Combat course & E1E....

[KeeperSD]

Good thread Robocop, one thing that i wish we would do more of (actually any would be good).

and this is why I am trying to find a way to get my Raider up to speed with a lanyard.

Not sure how good you are with paracord, but this knot works very well for attaching a lanyard to lights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrictor_knot

Or maybe you could try and look at some of the new tail caps that Wolf Eyes are making with lanyard holes. Not sure if they are making them for the Raider though.

 

[Robocop]

Keeper thanks for the links and I will surely look into the new tail caps. I had no idea Wolf-Eyes was offering a new design with a lanyard.

I did try the constrictor knot as I found some photos from an old thread on a search. In theory it works pretty well however I was having trouble finding a way to actually carry it on my duty belt. The wrap and knot made it unable to fit my holster.

As of now the only way I can imagine attatching a lanyard would be to the bezel end as my light rides bezel up in my duty holster I actually have a light made by Peak (1st Responder) with a lanyard attatched to the bezel rather than the tailcap area. I actually like it better for some reason and it is very easy to "flip" the light up into your hand using the bezel attatchment....much more so than my other tailcap attached lanyards.

 

[Mercaptan]

For the average citizen(non-leo) a weapon mounted light is probably the stupidest thing you could ever do. It violates the basic principle of gun safety. NEVER POINT A WEAPON AT SOMETHING YOU DO NOT INTEND TO SHOOT. I'm sure I can come up with 100's of scenerios
to point this out.

I respect your opinion, but my two home defense weapons humbly disagree.

You are violating one of the four firearms rules of safety, being "never point a weapon at a target unless you see fit to destroy it" - you are treating it as if it is loaded, yes, and you are keeping your finger off the trigger. But, truth be told, if I am willing to shine a light on something in my home for defense, I better be able to counter and respond to the threat just as quickly and appropriately. Hence, weapon-light.

To truly assess the foreground and the background of the target, you need to inherently point the weapon co-witnessed with the light. I don't know about you, but I'm not man enough to hold a 12 gauge one-handed and a light in the other while firing, let alone working the action.

I also sure as hell cannot perform a tactical reload with a handheld-light in one hand easily (takes two-three times the amount of effort, coordination and time). That being said, this is also with a handgun. With a rifle, it only gets harder, especially based on where your gear is strung. Certainly, a lanyard in this situation would be most helpful.

Anyway, I enjoy my weapon-lights. Make me feel all warm and cozy.

To Robocop, what weapon-mounted lights did you see fail, and do you know of any reason for their failure?

 

[Robocop]

Mercaptan I am not sure however I believe one of my co-workers was using a weapon light made by Insight Technology that suffered a lamp failure while the other was using a TLR-2 I believe.

The second of the two was a battery problem I believe as his light did not shut off quickly it just went dim within a pretty quick time....it was however right in the middle of his qualification and he froze.

I am not against weapon mounted lights as they are surely a proven design and used correctly offer a great advantage. The problem I see is that officers become lazy and rely only on their weapon light. I see many officers using their weapon light for routine searches of cars or other trivial stuff that you should use your main light for. The problem here is exactly what happened to my co-worker with the failure on the line. He used his weapon light for everything and when he needed it the most it was almost spent.

He did carry a Stinger as a main duty light and was given a chance to use it on a second attempt. Yes you guessed it he had not used his Stinger for so long it was also almost spent and he had to borrow a light from another officer. He had grown lazy and used to his weapon light and in a real life situation this could easily get him killed.

I believe most of my problem is that I do not like change and have been trained for 11 years without a weapon mounted light. I simply believe for myself I do better without one as it is one less thing to worry about failing.

 

[KeeperSD]

Keeper thanks for the links and I will surely look into the new tail caps. I had no idea Wolf-Eyes was offering a new design with a lanyard.

I did try the constrictor knot as I found some photos from an old thread on a search. In theory it works pretty well however I was having trouble finding a way to actually carry it on my duty belt. The wrap and knot made it unable to fit my holster.

I have only seen the lanyard tail caps available on the P7 Sniper or the Fox http://www.wolf-eyes.com/product/Fox-I%20detail.html not sure if they offer or it would work on the Raider.

In relation to the constrictor knot, perhaps try taking the inner strands out of the paracord, makes it sit nice and flat when the knots are tied and you really shouldn't need to extra strength that it adds to hold the light. Should fit into your holster then.

 

[Mercaptan]

Mercaptan I am not sure however I believe one of my co-workers was using a weapon light made by Insight Technology that suffered a lamp failure while the other was using a TLR-2 I believe.

The second of the two was a battery problem I believe as his light did not shut off quickly it just went dim within a pretty quick time....it was however right in the middle of his qualification and he froze.

Cool, I love getting more information about reliability issues. I cannot believe any patrol officer would have a weaponlight without a backup hand-held. That just seems silly.

Some firearms instructors even have two (or more!) lights mounted to their carbines (backups for backups, even).

Thanks for your service, and stay safe out there!

 

[foxtrot29]

I remember clearly what is the worst low light training I ever got a few years ago.

I was on the firing line, alone, back to the range, with a range officer. He says, "Turn around and solve the problem." Close to me were two bad guys with guns, and a third bad guy holding a hostage. I shoot bad guys 1 and 2, then 3 in the head. Further downrange is another target in darkness. I kneel and "take cover" and observe. The range officer says, "OK, do you have a flashlight?" "No," I said. At the time, I didn't always bring flashlights to training because we rarely needed them.

"So what are you going to do?"
"I'll just watch from cover and see what he does, see if he moves into light where I can see him clearly or if he shoots at someone."
"Are you going to challenge him?"
"No, I think I'll just observe for now."
"OK. Holster your gun. Let's walk downrange." He shines his flashlight on the target and as we get closer, I see the target holding a badge. Off duty/plain clothes cop, probably. Then, I start seeing bulletholes in the cop. Lots of 'em. Wow, I thought, our guys really screwed up.

During the debriefing, the range officer says, "Everybody did well on that last scenario. . .except you (nodding to me). You didn't shoot the last target. I know you forgot your flashlight, but you need to do something. Even though everybody else had flashlights, they either didn't see the badge or couldn't tell what it was or something, so everybody shot him. Good job, everyone (not sarcastic)."

Wait, I don't shoot the cop, and I messed up? I was dumbfounded--I literally could not speak I was so amazed. I know, I should have a flashlight, but that wasn't what he was saying. Officers were being told to shoot someone they couldn't identify as a deadly force threat!

It brought home how important a super-bright flashlight is (because dirt, debris, water vapor and smoke may make the air cloudy) and how bad training can be worse than no training. I don't have 20/20 vision either, but that won't be much of an excuse for shooting an innocent.

"they either didn't see the badge or COULDN'T TELL WHAT IT WAS OR SOMETHING, SO EVERYBODY SHOT HIM. GOOD JOB..."

Am I to understand that he was praising everyone for shooting at a target that was not identified as ANYTHING before hand? I don't know what the scenario was exactly, but part of my training was to always identify a threat before shooting at it. And not "well, i wasn't sure so I blasted away".

Wow.

 

[foxtrot29]

I respect your opinion, but my two home defense weapons humbly disagree.

You are violating one of the four firearms rules of safety, being "never point a weapon at a target unless you see fit to destroy it" - you are treating it as if it is loaded, yes, and you are keeping your finger off the trigger. But, truth be told, if I am willing to shine a light on something in my home for defense, I better be able to counter and respond to the threat just as quickly and appropriately. Hence, weapon-light.

To truly assess the foreground and the background of the target, you need to inherently point the weapon co-witnessed with the light. I don't know about you, but I'm not man enough to hold a 12 gauge one-handed and a light in the other while firing, let alone working the action.

I also sure as hell cannot perform a tactical reload with a handheld-light in one hand easily (takes two-three times the amount of effort, coordination and time). That being said, this is also with a handgun. With a rifle, it only gets harder, especially based on where your gear is strung. Certainly, a lanyard in this situation would be most helpful.

Anyway, I enjoy my weapon-lights. Make me feel all warm and cozy.

To Robocop, what weapon-mounted lights did you see fail, and do you know of any reason for their failure?

Agreed. I can't remember what the acronym for this is anymore, but there is some series of phrases we learned that goes something like this:

Finger on trigger, on target -- intent to shoot.
Finger off trigger, on target -- intent to cover.
Finger off trigger, off target -- assess.

 

[Lightraven]

Foxtrot29,

I think you understand what happened as much as I do. It made no sense to hang a cop target in the dark (4th in a logical sequence of closest most obvious threats to furthest, least obvious threat) then tell everybody they were right to shoot it because. . .I don't know. I'm sure guys honestly didn't see the badge in their light beams with all the gunsmoke at 10-15 yards, but so what? If you can't see the badge, the gun isn't visible, either.

Better instructors--which is to say, very experienced tactical officers both in their own shootings and in court for others'--have said as much. It's not that he doesn't expect officers to make mistakes--but he surely doesn't train them to make mistakes. "Be sure of your target and background."

I'm still a little perplexed that anyone could say something so opposite of what you're supposed to be learning.

Two weeks ago, we shot something similar but not in the dark. This time, the targets were covered and quickly pulled towards us on a pulley. When they got close, the cover pulled away to reveal--a bad guy with a gun or knife, a fellow officer, or a guy with a cell phone.

I didn't shoot the cop or the cell phone dude, of course--but a lot of my coworkers did. Lots of bulletholes, right through the guy with a big Police ID panel on his chest in bold letters. I actually watched one of my coworkers shoot everything that moved--the fellow officer, the cell phone guy, the bad guy. The range officers asked, "Why did you shoot this guy?" "Uh, I guess I messed up." I guess so. Talking to another officer, he asked if I shot the cop. "No," I said, "but I do a lot of training to hold fire until I'm sure of what I'm shooting at. Games, live fire, simulations. I've spent a lot of time doing this stuff."

That training isn't fun and games--I was in a real shooting, at night, in October.

 

[foxtrot29]

Foxtrot29,

I think you understand what happened as much as I do. It made no sense to hang a cop target in the dark (4th in a logical sequence of closest most obvious threats to furthest, least obvious threat) then tell everybody they were right to shoot it because. . .I don't know. I'm sure guys honestly didn't see the badge in their light beams with all the gunsmoke at 10-15 yards, but so what? If you can't see the badge, the gun isn't visible, either.

Better instructors--which is to say, very experienced tactical officers both in their own shootings and in court for others'--have said as much. It's not that he doesn't expect officers to make mistakes--but he surely doesn't train them to make mistakes. "Be sure of your target and background."

I'm still a little perplexed that anyone could say something so opposite of what you're supposed to be learning.

Two weeks ago, we shot something similar but not in the dark. This time, the targets were covered and quickly pulled towards us on a pulley. When they got close, the cover pulled away to reveal--a bad guy with a gun or knife, a fellow officer, or a guy with a cell phone.

I didn't shoot the cop or the cell phone dude, of course--but a lot of my coworkers did. Lots of bulletholes, right through the guy with a big Police ID panel on his chest in bold letters. I actually watched one of my coworkers shoot everything that moved--the fellow officer, the cell phone guy, the bad guy. The range officers asked, "Why did you shoot this guy?" "Uh, I guess I messed up." I guess so. Talking to another officer, he asked if I shot the cop. "No," I said, "but I do a lot of training to hold fire until I'm sure of what I'm shooting at. Games, live fire, simulations. I've spent a lot of time doing this stuff."

That training isn't fun and games--I was in a real shooting, at night, in October.

Yeah, at least that is how I was trained. I mean, if you shot the guy with the cell phone or police id, and were able to honestly articulate as to why you did so that is something else. But for the instructor to say the target should have been shot at because no one was sure what it was is just wrong. I don't care what the reasoning is.