TexasCHLforum.com

This is an interesting case. I believe it shows the problem with most officers and rifles. They tend to treat it as a large pistol, instead of the precision distance weapon it is. By that, I mean they do not practice long distance shots, with 100ft being the furthest most go. They do not practice proper sighting and continue to use it while moving - much like they are taught with pistols. Officer Munn must be an experienced shot with a rifle and much more confident in his abilities.

There are several reasons for this problem, most of which is training and not refining tactics properly. Rifles started on SWAT teams and slowly expanded to patrol. A lot of the initial tactics and training came from military urban warfare training, because a SWAT team clearing a house is very similar to a military unit clearing a house. Not too many years back (probably the 90s), the average police shootout distance was 3 to 8 feet. A typical SWAT sniper shot was in the 80 to 100 foot range. The concept of police needing to shoot at a distance has not yet permeated most departments (despite the need for long distance training and awareness being demonstrated in the ambush of officers in Pleasanton in 1999).

And one of my arguments against rifles for patrol was shown in this video too. When all we had were pistols and shotguns, officers would have positioned themselves much closer to the suspect's house than they did. They know pistols work and how to make it work when they are close up, like the edge of the property. They know rifles work from further away and it makes them safer to stay further away (most criminals are very poor shots so distance is the officer's friend). My argument fails when we develop better tactics and shooting ability in general patrolmen.