Firearms training sufficient?

Having completed the firearms training for the year 2000, I would like to raise the following points for Training Wing's consideration.

In a mock scenario on the mini-range, a hawker accused a man of demanding protection money. The man grabbed a knife and fled. I drew my extendable baton and ordered him to stop. Suddenly, he turned and threatened me with the knife. I pointed my baton and demanded he put it down. Ignored, I struck his forearm.

With the screen turning bloody red to show I was injured, the instructor asked me why I did not use my revolver. I said officers should use the lowest degree of force and I could well manage the situation with the baton. However, he insisted I should have used the revolver and because of my failure to do so, I got injured and therefore failed the test.

I believe firearms training should in no way contradict the principles regarding the use of force and we should avoid sending the wrong message to our frontline staff. Also, I am puzzled why everyday equipment such as extendable batons and OC Foam are not used during firearms training. Though it would be difficult for the screen to 'feel' this equipment, officers' response could still be recorded by video camera and monitored by instructors.

Officers also entered the mini-range with unloaded revolvers, so instructors could try to snatch their weapon from different angles and test their ability to protect it. Instructors concerned about possible injury could wear protective gear.

Ling Kim-kwong
Senior Inspector

Thank you for your thought-provoking and useful comments. The Use of Force Continuum adopted by the Force is benchmarked against international standards and best practices. Use of force is reactionary and dependent on the resistive action of the subject, the officer's perception of threat and knowledge of their own ability. The subject may enter the continuum at any level while the officer, in order to exercise control, is justified in using the minimum level of force greater than that being offered by the subject - the "one-up" principle.

A knife attack is very dangerous unless you are a considerable distance from the assailant. We generally do not recommend officers to take the risk of using a baton.

To give officers clear guidelines on use of force, all scenarios for decision making training in the mini-ranges are scrutinised thoroughly by a Scenario Vetting Committee chaired by the Assistant Commissioner of Training, with members from Regional Emergency Units, formations and Weapons Training Division. They decide what action should be taken for each scenario (e.g. to issue a verbal warning or to fire). The one you mention is classified as a "shoot scenario" in which officers are justifed to open fire to stop the action of the assailant, and protect themselves in a life-threatening situation.

The design of the mini-range focused on decision making in the use of firearms. I fully concur that mini-range training should be enhanced to integrate all levels of force, such as OC foam and batons. However, new computer hardware and software need to be installed. To this end, a plan was drawn up in 1997 to upgrade our mini-ranges so the use of force continuum could be integrated. The Police Training School and Police Tactical Unit mini-ranges have already been upgraded. The remainder will be upgraded this year and the use of OC foam or batons will be integrated step by step.

The new mini-ranges will be interactive and the scenario will develop in response to the officer's action. These branches and various endings will create a more realistic scene and teach officers the correct use of force. To ensure these scripts meet training needs, we will consult officers when preparing sketches and practical exercises.

Regarding your last suggestion, refresher training for weapon retention is now being conducted at conventional ranges.

Should you have further suggestions on the subject, please feel free to contact me.

Lee Yeung-chi
Superintendent Weapons Training