To comply with the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) which allows retired cops to carry concealed legally across the nation, LAPD instituted a qualification course for granting CCW to their retired personnel. The course is fired at a B-27 target at a distance of 7 yards, there is no time limit.
Here is the full course of fire, taken from the LAPD Manual:
The starting position for this qualifying course of fire will begin at the 7 Yard Line. When the target faces, the shooter will draw and fire 10 rounds at a single silhouette target. A score of 70 percent is required to pass the qualification. All rounds impacting anywhere on the body and head will receive full value and rounds impacting upon the arms are half value.
There is no time limit, so all you need to do is hit 7/10 shots in the torso or head of the target. It’s a pretty easy test, and yet I think it’s also a really good drill to run at the beginning of a basic pistol class.
Think about it, if you’re teaching an “introduction/fundamental/basic CCW” course, this wouldn’t be a bad drill to start with at the beginning of the class. Once you go over safe gunhandling, you get everyone on the line, and then go down the line student by student and have them execute this drill. You’ll be able to get a get a pretty good grasp of individual shooting skills based on how quickly and accurately people shoot the drill.
What do you think? I know we have some instructors that read the blog, would you use this drill as a basic fundamental skills test for new shooters in a basic class?
I think it would work fine as a basic skills test. I’m not an instructor. I think it’s a pretty low standard, though, to certify for CCW.
That is pitiful! I’m retired Fed of 30 years..15 of those as a firearms instructor. My LEOSA yearly qualification is two targets side by side. Timed fire at 3/7/10 and 15 yards with a reload drills
Holy crap is that easy. The Texas CWP test is much much harder, and that was ridiculously easy to pass.
I think as a benchmark drill it might work. It is easy enough to shoot with near zero experience that it can be shot at the beginning of a class before any actual skill development has taken place. It can then be shot again at the end of the class to show improvement and give the student something tangible. I am not sure I like using it as an actual skills test to establish/determine competence though.
It could be modified to a points per second scoring system by using a shot timer and actual point value of the scoring rings. With those modifications I think it MIGHT be useful in that capacity.
The State of Arkansas Speed and Accuracy COF which is the old LE qual for the state is pretty easy to pass and is also shot on a B-27. To make it more interesting I use a points per second scoring system, that way I can better track performance improvements.
The LEOSA is a whole different thing. Retired officers under the LEOSA must qualify on the same course of fire that their agency requires of active duty officers or the POST course of fire in the State where they live. Google LEOSA..
It says right in the LAPD manual that the qualification course for retired officers is to ensure LEOSA compliance.
The LAPD manual you linked to clearly indicates that additional firearms qualification is required for those officers to comply with the LEOSA and carry outside the State of California. I have been a qualified retired LEO since before the LEOSA was first passed in 2004. I have been “qualifying” ever since.
This is directly from the LAPD Manual:
There’s nothing in there about additional qualification required to comply with LEOSA, what it does say is that if a retired officers takes a course that’s harder than the LAPD course, it would meet their requirements. I’m just reporting what’s in the manual that I read. If you have a source for what you’re saying please feel free to post it.
The LAPD Manual does not trump the LEOSA. A “special” qualification course for retired officers from LAPD does not meet the requirements for the LEOSA especially the “amended” LEOSA as referenced in your above quote under “RETIRED OFFICER’S RESPONSIBILITIES”. It may qualify them for CCW in California but not the rest of the US under the LEOSA.. This may be beside the point of whether or not the “special” LAPD course for retired officers is good as a basic qualification course for those just learning how to shoot. This is my last reply to this.
My source is the LEOSA. Google it.
I did google it. Here’s exactly what it says, word for word on qualifications for retired officers:
There’s a pretty considerable amount of wiggle room in there, especially with the bit about “certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test” etc. What that means is that so long as the retired officer’s qualification is administered by a certified firearms instructor who is also qualified to conduct tests for active duty officers, than it would be acceptable under LEOSA. It would see that would sort of circumvent the intent of the law, which is pretty clearly to make sure that retired cops are shooting a tougher qual course, but I could easily see how LAPD could justify their Retired officer’s course meeting the LEOSA standards.
The shooting portion of the Alaska CHP test is 10 shots untimed at 7 and 10 yds at a B-27. Going off the top of my head it’s 7 in the black at 7 yds and 5 or 6 at 10 yds.
I laugh at the course required at my annual qualification. All 10 yds and closer. At the 10 from behind a barricade, we shoot 3 strong side and 2 weak side. I am always finished with all 5 shots and scanning before I hear anyone else shoot. I wonder if these same retired cops will react as slowly should they actually be involved in a shooting situation.
This is without a doubt the saddest LE qual I have ever seen.
I don’t disagree about that, my father’s a retired LA County Deputy and he makes fun of it when he has to shoot it.
But to the question in my post, what do you think about using it, with some modifications, as a basic test for shooters in a beginning pistol class?
Yes, I think a test such as this would be a quick and easy way for an instructor to have an idea of the skill level of each student in the class. Even in a basic class not every student comes with the same level of experience and knowledge. I think it would also help the instructor identify any potential problem areas to help the student with like anticipation, trigger control, grip, etc. One thing I would add to the this test would be a reload. Shoot 5, reload then shoot another 5.
Sure, it could serve well as a baseline evaluation suited ONLY for absolute beginners. It is really sad for what it is being used for. The only thing the average LEO qual does is serve to negate liability. When the average shmuck of a cop hits everyone but the perp the lawyers can say “look, he kept his shots on the huge ass B27 target at 7 yards!” What a joke.
Its application as a CCW test is not under examination here. To the question- is this a viable shooting exercise for a beginner’s course? I would say yes. This course of fire would give an instructor the opportunity to observe several things in establishing the shooter’s skill level, or more appropriately stated, their deficiencies. Does the shooter use the sights? Is their grip acceptable? Flinch? Firing line safety? Stance? It’s a short test, so it won’t take too much time to put a whole class through it. That seems more like an answer to the question being asked.
I’d think an untimed FAST drill would be a better indicator of basic skill, and the targets would be cheaper – a 3X5 card and a 9″ paper plate. It would show how well the student can use the sights, some indication of level of trigger control, do they know how to reload, and can they handle the gun safely.
Any live fire drill, however, requires some degree of understanding of gun safety and gun operation. I would not want to have raw newbies shoot any live fire drill until after they had received – and understood well enough to successfully practice – gun safety and operation.
It would be a good benchmark for a beginning shooter.
If you can’t put “7/10 shots in the torso” then you shouldn’t carry a firearm for protection.
Why is this test required at all by law? Do you need an intelligence test to vote?
At 7 yards you could literally pass this blindfolded 9 out of 10 tries.
I think this is an excellent tool for new students. I like to set expectations and even people who have never touched a gun before expect shooting to be easier then it is. I like to get new students on the range first thing, coach them through a few shots, demonstrate how to do it and move to the classroom for discussion. Some people do well, most don’t. Everyone realizes they don’t know a lot of stuff so we get to talk about it. It also makes it easier for inexperienced people to understand what you are talking about in class instead of all that seemingly abstract stuff they hear in a basic pistol class that doesn’t make any sense until they get to shoot at the end. When they see an improvement at the end of class it is a big confidence builder and encourages students to come back.
Good “pre-test” course, and I would argue, good *enough* for “CCW qualification” if statute requires a “shooting test” but doesn’t specify how stringent a test. (Yes, you *should* be able to shoot better than that if you’re going to be carrying. “Should” and “ought to be required by law before executing your civil rights” are two entirely different things.)
Obviously the LAPD ten and you’re done course is designed to conserve time and ammunition. The only possible somewhat legitimate excuse is that LAPD FA instructors are overwhelmed by massive numbers of retired officers, but still, 10rds at 7yds is embarrassing. I qualify twice a year as retired TXDPS and we shoot a total of 60rds from 3yds (18rds), 7yds (12rds), 15yds (18rds), & 25yds (12rds), the same course current Troopers shoot. Several retirees still shoot a perfect 300 score and a bunch of the old timers can still shoot 290 or better. I’ve never seen anyone fail to qualify or even score close to the 225 minimum score.
Comments are closed.