The National Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association (NLEFIA) recently released the results of its five-year study on pistol red dot sights in law enforcement. As a firearms instructor familiar with the science of human factors, I had additional questions regarding the survey’s methodology and results.
Unfortunately, the survey was small. A larger number of responses would have increased the validity of its findings. As stated in the summary, there was difficulty making people aware of the survey in the law enforcement community, despite organizations like Police1, Force Science and NLEFIA members disseminating it. It attempts to answer some questions while creating others. I want to look at both.
The survey required that either the officer involved in the shooting, the firearms instructor of the officer, or an investigator of the OIS complete it. Some may have chosen not to respond due to pending litigation. Another reason may be that the OIS results were not favorable. The survey focused on equipment, training and hit ratios in the OIS.
| RELATED: The verdict on pistol red dot sights in law enforcement: Insights from a 5-year survey
Equipment
Glock had the highest use at 77.1%, with Smith & Wesson trailing at 11.4%. The remainder were Staccatos. The 9mm dominated caliber choice, with .45 only showing 6.7%.
Trijicon’s RMR and SRO were used in almost 60% of cases, while Holosun’s 407/507/508 and 509T accounted for around 25%.
Training
A surprising 20% of respondents indicated that they had no training from their agency prior to carrying the RDS. The survey asked whether those officers had training outside of their agency or if they were self-taught.
Half of the officers had 16–20 hours of training on the RDS, 40% had 10 hours or less, and around 10% had more. Not all respondents answered this question. The survey also explored whether the low hours of training, or lack of training, correlated with the 14% of officers who reported difficulty or delay in seeing the dot during their OIS.
Over half reported more than 40 hours of live-fire training with the sight before their shooting. Another 22.9% had 11–20, 14.3% had 31–40, 2.5% had 21–30, and some had 10 or fewer hours. When asked how many practice rounds — either training or on their personal time — they had fired prior to the OIS, around half reported 2,000 or fewer, around a quarter answered 2,000 to 5,000, and less than a quarter reported more than 5,000 rounds. The survey raised the question of whether the number of rounds fired, hours of training and practice correlated with individual hit ratios, and whether there was a specific number of hours or type of training that yielded the best results in OISs.
| DOWNLOAD: How to buy firearm optics (eBook)
Shots fired
The biggest question regarding the use of the RDS was whether it improved hit ratios in OISs. The survey reported a 63% hit ratio. A 35% hit ratio is generally considered the average in OISs in the U.S. One incident involved 23 rounds being fired at a suspect behind a barricade with only one hit. Removing that incident raised the hit ratio to 73%.
Officers in training scenarios and OISs have reported not seeing their sights during a shooting. The survey looked at whether the same results would be reported when using RDS.
The only reports of not seeing the dot occurred at five yards or less. In my conversations with Josh, he indicated “most” of those respondents said they did not see their sights. Additional officer comments showed three indicated that the shooting occurred at close/contact distance, which didn’t allow for using the sight. The survey asked what reasons remained for not seeing the sights among officers outside of those close-contact scenarios.
Five officers reported having a delay or difficulty seeing the dot during the OIS. Two indicated the RDS failed or became occluded, but no cause was reported. The survey attempted to determine what specifically caused the difficulty, occlusion or failure of the RDS.
Four of the shooters reported being unsatisfied with the use and performance of the RDS. The survey asked what aspects of the RDS left those officers dissatisfied.
I think the most important survey result is summed up in one officer’s comment: “By utilizing the optic on my handgun, I was enabled a larger picture of the suspect’s actions as well as a sighting system.” Research done by Force Science has shown that officers who maintain a threat focus rather than a front sight focus have a better ability to see a suspect’s movement, which results in a reduction of shootings caused by misidentifying an object held by the suspect as a gun. That ability sped up the officer’s response to a deadly force threat and showed a marked improvement in accuracy.
This survey provides us with some answers about the training and use of the RDS, while at the same time raising additional questions that may be answered by further analysis of the data or additional surveys and research. The modern trainer should be using evidence-based, research-driven information when determining what officers should be trained in and how that training is delivered. The law enforcement community should be thankful to NLEFIA for their efforts in gathering and disseminating this valuable information.
Tactical takeaway
Survey data suggests red dot sights can improve OIS hit ratios, but training hours and practice volume remain critical variables for officer performance.
