Trigger (Finger) Warning

 Last week, in response to reports of an IRS agent being shot dead in a training accident, Rich Grassi published a piece at The Tactical Wire on how all the basic gun safety rules flow from the first and greatest rule: "All guns are always loaded". Thus:

    Rule 1 [is] in effect. If there’s any doubt, there can be no doubt. Any firearms activity defaults to “it was loaded.”

    Rules 2-4 (and, to stretch a point, Rule 5) arise from Rule 1. We mind the muzzle, avoiding covering anyone and most things, because all guns are always loaded.

    We keep the index finger at high register (straight or bent), avoiding the trigger and trigger guard, because all guns are always loaded.

    We don’t seek targets through a magnified optic and don’t shine weapon-mounted lights around when searching because of Rule 2 (and Rule 4: positive visual identification of the target) both of which stem from Rule 1.

    Because all guns are always loaded, we attend to the muzzle – don’t cover anything you don’t want to destroy – and keep your finger (and other snag hazards) away from the trigger. ...

He posted a follow up a couple days ago to respond to a comment from retired LEO who noted that it was common for officers to point their loaded handguns at potentially dangerous suspects: "His statement had to do with gunpointing potentially dangerous violators. For example, if you get a robbery in progress call and arrive to find someone hurriedly leaving the case address with gun-in-hand, the ‘old’ police response was to draw, aim in and order the perp to halt." He notes that the officer in question had retired in 1993 and so was probably trained in the 1960s. But if you watch videos of police responding to calls, it is generally the case that if the pistol comes out of the holster, it is immediately trained on the suspect, not kept in a ready position.

    In any event, Grassi addresses the question of whether "gunpointing" offers any significant advantage in terms of speed. 

    Does gunpointing someone provide a time advantage over having the muzzle averted?

    What does a suspect think if they see someone at low ready with a stern disposition and with a commanding voice … do they think he’s unprepared to shoot?

    Let’s take each issue in turn. As Jeff Hall noted in a piece he did for PoliceOne in 2009, when the officer says “it’s faster,” the response is:

    Not so. I’ve tested instructors from Florida to Alaska and have found that it takes .48 to .52 seconds, either from the ready or on threat and “indexed”, to get a center mass hit on a known target, using an electronic timer. Ron Avery is the director of the Practical Shooting Academy (and Firearms Columnist for PoliceOne) and a world-class IPSC shooter and trainer. Ron’s research showed about .40 seconds. Ron does not feel that running around with guns in folk’s faces is a good tactic, either.

    Consider that I take .18-.26 to press a shot on the Vickers Demand Drill (aimed in, finger on trigger, slack out; cut the beep of the timer in half with the gunshot). That’s a trigger control drill not a street tactic. If it takes me around .50 to make the hit from guard, can the offender tell it’s ¼ second slower?

As to the question of whether a criminal will take you more seriously if you are pointing the weapon at him, Grassi writes:

    In my experience, hardened felons hardly bat an eye at gun muzzles pointed at them. A percentage have been shot before, some multiple times. It’s another day at the office for them. Let’s say it’s someone who’s at wit’s end, not a career criminal but someone who’s contemplating self-destruction. Their response is often “Go ahead, shoot me. I have nothing to live for.”

    Now what? With the gun instead at ready, as you are moving to an obstacle – cover or concealment – while using cogent verbal skills, you’re literally better able to communicate – and to see the offender.

And he goes over the downsides, including as briefly noted above, you can't see the criminal as well if your view is partially obscured by the firearm you have pointed at him or her. Or perhaps you are pointing the firearm at the wrong person. And there are the legal consequences:

If the gun is aimed in on a person – without any intention to immediately service that target – and the gun gets fired, regardless of how – what legal position are you in? While you may be justified in an intentional shooting, “There’s no such thing as a justifiable accident.” Justifiability, Ayoob notes, is a defense reserved for the intentional act.

 In short, then, "Gunpoint provides only two very minor advantages – along with huge downside risks. Don’t do it."