A serious problem facing the law enforcement profession today is the lack of firearms proficiency by some sworn personnel. Law enforcement officers who require more that one chance to qualify or who barely qualify need to improve their skill level with the firearms they carry on and off duty.
It's truly scary that civilians who pay for their own ammunition and, in some cases, firearms instruction can out shoot some of society's protectors. How can LEOs struggle with marksmanship after receiving excellent basic and in-service training and free ammunition for practice?
One reason why law enforcement officers fail to qualify or barely qualify is due to a lack of motivation. How else can you explain why anyone who serves in law enforcement is unable to qualify on the first try or consistently obtains a barely passing qualification score? There are law enforcement officers who work hard to improve their marksmanship capabilities and others who don't.
One problem involves law enforcement agencies that don't make remedial firearms training mandatory for sworn personnel who fail to qualify or barely qualify with their on-duty service handgun. While it's commendable that a law enforcement agency will hold remedial training sessions, the problem occurs when the LEOs who need to improve their firearms proficiency fail to take advantage of this free instruction. Every law enforcement agency that has lousy shots in their department is a time bomb waiting to go off from a liability standpoint.
If you think I am crazy, you need to talk to some civilians who honestly believe that cops should be able to shoot guns and knives out of the hands of criminals. All it takes is one person who believes in this ridiculous premise to contaminate the minds of other jury members in a civil or criminal trial.