CAF MP SUES DND AND SIG SAUER

[brihard]

If you do the training package that the C22 mandates, it's fairly robust and should result in comfort with a readief pistol. That said I reiterate the issue is that we should begin training with a pistol on the assumption you'll carry it loaded and readied. The problem becomes now we have to teach two different draws - one readied and one not. The correct drill should be i unholster my pistol, load it, ready it, check the brass indicator / press check it, return it to my holster. In even the even i have to engage in draw and fire, potentially from the hip or chest if i dont have time and space. That is all normal pistol drill.

Conversely where the caf begins i now have to teach soldiers to potentially do an awkward half draw / ready drill and then do what after they engage? Unload and holster?

All this is to say that carrying a loaded readied pistol isnt inherently dangerous, the CAF at large just sucks at teaching it. Thats what creates the training scars at play here. Regarding the threat - if its high enough to justify carrying a loaded weapon why would you not carry it readied?

100% this!

 

[Infanteer]

If you do the training package that the C22 mandates, it's fairly robust and should result in comfort with a readief pistol.

I've done it. Its a good package, but doing it once does not equal expertise. The problem isn't with the training package, its that afterwards, most Army members rarely ever see a pistol again.

the CAF at large just sucks at teaching it.

Hence my comment on training and experience.

Outside of those who carry a pistol as their principal weapon for duty (namely, MPs), who is the next largest user of pistols? Generally HQ personnel on some sort of base, who have neither the training nor the experience to competently handle the thing. Watch an average clearing bay in a HQ to see what I mean. Not a good thing, but a reality.

For the branch that is generally looked at as having the most experience and comfort with small arms, the Infantry, the pistol is pretty much a sideshow with limited application, and so generally receives less priority for training.

Regarding the threat - if its high enough to justify carrying a loaded weapon why would you not carry it readied?

...because the threat isn't high enough and carrying it loaded saves one from having to carry a loose mag? Haggis also spoke to retaining the action of readying the weapon as a UoF technique.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I don't know how it is with the C22/C24 training, but before I got out (2018) the Army sucked at pistol training and would often default to "safety scared, not safety conscious".

Like holding the unloaded rifle backwards (pointed down range) as you walk back to the firing line.



I have no reason not to believe the MWO's account of events. The timing is curious how the first time this may have actually happened in Canada was someone standing on a range opposed to regular MP dudes loading and unloading pistols every day, getting in and out of cars, and in and out of chairs.

 

[brihard]

Like holding the unloaded rifle backwards (pointed down range) as you walk back to the firing line.



I have no reason not to believe the MWO's account of events. The timing is curious how the first time this may have actually happened in Canada was someone standing on a range opposed to regular MP dudes loading and unloading pistols every day, getting in and out of cars, and in and out of chairs.

I’ve seen comments elsewhere that he may not have been using the holster approved for this pistol, but instead a modified one intended for a different model. I’m very curious if that’s true.

 

[Infanteer]

Like holding the unloaded rifle backwards (pointed down range) as you walk back to the firing line.

That's what I meant when I said "weird psychology."

 

[markppcli]

I've done it. Its a good package, but doing it once does not equal expertise. The problem isn't with the training package, its that afterwards, most Army members rarely ever see a pistol again.

Expertise and able to handle it safely aren't the same thing. One doesnt need to be an expert to keep the weapon holstered.

Hence my comment on training and experience.

Outside of those who carry a pistol as their principal weapon for duty (namely, MPs), who is the next largest user of pistols? Generally HQ personnel on some sort of base, who have neither the training nor the experience to competently handle the thing. Watch an average clearing bay in a HQ to see what I mean. Not a good thing, but a reality.

Sure but again thats a training failure. Should we adopt our policies based on the expectation that we won't actually conduct mandated annual refresher training? Again having different standards of carrying the pistol increases the training burden, it does not lower it.

For the branch that is generally looked at as having the most experience and comfort with small arms, the Infantry, the pistol is pretty much a sideshow with limited application, and so generally receives less priority for training.

Agreed, but its a weapon and we are expected to be proficient.

...because the threat isn't high enough and carrying it loaded saves one from having to carry a loose mag? Haggis also spoke to retaining the action of readying the weapon as a UoF technique.

Id argue that i can re rack a loaded weapon if i need that as an escalation, but being unprepared to fire my weapon when I need it is planning for failure. This is the hang over of UN ROE training.

 

[Infanteer]

This is the hang over of UN ROE training.

Probably. I'd offer that its anchoring bias based on a career of using a service rifle. It's certainly where I am coming from at this as I am not a pistol guy in my spare time. For as long as I've been in, a weapon is readied and is on safe, and is removed from safe when it is fired and then placed back on safe. There is an external safety that is used. Introducing a weapon with no external safety is a change to that mindset.

 

[brihard]

Probably. I'd offer that its anchoring bias based on a career of using a service rifle. It's certainly where I am coming from at this as I am not a pistol guy in my spare time. For as long as I've been in, a weapon is readied and is on safe, and is removed from safe when it is fired and then placed back on safe. There is an external safety that is used. Introducing a weapon with no external safety is a change to that mindset.

Think of the holster as doing most of the work of the external safety. Trigger weight does most of the rest. The little bit left is trusting your troops to keep the booger hook off the bang switch.