surveilance until you can confront him without endangering citizens (yaknow those you are suppose dto protect and serve).

I keep hearing that noone should be able to carry because the police are "TRAINED PROFESSIONALS".

Im sorry but a lot of civilians would have done a better job. Im just glad none of the innocents were killed by those who were supposed to protect them.

This is a perfect example. Handguns have been banned in NYC for 100 years. So, clearly, bans work amazingly well.

The police, whom some people think should be the only people with guns, failed miserably. They created a haphazard shoot out. (They're currently adding up the number of rounds fired by police and it's not looking like it will be a number that makes them look good.)

The anti's side of the fence sounds like chirping crickets right now.

And you figure more guns would reduce the shootout.

You have no idea what NYC is like.

quote:

What I pointed out that banning things doesn't work. If people want them they figure out a way to get them. Banning drugs doesn't work. Prohibition didn't work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

If those guns were floating around in the hands of law abiding citizens then yes, the city would be a safer place. At least those citizens with the guns and their families would be safer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pyschosubmission

Firearms can only be used to kill. That is there sole purpose.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pyschosubmission

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

If those guns were floating around in the hands of law abiding citizens then yes, the city would be a safer place. At least those citizens with the guns and their families would be safer.

Firearms can only be used to kill. That is there sole purpose.

Perhaps this is just "European Socialist" ideas coming through, but, the idea that more people carrying instruments of death seems incongruous with my idea of "safer"

quote:

ORIGINAL: pyschosubmission

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

If those guns were floating around in the hands of law abiding citizens then yes, the city would be a safer place. At least those citizens with the guns and their families would be safer.

Firearms can only be used to kill. That is there sole purpose.

Perhaps this is just "European Socialist" ideas coming through, but, the idea that more people carrying instruments of death seems incongruous with my idea of "safer"

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: pyschosubmission

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

If those guns were floating around in the hands of law abiding citizens then yes, the city would be a safer place. At least those citizens with the guns and their families would be safer.

Firearms can only be used to kill. That is there sole purpose.

Perhaps this is just "European Socialist" ideas coming through, but, the idea that more people carrying instruments of death seems incongruous with my idea of "safer"

This...in spades