PURPOSE OF THE QUALIFICATION
By law, agencies must conduct a background investigation and oversee required training for each CCW applicant before granting them a permit. Departments have an interest in reducing their liability and adverse public exposure if their permit holders engage in unlawful or negligent behavior. When a CCW permit holder engages in an altercation, two major questions are asked:
Was the CCW holder justified in using the deadly force?
In doing so, how did they perform?
With regard to the first issue, CCW training providers are obligated by California law to provide instruction on the permissible use of a firearm (26165(a2) PC). Obviously, this is an extremely important topic, but it’s not the focus of this article. However, I will address the second issue pertaining to the performance of the permit holder who had engaged in a gunfight.
California lawmakers have directed that CCW “courses shall include live-fire shooting exercises on a firing range and shall include a demonstration by the applicant of safe handling of, and shooting proficiency with, each firearm that the applicant is applying to be licensed to carry (26165(a6) PC).” Since the law nor CA DOJ have established a state-wide performance standard, issuing agencies have taken the words “live-fire shooting exercises” and “demonstration” to mean a qualification course, not unlike the courses required of their officers.
Therefore, each agency has established its own qualification course to evaluate their applicants’ performance. This has led to a variety of qualification courses being administered throughout the state. The important question is - Do any of these qualification courses adequately evaluate whether the shooter will perform well in a gunfight?
Likely not.
Qualification courses hardly reflect the conditions of actual gunfighting. Current courses are designed so that:
The shooter is static
The adversary is static and fully facing the shooter
The adversary is not shooting back
Cover and concealment are not in available
Lighting conditions are optimized
Ground is flat with no trip/fall hazards
In an actual gunfight, both the shooter and adversary are free to move and to use cover and concealment in order to gain a tactical advantage over each other. Hits on the shooter and/or adversary will impact the performance of the injured party. Environmental conditions will vary with respect to light, ground surface, and objects nearby.
Currently, there is no push to revolutionize qualification courses to take into account the factors above. Time, funding, technology are a few factors prohibiting a dramatic change in qualification courses. Also, changing established agency procedures can be a difficult process. However, if we can come to an agreement that current courses have room to improve, then we have an opportunity to design courses which can be defendable in the courtroom and in the public sphere.
There are three goals when designing a qualification course:
Measurement of performance
Safety
Efficiency
These three goals will be referenced repeatedly throughout this article as we delve into qualification course design. For agencies, the first two goals are important. They want a defensible way to measure shooter performance and for them to be safe doing so. However, the third goal is significant for CCW training providers who have limited time to train the applicants.
Measurement of Performance
With regard to measuring performance, there are three basic questions:
Did the permit holder incur any injury or die during the gunfight?
Did the permit holder injure or kill the adversary in the gunfight?
Did the permit holder cause any collateral damage?
From the perspective of the permit holder, the first question is the most important. They have spent time and money to obtain a CCW permit to survive violent encounters. However, the issuing agency may have a different priority: fear of litigation and negative public perception when one of their permit holders is involved in an altercation.
An adverse impact is unlikely for an agency when a permit holder survives in a justified shooting. Even in cases where the permit holder happens to loose the fight, the agency is likely not exposed. However, problems may arise if the CCW holder inflicts collateral damage by hitting uninvolved parties during a gunfight. The public will question whether the agency which granted the permit performed due diligence in measuring the shooting performance during the application process. Therefore, from an agency’s perspective, the qualification course should measure the applicant's potentiality for inflicting collateral damage.
How do we minimize collateral damage? Foremost, the shooter must hit the adversary in the torso and/or head so the rounds are absorbed by the target. Another important factor is the type of rounds used. Jacketed Hollow Point (JHP) rounds are preferred due to their expansion and limiting penetration. This will decrease the chance of a “pass-through” round hitting someone due to over-penetration.
Barring ammunition selection, we should measure performance in terms of hits and misses on a human-sized torso target. Obviously, agencies would like shooters to have a 100% hit rate, approximating no collateral damage. However, since agencies are not demanding a 100% hit-rate for their officers, it would be unreasonable to subject CCW holders to that standard. I will discuss passing percentages below.
Safety
Agencies must also design a course which is safe for both the shooters and the instructors administering the course. Risk comes from not matching the shooters’ skill levels with the difficulty of the course. Compared to the average law enforcement officer, the average CCW holder has a lower level of gun-handling skills (there are outliers for both groups, however). Officers have had hours of firearms training in the academy and at least quarterly firearms training sessions; most CCW holders have limited time training. Further, a few CCW holders have mobility issues and rely on canes, walkers, and wheelchairs. Some may have impaired hearing and have difficulty comprehending instructions. The adoption of an existing law enforcement qualification course, especially courses involving complex instructions, or a movement component, is not advisable.
Efficiency
An overlooked factor when designing a course is efficiency in its application. Training time for CCW applicants is limited and much of that time is covering material in the classroom. Instructors want to minimize the time required for qualifications to allow more time on training the fundamentals of shooting and firearm-manipulation skills. A properly designed course can be conducted quickly while still measuring performance and remaining safe. Factors which impact efficiency such as rounds per stage of fire, total round count, distance, and target selection are discussed below.
DESIGN FACTORS
There are several variables which can be manipulated to to design qualification courses. An infinite number of courses can be derived by changing the criteria listed below:
Distance
Time
Rounds per stage
Total rounds
Target Type
Passing percentage
Manipulations and movement (single-handed shooting, timed reloads, etc.)
Law enforcement agencies in the San Francisco Bay Area have a diverse set of qualification courses. Some departments place “stress” on the applicants by having them shoot at longer ranges, others with shortened stage times, and still others with manipulations like single-handed shooting. Ultimately, we need a systematic approach to understand the importance of each variable in order to optimize the design of a CCW qualification course. We discuss each one below.
Distance
What are ranges in which gunfights are occurring? Utilizing FBI Law Enforcement Officers Killed or Assaulted (LEOKA) data of 397 incidents between 2010 and 2019, 67% of gunfights occurred under 4 yards and 81% occurred under 7 yards.
This would seem to indicate that qualification courses should focus on close ranges to approximate actual gunfights. I agree to an extent; however, having observed the performance of numerous shooters, stages of fire closer than 5 yards are not useful for measuring performance. Nearly every shooter I have examined hit a body-sized target placed less than 5 yards away. At 5 yards and beyond, with the addition of a time constraint (discussed below), we can discern performances levels amongst the shooters.
A few Bay Area courses have stages fire starting at close range (1.5, 2, or 3 yards). As mentioned, these distances are too close to gain meaningful information on performance, but another important factor is that it requires specialized skills to engage at these distances. Shooters should not extend into a firing position at a distance under 3 yards because the adversary can block their draw, divert their aim, or disarm them using this method. To fight in a close-quarters situation, one must understand when it is safe to draw and to use “retention shooting” methods to prevent the adversary from disrupting their shots. Paladin offers a Close Quarter Pistol course to train CCW holders how to draw and engage at these ranges.
If 5 yards is the minimum distance, then what is the maximum? Based on LEOKA data, 80% gunfights occur under 7 yards. Since extending the range to 10 yards would get close to 90% of the altercations, this would be a reasonable maximum distance for a qualification course.
Two Bay Area qualification courses extend to the 15 yard line or beyond. The inclusion of a 25-yard stage by one issuing agency is likely a method to identify poor performers. Although a good intention, it would be better to place a time stressor on the shooter at closer distances since this resembles actual gunfighting conditions. Another argument against a 25-yard stage is that some CCW training facilities do not have 25-yard ranges in order to conduct this qualification course.
Recommendation: Based on LEOKA data, 5 yards to 10 yards is a reasonable distance to conduct qualifications.
Time
The primary goal in a gunfight is to immediately incapacitate the adversary. Every fraction of a second longer the fight goes on may result in the injury or death of the CCW holder or others. Unless the fired round hits the brain or spinal column, the adversary may not be incapacitated until he becomes unconscious through blood loss. Adding more hits on the adversary can increase the rate of blood loss and, thus, hasten unconsciousness. Therefore, increasing the rate of fire can be critical to winning the fight, but shooting faster may result in higher inaccuracy…and collateral damage.
CCW trainers are obligated to train their students how to win by shooting faster, but doing so without decreasing their accuracy to the point of missing the target. The qualification course should test whether that standard was met.
So what is fast? High-level shooters can draw and fire a round from the holster in under one second and then fire additional rounds under 0.20 seconds (5 rounds a second). For CCW applicants, I would consider a reasonable standard to be a two-to-three second draw and then a rate of one round per second at ranges under 10 yards on a man-sized target. With an adequate grip, the pistol can recover from recoil and the shooter can confirm the sights are on target within this one-second timeframe. Therefore, a 5-shot string from the holster should be under 7 seconds. This “timing” should be taught by the training provider and should be reinforced in the qualification course. If we are going to focus on a variable to “stress” the shooter, time should be the variable rather than distance because it is more applicable to winning the fight.
Recommendation: Shooters should be under “aggressive” time constraints to complete the stage of fire (e.g. 2-3 second draw with 1 second/round thereafter).
Rounds per stage
A factor in the design of the qualification course is the number of rounds expended at each stage of fire. Current Bay Area courses have 5-, 6-, and 10-round stages.
One major factor influencing the number of rounds per stage is California law limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds. A second factor is that agencies allow their applicants to add 5-shot revolvers onto their permits. Based on the divisibility of 10 by 5, the optimal count for each stage is 5 rounds. In this case, a 10 round magazine allows the shooter two 5-round stages without reloading. Also, revolvers and pistol with capacities under 10 rounds would fill their weapons with only 5 rounds.
Recommendation: 5 rounds per stage the increases the efficiency of administering the course.
Total Rounds Expended
The current CCW qualification courses in the Bay Area range from 13 to 50 rounds. Will shooting more rounds give us a better measurement the CCW applicants ability? Based on my experience with these various courses, the answer is no. Properly designed qualification courses can reveal performance deficiencies with a limited number of rounds.
Listed below are three downsides to high round count qualification courses:
1) To increase round counts, short range stages of fire are introduced. However, even inexperienced shooters do not miss at these ranges when engaging large targets. Therefore, these close-range stages do not provide any meaningful measurement of performance.
2) High round count courses require filling of magazines on the firing line once the first two magazines have been expended. Also, many applicants have issues filling the 10-round magazines due to a lack of hand strength. Both of these factors will slow down the course significantly.
3) 50-round count qualifications can be expensive for those who have multiple pistols on their permit. Each pistol will require the purchase of an approximately $20-25 per box of ammunition.
I opine that a 20-round qualification course is optimal for efficiency (see below for the “4-5-7 qual”). The shooter can complete this course with two fully filled 10-round magazines. This is likely the state in which the permit holder would carry his pistol (unless the pistol is topped to off 11 rounds). To optimize efficiency, students can arrive with two pre-filled 10-round magazines for each pistol. This prevents lost time in class due to filling magazines.
Recommendation: When designed correctly, a 20-round qualification course will increase efficiency without impacting the measure of performance.
Targets
Traditionally, we see three types of targets for pistol training, each with a specific purpose:
Skill building: Targets may depict bullseyes or various shapes used for competition or to practice specific drills
Practical: Photo-realistic representation of person for tactical exercises or shoot/no shoot scenarios
Qualification: Usually depicts a silhouette of a head and torso and contains defined hit zones to numerically score a target.
Properly designed qualification targets should have a circle to outline the upper thoracic cavity (UTC) region on the torso. The UTC is where the heart and large blood vessels are located. Hitting the UTC is more likely to cause immediate incapacitation of the adversary. Alameda County Sheriff target ACSO-21 and the Contra Costa County Sheriff target COCOSO-1 are examples of targets which outline the UTC.
On the other hand, some agencies use the B-27 target for qualification. This target has the highest scoring area centered in the upper abdomen rather than the UTC. This target should be retired from use because it forces the shooter to aim at an incorrect location. Qualification targets should reinforce where to place rounds to cause immediate incapacitation.
Although the ACSO and CCCSO targets referenced above are adequate qualification targets, those can be ordered only from a limited number of manufacturers. Another option would be utilizing the IDPA (International Defensive Pistol Association) targets for qualifications. IDPA targets have been in use worldwide for decades as a mechanism to measure shooting performance. As such, they should be generally accepted as an appropriate target. These are available from numerous commercial sources and cost effective at approximately $1.00 each.
The IDPA target has three scoring areas on the torso. The highest scoring area is an 8-inch diameter circle over the center of the UTC. The next area is an oblong octagon, referenced as “-1.” The remaining area to the edge of the target is referenced as “-3.”
Since this is a qualification course and not a competition, there is no need to differentiate the hit placement for the qualification. If we are measuring performance based on the minimizing collateral damage, it makes no difference whether the shooter made the hit in the UTC circle or the outer edge “-3” zone. All hits on the torso should count the same for the official score.
Nevertheless, the internal markings of the IDPA can be used by the shooter to independently judge their performance. Taking into account the areas of the target, a hit in the area of “-1” subtracts one point from the maximum score and a hit in the “-3” is a subtraction of 3 points from the score. Missing the target is a loss of 5 points. Using this system can differentiate the performance between shooters. One shooter may have placed all his rounds into the UTC circle, while the other has rounds sporadically spaced throughout the torso. Both have achieved a 100% on their qualification, but one is a much better shooter. Trainers can use this to point out to their students that although they have passed the qualification course; they have to put more time into their training to improve accuracy to the point of placing all rounds in the UTC.
Recommendation: Utilize targets to reinforce upper thoracic targeting such as IDPA, COCOSO-1, or ACSO-21. All hits in the torso area count as hits to calculate the passing score.
Passing Percentages
Most LE agencies use 70% as a minimum score to pass the qualification. The few agencies which use an 80% standard have qualification courses with unlimited times at each stage. Applicants with little or no training are passing all the current Bay Area qualification courses; only a very small percentage fail. Most of those who fail will subsequently pass with some remedial training.
A minimum passing score of 80% is reasonable and easier to defend. As mentioned above, I advocate for a 20-round qualification course. Utilizing the target and scoring system in the previous section, it’s simple: the shooter is allowed to miss the target with only four of the 20 rounds. Any more than four misses is disqualifying.
Recommendation: The minimum passing score should be 80%.
Manipulations and Movement
Below, I will analyze weapon manipulations and movement as factors in the design of a qualification course:
1) Drawing from the Holster
About half of the Bay Area qualification courses require the drawing of the pistol from a holster to commence the stage of fire. This is a good practice since CCW holders will likely have to do so at the start of an engagement.
From a safety concern, there is some risk that the shooter could discharge the pistol during the draw. A method we use to help shooters stay safe during qualifications is to allow them to obtain a firm grip on the pistol with their strong hand and to place the support hand on their chest prior to the draw. On the “fire” command, they draw, bring the hands together to build the grip, and then extend to the firing position. With regard to holstering, we insist that they clear their garments and watch the pistol back into their holster. If they feel any resistance while holstering, they are to cease that movement and clear the obstruction before proceeding.
Recommendation: Drawing from the holster should be included in a CCW qualification course.
2) Single-handed Shooting
Several Bay Area qualification courses have a single-handed shooting component. This skill is useful in several conditions which include:
An injury to a hand or arm
Holding a flashlight in low-light conditions
Grasping an object or guiding a person
A significant number of gunfights result in injury to the hand and arm which will require the use of only one-hand to stay engaged with the adversary. Also, most CCW holders don’t have weapon-mounted lights on their pistols. This requires them to hold a flashlight, relegating them to single-handed shooting in low-light conditions. Since single-handed shooting may be necessary, I believe that the qualification course should include this skill.
The current qualification courses that utilize single-hand shooting do so at the 1.5 or 3-yard line. As mentioned above, these distances are too close to adequately measure performance. A timed stage of fire at the 5-yard line is a good measure of performance.
Recommendation: Single-handed shooting at the 5-yard line should be included in a CCW qualification course.
3) Timed Reloads
Some CCW qualification courses incorporate a defined reload (either untimed or an extended period of time). For law enforcement, reloading the pistol quickly is an important skill as it’s estimated that approximately 5-10% of police shootings require a reload. Since officers carry extra magazines in pouches on their belt, it can be tested under timed conditions during the qualification. However, CCW holders usually don’t carry an extra magazine or don’t carry it in a way that is quickly accessible (pocket, pack, etc.). Adding a short, timed reload would created an artificiality because CCW holders would only wear magazine pouches for their qualification in order to make the time for the stage of fire. In addition, revolver shooters are generally slower at reloading than their semi-automatic pistol counterparts. To make it “fair,” the course would have different times for each weapon type. This complicates the course and drives down efficiency.
Recommendation: Timed reloads should NOT be included in a CCW qualification course.
4) Movement
One agency in the Bay Area is incorporating movement in their qualification course. This is likely an attempt to make the qualification course resemble gunfight conditions. Although this is laudable effort, the positive effect is outweighed by the safety and efficiency.
There are two methods combining movement with shooting. The first is “move-THEN-shoot" and the second is “moving-WHILE-shooting.” With the first case, moving and then "settling in” before taking the shot has some value, but ultimately the shooter is still stable during the firing process. Shooting a pistol WHILE moving is a more difficult skill to mastered and will require additional training beyond the 16-hour requirement. We teach this skill in our Intermediate Pistol and Advanced Pistol courses after completing their required CCW training.
Movement on the range can be lateral, forward, or backwards. Lateral movement is integrated into some law enforcement quals to mimic moving to cover before shooting or moving off the line of incoming fire. Practically, to maintain safety, this requires large spacing between the shooters and a higher instructor-to-shooter ratio to avoid anyone crossing into the line of fire of an adjacent shooter.
A former FBI qualification course had two stages of fire requiring a forward sprint before shooting the target. This de facto physical agility test within the course resulted in failure for mobility-impaired agents. Similarly, some CCW applicants are physically impaired and are seeking a permit because they feel vulnerable because of this condition. Therefore, requiring any rapid movements in the course is counter-productive to the applicants’ abilities and needs.
Recently, I have become aware of a qualification course which has the shooter run up-range from the adversary at the commencement of the stage, turn back towards the target, and then shoot. Running up-range impacts both safety and efficiency of the qualification course. First, the shooter must not draw the pistol until he has fully turned back toward the target to avoid flagging the instructors or adjacent shooters. Second, if one shooter moves significantly faster than the adjacent shooter, he will flag this adjacent shooter who is still downrange when he draws. Backward movement in a qualification course is not advisable.
Recommendation: The decrease in safety and efficiency outweigh any value gained by incorporating movement in a CCW qualification course.
4-5-7 QUALIFICATION COURSE
Below I describe the "4-5-7 qualification course." The name reflects the structure of the course: 4 stages, shooting 5 rounds at each stage, while allowing 7 seconds to fire the 5 rounds. The course has been tested with students attending Paladin's Basic Pistol course and we've seen good results.
As of 2/22/2025, 61 of 63 students who shot the course obtained a passing score. The two who failed the course would have likely failed any of the current Bay Area qualfication courses. We plan to continue to validate the 4-5-7 course in the coming months to ensure the failure rate is remains within a reasonable level.
COURSE OF FIRE
Target: IDPA, COCOSO-1, or ACSO-21
Setup: Fill two magazines with 10 rounds each (or 5 rounds each for low capacity magazines)
Stage 1
5-yard line
5 rounds in 7 seconds
Draw, load, and holster the pistol.
Prepare for draw by placing strong hand on the pistol and support hand on chest
On “Fire” command, draw and fire 5 rounds using the strong hand only. Holster.
Stage 2
7-yard line
5 rounds in 7 seconds
Prepare for draw by placing strong hand on the pistol and support hand on chest
On “Fire” command, draw and fire 5 rounds using two hands. Once complete, stay at compressed ready.
Stage 3
7-yard line
5 rounds in 7 seconds
From compressed ready, on “Fire” command, extend to the firing position and fire 5 rounds using two hands. Holster.
Stage 4
10-yard line
5 rounds in 7 seconds
Prepare for draw by placing strong hand on the pistol and support hand on chest
On “Fire” command, draw and fire 5 rounds using two hands. Conduct a safety check and holster.
Scoring
Each hit on the target counts as 5 points.
Passing score: 16/20 or 80%
Kommentare