Well, you said that a degree was a necessary condition for you to hire someone.
No...I never said that. Go re-read it, you need to work on your reading comprehension.
That seems to translate to you being extremely impressed by a degree.
Even if that premise were true, the conclusion doesn't follow. I could require a degree and still heavily vet candidates (in fact, I do vet everyone that claims the required skills). After reading comprehension, try taking a logic course.
You know, maybe at a university?
Going to college makes a person no more educated than going to a garage makes them a car.
Speak for yourself.
One of my classmates literally paid his way through school...How does learning to cheat yourself factor into a successful career?
This is a straw man argument and I don't know why you think this is relevant to the discussion, do you think I just hire people based on the lies on their resume?
Are you saying I should hire people who have no experience and no education?
So you will hire people who are humble and have practical experience?
Yes. Which as you readily admitted, is already inferred by that statement.
I don't give two shits what you "seriously doubt" and I've already invalidated the rest of your argument, but nice try. And before you go making any more bullshit assumptions, I bet I code more than you in any given week of the year.
Individual officers quite frequently don't have a lot of firearms training.
Youre missing my point that officers have a variety of training not directly related to firing at the range that increases their effectiveness with them, even if they are holstered all the time. Such as situational awareness, and being able to read body movements and facial cues. Not to mention psychological advantages such as the fact that they are under pressure every single day.
It's the culmination of all those things that determines the outcome, not just the number of bullets you discharge. The OP was implying that visiting the range a few times was going to be sufficient to outgun a cop.
Sure, maybe at the range.
10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.