Why Police Shooting Standards Aren’t What They Should Be

Visit: https://www.TF70.org/donate to help support our cause!
Join the TF70 Patreon for some HUGE perks: https://www.patreon.com/TaskForce70Foundation

Over 70% of America’s law enforcement agencies serve communities of fewer than 10,000 people. These rural and small-town departments face serious challenges—limited funding, inadequate training, and declining public trust.
The Task Force 70 Foundation was created by experienced rural law enforcement professionals to change that. Our mission-driven training program is grounded in the principles of the U.S. Constitution and enhanced with modern tactics. We prepare officers to respond to today’s threats, save lives, and earn back the respect of their communities.
Despite being the majority of the nation’s law enforcement, these officers receive little to no training support from local, state, or federal sources. That leaves both them and their communities vulnerable when emergencies strike.
You can help. Your donation will support the construction of a dedicated training facility, cover tuition, and offset travel and overtime costs which are the biggest barriers to department access.

#police #cops #lawenforcement

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Most cops are trained to use deadly force. However, most of that use of force training, especially in firearms, comes from a military foundation. It is also designed to do what's easiest for the institutions. Hey, I'm Chappie from the Task Force 70 Foundation. Guys, today we're going to be releasing the Patrol Institute's study, and if you don't know, the Patrol Institute is a part of the Task Force 70 Foundation. It's part of what your donations every month support is the think tank that doesn't otherwise exist for patrolmen. So this is one of the studies we've been working on through the Patrol Institute. Myself, Chris Sislov, Doc Spears, Joe Weyer, and several other people have been working on this concept in general for over 10 years. And Chris Sislov and I, over the last couple of years, have been really refining an integrated methodology for creating a marksmanship program that serves the larger purpose and it interrelates with all of the other necessary doctrinal pieces so that we can train police officers at every level. Guys, before we get deep into the meat and potatoes of this, hit the website, hit the like and subscribe here. Find our website over at tf70.org. There will be a long-going, continuing amount of material coming out along this line, especially in the armed movement portion of this methodology over on Patreon. So check out Patreon, you can support the foundation and get some good get some good information out of it at the same time. So, guys, one of the fundamental pieces missing in some places, especially in smaller agencies, through no fault of their own, is the purpose of firearms training for law enforcement officers. Most law enforcement firearms training comes from a military firearms training foundation. Most of the older generation of firearms instructors, the people who built the current doctrine, come from a military world. And they were built or they came up and they were taught to teach around something called combat shooting. Combat shooting is a military application of firearms to the accomplishment of a larger mission. That is the purpose of, at its base level, of the application of lethal force in a military context. That context does not exist in the law enforcement world. The only time we shoot at people is to rescue, either rescue ourselves or rescue a member of the public or a victim. That's the only time it's legally justified for us to shoot. The challenge we face in the modern age is that our officers are not trained with that in mind, generally. There are some agencies that do a phenomenal job at this, but those are generally not the small ones. And it's again through no fault of their own that they find themselves in this position unknowingly. So the problem generally with our modern law enforcement firearms training methodology is that it's based around combat shooting. Combat shooting is designed to accomplish a mission by creating casualties in the opponent. In a law enforcement realm, we have a completely different set of responsibilities. Combat marksmanship is built around the methodology of striking a target somewhere on the body, which has led to the big B-27 targets that a lot of police officers in a lot of states are unfortunately very familiar with. That coming from a military background or a military foundation is for the purpose of creating a casualty. Every casualty on the part of an opponent in a military application takes resourcing off of the battlefield on the opponent's side. That is not the appropriate application of force for us. The law enforcement application of firearms can only be used to prevent death or serious bodily harm. That's not only a case precedence issue, that is also a constitutional issue. We do not exist in law enforcement inside the United States to create casualties. We exist to preserve life and property. In order for us to accomplish our constitutional mission, the level of marksmanship required to do that effectively and constitutionally is much higher. The targets that we must be trained to shoot at are much smaller. Shooting a person on the body when they are trying to kill us or somebody else can be effective when they die of sepsis in six months. That is not the goal of this. The goal of this is not even to kill them. The goal of this is to apply gunfire to a very precise point that is biologically proven to make them stop doing whatever it is that caused us to start shooting them. That target is very small. In general, on a human, there are two places to do that. We can do it in the top third of the heart or in the center of the brain. If it's necessary for us to shoot somebody as a law enforcement officer, we're not shooting to kill them. We're not shooting them in these places so that we can ensure that they can't testify. It's not what we're trying to do. If a law enforcement officer is forced to shoot somebody, that is a very heavy responsibility that we carry with us every day. In order for that to be effective, we have to be able to use the least number of rounds possible to effectively make them stop doing that. Whatever they were trying to do to hurt or to seriously hurt or kill us or somebody else, it's necessary for us to make us that stop right now. And there's only some very small targets on the human body that make that realistically possible. This conceptual understanding of what's necessary for us to fulfill our constitutional duties is what led us to develop the rescue marksmanship program. In well over 20 years of teaching cops across the United States, I have a very clear understanding of the general level of proficiency of officers with firearms. And it's unfortunately fairly low. And over the last five years, as I look, large agencies don't seem to be losing much ground. But smaller agencies seem to be losing a lot of ground. In accuracy, I mean. And the reason that's important is all the things I just explained, but what can we do within our power to fix that? We think the rescue marksmanship program is the first step in that process of improving our ability to regain the public trust that we've lost. We've lost some of this trust with some members of the public because of the facts that come out in the news whenever a shooting occurs with us, whether it was a justified shooting or not. If there are any mistakes made, they will be immediately pounced upon by the media. It's kind of why the media exists, though, constitutionally, is to keep us, the government, in check. That's what they're supposed to do. But we can't keep taking L's like this unnecessarily. We keep shooting own goals on things that are well within our power to fix, and one of those is marksmanship. This is most commonly expressed in the public's uh perception of our abilities through the number of rounds fired versus the number of rounds that were effective hits on the target. The public sees this as we shot him 81 times, or we we missed the target with, you know, in some jurisdictions, over 80% of the shots fired failed to even hit the target at all, the target person, much less hit the very small places that exist on the human body that make the attack that caused us to start shooting stop. We also see some other issues most recently in Canada with law enforcement officers shooting the wrong person or shooting somebody who doesn't need to be shot. That is a multifaceted problem. It mostly revolves around lack of confidence due to either poor or low levels of training or check-the-box carinocracy training, which we'll talk about here in a little bit, that creates a lack of confidence. And the less confidence an officer has, the less likely they are to give themselves time or even conscious ability to make a good decision as to whether or not to shoot at all. So given our understanding of where standards come from, let's talk about why they're starting to roll back a little bit. Over the last 10 years, especially and most pronouncely within the last four or five years, we've seen the standards applied to law enforcement officers through the application of firearms actually falling in small agencies. There's reasons for that. Most of them are demographic and some of them are bureaucratic. On the demographic side, this problem is driven by a lack of qualified applicants to departments. So what that means is the cycle rate for officers coming and going from departments is much faster than it used to be. That leads chiefs and sheriffs into the position or puts them in the position where sometimes they just need somebody minimally state qualified in order to have somebody out on the street to respond to calls. The people to hire just don't exist. That is a problem that is beyond a chief's or sheriff's ability to fix. So one of the purposes of the rescue marksmanship program is to give those chiefs and sheriffs and the leaders that they've appointed responsible for taking care of this, give them some tools that they can take the same raw material that we've always had within reason. The common applicant today doesn't have as good of an education, doesn't have as high of a literacy rate as they used to, but in the physical realm, some of them, most of them, are still capable of performing the same basic tasks like the application of force as the generations before us were. However, we have to train them in a much more specific way. The percentage of law enforcement officers who are former military members who are veterans is getting lower every year. Fewer and fewer veterans come to work in the police. So not every military veteran is a firearms expert. So, but they have some level of fundamental understanding of the basics of combat marksmanship. With that kind of foundation, we can build a rescue marksman out of them that is much more difficult to do with an untrained civilian coming into the law enforcement service, but it's not impossible by any stretch of the imagination. So one of the purposes of the Patrol Institute's effort to push out this white paper and lesson plan, which I'll discuss at the end of the video what they are and where they are, where you can get them. One of the purposes of this is to give agencies a starting point to bring everybody from whatever position they're starting from, bring everybody to a higher level than they are now, which is what we're trying to accomplish. The second reason that firearms training has devolved a little bit over the last 10, 5 to 10 years is that firearms instruction as a specialty has devolved into a credentialing process in a lot of regions. The officer goes to an instructor development class and then he goes to a 40-hour firearms instructor class. And because of the velocity of manpower issues in most of these agencies, they're just happy to have a firearms instructor. Now, if you've watched my previous video on the difference between coaches, firearms instructors, and mentors and teachers, you'll understand why these folks who are firearms instructors, the department has to continue to invest in them over the long term. Becoming a firearms instructor is simply a credentialing exercise. We need these folks, and the smaller the agency, the more true this is, the more of an expert they need to be, because they need to be able to identify issues with shooters, with law enforcement shooters early and apply what limited teaching resources they have to the actual problems. Instead of just reading off of a checklist, this person went through the police academy 11 years ago, they they minimally qualify, and I'm going to push them back out onto the street. Your community expects a lot better of you than that. The next challenge to a robust firearms training program within any agency that we've identified through our research with the Patrol Institute is a problem called ladder pulling. Ladder pulling is when a person gets into a specialized training role and then does not create an apprentice behind them immediately. That is absolutely required. If you've just graduated the firearms instructor school and you're running qualifications, and let's say that everything is perfect and there's cotton ball clouds across impossibly blue skies, and you're going to two classes a year from various firearms, commercial firearms schools, you're getting some dead bang special operations shooters teaching you how to shoot better, teach you know, stealing their material of how they teach it, like you're getting everything you need to get. If you take all of that capability that you're developing and you pull, you ladder pull, you you don't bring any up anybody up behind you from the start, when you retire, uh that capability is gone for your agency and usually or sometimes the region as well. So we have a responsibility as instructors, mentors, and teachers to immediately be looking for apprentices and bring people with us. Firearms instruction, especially in small agencies, is not a rice bowl. It's not something for the instructors or the teachers to hoard for themselves because somebody might replace me before I retire. That is not the trade way. That is not how any trade operates, not and progresses. So all you're going to manage to do by doing that is forcing people to employ you well into your 80s, and that is not the way. So let's move on. So rescue shooting is critically important for law enforcement because, as I said in the beginning, the military application of firearms is different than the law enforcement application of firearms. And it's deeper than the requirement for tight shot groups. It's a far deeper issue than that. The primary issue in that is making good decisions. The reason that's so critically important for police officers, it's important for military members to make good decisions in all things that they do, including the use of force. And the military teaches pretty well their use of force methodology. The problem is it's different for us. When a military member goes into a field with a firearm, he's working under the direct supervision of somebody else. Somebody else is making the decisions generally whether we're shooting, who we're shooting, who I'm responsible for shooting. Are we ambushing these people? Are we running a defense? And if so, what sector of fire am I responsible for defending? All of those are orders that military members are given, either in general or in specific, and it requires fewer decisions for them as an individual. As police officers or deputy sheriffs, 100% of the time there is nobody there to tell you what to do. The decision whether or not to fire, what force to apply, how long to wait, how to make that decision most effectively is solely on you as an individual. And if we're training police officers and deputies to be the same kind of shooters that we are teaching military members, we are doing our communities a serious disservice because we are removing the decision-making process from the shooting process and isolating those two things differently. Those two things have to be connected at the hip at all times. The only way these officers make good decisions is by becoming confident in their individual ability. So, what does rescue shooting look like when we're actually practicing it or training it or doing reps? What is it actually trying to do? So, what we're trying to do with rescue shooting is to create a much smaller, more precise target that is generally a three-inch circle. There are some variations. If you come to the website, I'll give you how to get all this all these documents at the end of the video. You'll see that there's two different size targets. There's a three-inch circle and a six-inch circle. The six-inch circle only exists because of mechanical issues, and if you're interested, shoot us an email, I'm happy to explain it. But the three-inch circle is the standard. Our goal here is to teach an officer to put all of the rounds that they fire inside of 25 yards with the handgun and inside of 50 yards with the rifle, inside of a three-inch circle, no matter the circumstance. We have a methodology that's laid out in the materials that I'll point you to that helps us build to that. It's not a gate. We're not trying to get anybody fired from their department for not being a Delta Ninja Lurp shooter. What we're trying to do is create a process that they can shoot consistently and predictably and reliably the same so that they can develop the skills necessary to be able to shoot some semblance or shoot at some semblance of that level in an emergency. Because we understand that it's a physiological and psychological fact that no matter how good of a shooter a person is, the more sudden the encounter, the more common misses are. The goal of this isn't to prevent somebody from missing a three-inch circle in a real shooting in a real emergency saving real Americans. It's not the goal. The goal of rescue marksmanship is to build the confidence in the abilities of the individual officer to the level that if they miss or when they miss, most likely, they're not all the way off the body of the person that is forcing them to shoot them. That's the goal. If we're shooting at a three-inch circle for the top of somebody's heart from no matter what direction or what aspect ratio is what that's called, if we miss by an inch, that's still a good hit. It doesn't mean we're going to stop shooting. We train law enforcement officers and we already do a somewhat okay job at this. We train officers to shoot until the threat stops, until they stop doing whatever it is that caused us to start shooting them. The goal of the rescue marksmanship program is that number one, they're hitting those targets with fewer rounds. And number two, when they miss those, because that's statistically going to happen on the street, the misses are much less consequential because we're still striking the person that we were legally justified to shoot. If we miss their body completely, what's in the background? The public that we're trying to protect is in the background. Now, depending on the individual circumstance, that might not be an issue, but that's always an issue. If your department has had two shootings. In the last 10 years, and your hit rate is 50%, and hit rate means you hit the suspect, fine. What we actually want to see and what your community expects to see, and we'll talk about why here in a moment, is that 100% of your hits hit the person you were shooting at. That's what the community expects of us. And that expectation is absolutely reasonable. Another reason that we're so invested in rescue marksmanship as a foundation and more particularly as a patrol institute is the vast majority of times that law enforcement officers have to apply lethal force to a problem, we are shooting pistols. And pistols suck at killing people. We're not looking to kill suspects, but the only effective, repeatable way to make sure they stop, we're not counting on wishes and unicorn farts. The only thing that we know for a fact makes them stop as rapidly as possible is hitting a three-inch target from any angle, two very specific targets in the human body. If we shoot somebody in the spleen and they give up, that's great. But that's still not a win. We have not performed at the individual level at the level that the community expects us to. So the overall goal of the rescue marksmanship program is to train the officers to a level that is such a high standard that if they can come near reaching it, the mistakes that they make will be less severe. Instead of missing whole people, they'll miss the very precise small spot that they need to shoot. That makes it safer for the public that they serve. This also allows them to make better decisions. The higher the level of confidence that the individual officer has in their ability, the more likely they are to make a good decision. Not because of an egotistical reaction to resistance, it's because the officer knows what they are capable of. We're going to talk here in a moment about the rescue marksmanship tracker, which is also available as part of this program to agencies and to good American citizens. The purpose of this is to build not only ability but also confidence. The more confident an officer is in their ability, the longer dwell time they have to make a good decision. So whether or not to shoot somebody at all. It also makes confidence equals calm generally. We don't, and we don't accept constitutionally overly emotional decisions for officers when they're applying force. That is not acceptable. Making a decision because we're angry will always lead to a bad constitutional outcome. So the Patrol Institute has created two products, four that are available now on the website. I'll explain to you how to get to those at the end of the video. Two things. One of them is a white paper. That's the legal and philosophical justification for utilizing rescue marksmanship as your standard. The second is a lesson plan. The lesson plan is the rescue marksmanship lesson plan that can be applied all the time. The more reps the guys get with it or your gals get with it, the better. The more confident they will become. Even if they suck right now, it is not as difficult as you think it is to get people up to a much higher standard. The purpose of this is not to berate or demean anyone who can't shoot it immediately or even long term. The goal of this is to make your community better served by increasing the individual capability of every officer, starting wherever they happen to be now. If we improve them 10%, your community is 10% better off. If we improve them 100%, the community is 100% better off. But without a validated mechanism to do that, it's very difficult if we're relying on 30,000 different firearms instructors to do this on their own from their own creativity. It's not that they're not capable of it, it's that they have a thousand other things to do. So one of the jobs of the Patrol Institute, as you guys hopefully know, is to give these guys and gals all the tools that we have within our means to help them shortcut the systems that block their way. And one of those is curriculum development. So the Rescue Marksmanship Tracker is a single-page form. And if our drunk editor decides to, he will flash it up on the screen now. This is included in the documents that you're able to download from the website. The purpose of this is to give you a lesson plan and then a separate one-page recording mechanism to record every time every officer shoots the rescue marksmanship drill. So this is intended to be a consistent way to go through all the individual skills that are necessary to do this properly and record it. So it's critically important that we record this every time we shoot it. This allows us several benefits, not only to ourselves, but also to the agency and to our community. The first benefit we get from utilizing the tracker properly is it creates a long-term mechanism for us to track our own and our teammates' performance and growth. That is the number one reason for it. Secondly, the Rescue Marksmanship Tracker allows us to track that performance throughout an officer's entire career against a known standard. This is not a build roll. This is not intended to work just the clock. The clock is actually the last thing that comes into this before we get into shooting it from cracky, crappy circumstances. So this allows us a way that an officer who is starting today, he just got out of the academy, he's coming to his first range session with the department, and hopefully you're shooting more than once a year, please. Um, and you're not just shooting the state qualification. It allows them to track from then to 30 years later when they retire, they can create a known path of how they've grown, how they've matured, what confidence they're able to have through this one form. So we fill this form out every time we shoot the drill. We track it by officer. Next, the tracker allows us as either instructors, mentors, coaches, uh, teachers, it allows us to track individual officers' weaknesses. We've been testing this for over a year using this tracker, and it's a much more reliable way for me as a teacher to identify early what somebody is it needs to improve in their individual shooting. Everything from grip consistency to trigger press to uh motion and armed movement, things of that nature. Uh, and I can identify that once you guys look at the tracker, you'll be able to see it if you read it carefully, that it's separated in different sections by stage that allow you to more clearly refine what exactly that person is doing wrong. Because sometimes people who have been cops for a long time are still terrible shooters, and some of them are so not great that it's hard to clearly identify what exactly they're doing. And this tracker is designed to help us identify those things. On the administrative side, this tracker also allows us to utilize realistic and actual data from our demographic. I don't need to worry about what the agency two counties over does. I know exactly how my guys perform every time we shoot the drill. This gives me actual data that I can use as ammunition as a leader or a training staff member or the only firearms instructor in three counties. It allows me to create data-driven recommendations, not only for training, which is critically important, but also for equipment. If my officers are shooting terribly and I'm trying to get them red dots on their pistols, you need something other than Instagram says we need red dots on our pistols. Your chief, your chief or sheriff is not buying that. So what he would buy is a brief written report that says, over the last year, we have fired the rescue marksmanship tracking drill or the rescue marksmanship drill and tracked every instance of it for every officer. And we are noticing this problem. This problem can be overcome in decision-making ability by taking their focus by not requiring us to transition focus constantly from our front sight post to the target and back. That's why we need red dot sites, and here is hard data that I can use to prove this need. This is why I need it. Sometimes, especially as gun people in our tribe, some solutions, especially on the equipment side, are obvious. Like obviously we need that. That's not so obvious to a chief or a sheriff who's not a gun guy. You have to justify that to him. And that is not a bad thing. Remember, your chief or your sheriff are working under constraints and pressures that you don't know exist. So if your executive is going to go to whatever Article II or Article I power that controls their budget, if they're going to go ask for resourcing, do you think it would help their case to say, not only do we know we need this because it's commonsensical, but we have nine officers in our department. They fired this very specific regimented repeatable drill that is directly aimed at the use of force that you expect us to provide. And this is where we are running short. We don't have enough ammunition in order to be able to shoot the drills that we need to shoot and do the teaching we need to do in order to raise to the level where they can all shoot a zero, which is a perfect score in the rescue marksmanship drill. Or we don't have red dot sights, or we don't have consistent, reliable, high-quality slings for our patrol carbines because you know we can't we can't transition to the pistol reliably because everybody's using some uh surplus garbage, or you know, they found an eBay T-MU sling for their patrol rifle because it was $4, or whatever the problem is, it allows us to not only identify but justify fixes to those problems. And lastly, and probably most importantly, to your administrators, this rescue marksmanship tracker allows us to show in black and white proof that we have met the reasonable expectation of our community in training. So we have not just done the state minimum. We have implemented this rescue marksmanship program, which allows us to track and fix individualized problems so that when there is a shooting, all of that training documentation is going to be discoverable. Would you rather that be that discovery show that once a year this guy barely made the call? Or every two months they were at the range for two hours shooting this drill and getting individualized instruction, and this is the trace of the documentation of improvement. And then when the time the shooting arrived, because we never know when it's going to happen, we show that as an executive, I have made a reasonable effort and over-the-top effort, if you testify correctly. I'm not doing the state minimum. I'm doing what my community expects me to do for training, and this is why this officer was able to make a good decision. The shooting was absolutely justified, assuming it was, because he had dwell time to make that decision because of the confidence that this department and this community is invested in this officer to make them truly capable of applying force in a constitutional way. So I've already spoken of this last piece a little bit, but I cannot over-emphasize the importance that individual confidence and ability has in an officer's good judgment. The better an officer is at performing a skill that they earned the hard way, the more confident they are, the better decisions they make generally. Statistically, we've proven this over and over and over again. This is not only applicable to officers who do department training, but even competition shooters who are off also officers generally make better decisions. Competition shooting is definitely an applicable training thing for law enforcement officers, but it's not usually for the reason that they think. It greatly improves individual skill. The improvement of the individual skill isn't the piece that is greatly magnifying that officer's ability. What is, or the outcomes of their calls, what is increasing that is the confidence that they're developing through good application of individual skill. The better confidence they have, the more realistic, reality-based confidence they have based on the performance the tracker shows, the better decisions they're going to make in the worst possible times. Realistic confidence that the individual officer has is the most critical piece of him making a good decision, of him waiting if it's appropriate instead of panic shooting, him deciding to shoot earlier and saving someone because he has a high degree of confidence in his ability to put whatever rounds are necessary inside of a three-inch circle at realistic distances. That's the real purpose of the Rescue Marksmanship Program, in addition to all the administrative and individual performance benefits that we get by using this program. So we've talked a little bit and we're giving some tools for the individual instructors, mentors, teachers to do their thing, to give the officers the ability to actually do what the public expects them to be able to do, which is every time someone calls 911, they expect an expert to show up, and that expectation is absolutely reasonable. So the officers or I'm sorry, if the instructors or teachers are doing their part, there are some things that the agency needs to be doing as well to maximize the or amplify the benefits that the public is going to get out of doing a program like this. So the first thing is obviously the most obvious. If we're asking individual officers to do this on their own time, you may get some buy-in, but I guarantee you it'll be less than 5% of your officers. So that does not create an actual capability for the agency. The only way to build that is by applying whatever resources are available or that you can justify to provide the time and resources to do this on an ongoing basis. The second thing, and we don't know yet if this is based on our sample or if it's a widespread reality, but there is an indication based on research that the officers who are firearms instructors aren't being resourced as adequately as they should be on the agency level. What that means is just because you sent your firearms instructor to instructor development and firearms instructor school two years ago, he's teaching off memory. He needs constant attention and dedication of resourcing at whatever level is realistic in your agency to build his own capability. An officer who teaches from a position of ego is always going to provide bad instruction and is always going to magnify problems and emergencies inadvertently. The only way to build that guy or gal to the point of competency as a teacher, which is built on their confidence based on a reality of how they perform, the only way to do that is to resource them at whatever level you can to continue to build their abilities as a mentor, as a teacher, as a coach, or as an instructor. Do not teach your firearms instructors as credentialed personnel. They are on the way, hopefully, to becoming masters of this craft so that your community has a high degree of confidence that, man, if our officers have to show up in our little town to deal with a problem, that suspect's in trouble because our chief takes this very seriously. He takes the application of force against American citizens very seriously, and because of that, he has resourced properly the people who are responsible for teaching them, the force multipliers. We're not just certifying our police officers, we're training them constantly. This is an ongoing career-long effort. Next, utilizing this rescue marksmanship tracker allows us to track performance over a realistic and constant standard. As an agency that is critically important for changing what we do all the time, we don't have any method to compare data. If one year we shoot one way and the next year we only shoot once the minimum 50 rounds, and everybody qualifies, we don't do anything for a year. I have no measurable matrix by which to provide data not only for resourcing, but also in the event of an unfortunate use of force on an American. We need to be able to show that we are able to not only do this training, but we take it seriously and we track the officer's performance on the individual level. So, guys, I've covered kind of the general outline of the rescue marksmanship program. Just keep in mind that this was a long-term effort put in by a lot of folks who really care about the service that we as law enforcement officers are providing to our communities. Law enforcement firearms training as it has evolved has never been, in small agencies, especially in its state levels for patrol, has never been specifically designed for the constitutional obligations that we have. The Rescue Marksmanship program is a step towards more closely fulfilling the obligation that we have to ensure domestic tranquility through a high level of individual competence from all of our police officers. So, guys, if you're interested in the program, the way to download the white paper, which lays out the program and its reason, purpose, objective, etc., and the lesson plan that your firearms instructor, your coach, your mentor can use to work from. They can teach it directly from the way it's written, or they can use it as a starting point to build your own program. Both of those are available on the website. So if you go to tf70.org, at the top of the website, you'll see a tab that says resources. If you click on that, you'll see the top two things are the rescue marksmanship article or the white paper. And the next one down is the rescue marksmanship techniques lesson plan. Download both of those, read them carefully, use them as starting points, use them as justifications, read them and decide you don't like it. Whichever. The Patrol Institute is providing these so that you can use them. If you're very under-resourced, you can just start running with it. If you decide that you like the concept but you'd like to execute it differently, it gives you a base to push from. Whichever way you decide to use it is you or is on you. Guys, we really appreciate everything that every one of you police officers, deputy sheriffs, constables, court officers that everyone is doing, and we're trying our hardest to give you guys the tools that you need to make yourselves better so that your community trusts you. A lot of your you, your community already trusts you, but in general, the level of trust in the police world by the public is as low as I've ever seen it. And that's not just a social media problem. So whatever it's within our power to fix, we have a responsibility to fix. Guys, none of this would be possible without your donations. Uh, the Task Force 70 Foundation is completely funded by donors like you through our 501c3. You can donate by going to tf70.org slash donate. Or if you'd rather donate and get something out of it, you can join our Patreon. It's TaskForce 70 Foundation. I'm sure Matt will have a link somewhere, uh probably in the description to it. That not only supports the foundation directly, all of that money goes directly to mission, uh, to training cops and to the patrol institute, uh, but it also gives you something. So for the next good while, most of the material that we put up on Patreon and you can interact with is surrounding the rescue marksmanship technique system, which is interrelated with the armed movement techniques and the deconfliction and team deconfliction techniques. All of these techniques fit into a various number of different procedures that are necessary for us to more effectively operate as teams, even if that team is just me. So, guys, until the next time, check us out at tf70.org and we look forward to seeing you soon. Thanks for watching.