Barrel Truths

Why Standard Range Training Fails Combat Shooters

Last time, we talked about some big-picture ideas around firearms training through an EcoD lens. In this post, I am going to address what I see as one of the core issues in firearms training.

Barrel Alignment

One of the key issues in developing training from an EcoD approach is that you must identify the things that don’t change (called invariants in the EcoD jargon). For shooting, the key invariant is barrel alignment. If the barrel is correctly aligned at the moment the trigger breaks and the gun fires, the bullet will strike the target.

In many types of shooting, there are a number of factors that affect what correct alignment is. If you are shooting at a distance, you must aim higher because the bullet will fall as it travels. You also might have to adjust for wind or the fact that the target is moving.

A slow 9mm bullet traveling at 900 feet per second will cross 25 yards in less than a tenth of a second. At these speeds, things like gravity or a suspect's movement barely come into play. So, we can treat correct barrel alignment as the barrel being pointed directly at the suspect when the trigger breaks.¹ So our focus should be on getting trainees to understand when their barrel is aligned with the target or not.

Training to Feel Barrel Alignment

This is exactly what most traditional range training does. Chances are you've experienced this - First, we show the trainee how to hold the weapon. Next, we show them how the sight system works. Then we show them how to stand and tell them how to press the trigger.² Then they start shooting. Instructors watch what the person is doing and give them verbal cues to try and correct deviations from the “correct” way to hold the gun, align the sights, press the trigger, and stand. Instructors will also diagnose issues from where the rounds hit. For example, if most rounds are hitting to the right, the shooter may be pulling the trigger that way. As the shooter becomes more proficient at quickly and accurately shooting the target, the difficulty of the course of fire is increased. Across firing thousands of rounds, shooters learn to find this ideal alignment and can often tell as they shoot whether or not the round is going to be accurate.

The Big Issue

So what’s the problem? If your goal is target shooting, there isn’t one. Target shooting allows the shooter to stand the same way and work the pistol in the same way every time. The training at most ranges works very well for this type of shooting. Just watch a professional shooting contest—the shooters make it look effortless, like they’re machines! The high-friction grip, squared stance, arms fully extended, elbows and wrists locked, pistol directly aligned with the dominant eye way of shooting appears to be the most efficient way to shoot a pistol at range targets.

The problem comes in when we consider our old friend transfer. In the context of training, transfer refers to the ability to apply skills learned in one environment—such as a controlled range—to a different, often more dynamic, environment, like a combat scenario. The assumption of range training is that it transfers well to combat shooting. I think the data I discussed in the previous post shows that it does not. One big reason standard training may not transfer is that the officers often cannot use the affordances (opportunities for action) that they learned on the range. Stated more directly officers aren’t doing in combat shooting what they learned to do on the range. I detail some issues below:

1. Poor Sight System: Firearms trainers all acknowledge that standard pistol sights are not a very good system for aligning the pistol. Two big issues are:

   • The distance between the front and rear sights is short, limiting precise alignment compared to rifle sights.

   • You must focus your gaze on the front sight to achieve alignment. Under life-threatening stress (which includes most combat shootings), this is hard to do. Your visual system is set up to look at the threat, making it very difficult to focus on the front sight.

2. Movement: Officers often move during combat shootings. They may practice achieving alignment while moving on the range, but they don't do it very often. That’s a problem—on the range, you barely move. But in actual shootings, officers move. Some movements make it impossible to achieve barrel alignment using standard grips and postures.

3. Non-standard Postures: In many combat shootings, officers cannot achieve their normal range posture to shoot. This includes situations where the suspect is very close to the officer and situations where officers are shooting around or under objects or otherwise must shoot from a “non-standard” posture.

Put it all together and you have part of the picture of why officer accuracy drops in real shootings but is high on the range: on the range, officers practice in static positions with perfect alignment. In real-life situations, they’re moving, shooting from awkward positions, and don’t use their sights because stress takes over.

Possible Fixes

How do we bridge the gap? How do we fix this disconnect? We have to move away from the standard range practice where trainees stand at fixed known distances to train. I’m not saying to get rid of it completely—I still think a little traditional training is needed to familiarize the trainee with operating the firearm on the range in a safe manner. But after that, it’s time to start introducing things that will force them to achieve barrel alignment outside of the standard range posture. What follows are some general suggestions to improve officers’ sense of barrel alignment.

Improve Shot Feedback

First, we need to maximize feedback to get the most out of training time. Feedback is critical because it helps trainees connect their actions to outcomes, enabling them to refine their skills. Without immediate and clear feedback, learners struggle to understand what adjustments are needed to improve. In a lot of range shooting, trainees only get feedback on a group of shots—not each individual shot. For example, shooters keep their pistols in shooting position during an entire course of fire, obstructing their ability to see which round went where. This dramatically lowers the feedback available to the student. It is the equivalent of training someone to shoot basketball free throws where they only get information about a set of shots. For example, they shoot five shots but can’t see if the shots went in; they are only told that they made three of the five shots, and worse, they don’t know which of the 3 went in.

We certainly don’t want students lowering their weapon after every shot, so how can we improve feedback? Below are a few suggestions:

• Steel Targets: Use steel targets when possible. These provide instant audio feedback when a shot hits. Of course, there are safety concerns about ricochets or splashing at close distances that limit their use.

• Student Spotters: Pair students so one shoots while the other provides accuracy feedback. This can be as simple as saying hit or miss after every shot, or—if the pace of fire allows, the spotter can include location information such as “low left.”

• Reactive Targets: Use paper targets that leave a bright, visible mark where the bullet hits, allowing the shooter to detect shot placement more easily.

Amplify Barrel Alignment Information

As mentioned above, standard pistol sights do not give great information about barrel alignment. Fortunately, some recent innovations may enhance this information:

• Miniature Red Dot Sights (MRDS): These scaled-down versions of rifle red dots allow the shooter to maintain focus on the threat (instead of cycling between front sight and threat focus). They also seem to improve accuracy and are more visible during force-on-force scenarios, suggesting better barrel alignment information than traditional sights.

• Lasers: While more controversial, lasers can amplify barrel alignment information. For example, lasers can show where the barrel is pointed when it’s not aligned with the eyes or if it’s moving during trigger pull. They can be used as a secondary tool to provide feedback to students, instead of as the primary aiming system.

Change Positions

If combat shootings require officers to shoot accurately from a variety of positions, then the only way they can learn to align their barrels in those situations is to practice doing it. Again, training should establish a safety baseline, but after that, we need to change things up:

• Moving: Spread trainees out and establish clear movement rules to practice moving in different directions and at various speeds, helping them develop a deep understanding of their capabilities. Taking a single step is usually a good place to start.

• Unorthodox Positions: Practice shooting from unusual positions, such as from the back or around obstacles. While simply experiencing these positions helps, frequent practice is required for proficiency.

Ultimately, firearms training isn’t just about putting the correct number of holes in a paper target—it’s about using deadly force to protect yourself and others in chaotic situations. This brings us to the other part of the picture we haven’t tackled yet—most firearms training just isn’t lively enough. When I say liveliness, I mean the stress, chaos, and unpredictability of real-world police shootings. Effective training must reflect these realities. I’ll discuss making training more lively in the next post.

1. Yes, I know a normal human can sprint at around 22 feet per second so if this person was 25 yards away and running at full speed and their direction was exactly perpendicular to me at the time of the shot, they would be about 2 feet forward from where the barrel was aligned at the time I shot by the time the bullet got there. But most movement in combat shooting will be much less than that.

2. Also, a lot the the standard shooting posture and grip is not about accuracy per se, but about recoil control which allows the shooter to make faster follow-on shots. Quick follow-on shots are often necessary as a single pistol round will often fail to stop a threat, but the recoil control elements of posture do not affect barrel alignment directly.