?Double Taps? Why not Quadruple Taps or...?

E

EQUALIZER

New member
I've read a lot of gun magazine articles and a couple threads concerning the classic "Double tap to center mass...,then evaluate at high/low ready..., if bad guy is not down,...follow up with head shot."

In order to keep this subject somewhat specific so we don't get off track into the unlimmited variety of schenarios which could occur, requiring different techniques than what we are discussing; I'd like to exclude multiple opponents. Let's keep it to one opponent, since that is what most of the trainers have applied this mozembique drill to.
I am familiar with the drill and the reasons behind it, as the owners of some of the combat schools have written extensively on the subject: effects on the central nervous system, etc. I have asked this question on other related threads with no response. So I thought that it would be appropriate to start this one.
I have a few problems with this drill:

1) If you are truly in jeapardy of life/limb so that you are forced to shoot a BG, why limit the center mass (heart) shots to double taps? The TIME it takes to >>tap-stop-lower weapon-visually evaluate whether or not BG still has weapon in hand or is able/willing to kill you-if so, then reaim at a possibly moving head-reengage trigger<<........at least several more shots could have been applied to his body. Anywhere you think effective to his body!

2) The choice of merely two shots, as oppossed to more, is assuming that the weapon in hand is an extremely effective one that you can trust to keep the knife welder/or the BG trigger finger from pulling off more shots at you. I don't want to get into a debate of "one shot stop" effectiveness, but IMHO a handgun has its place as the best alternative to the long arms in most peoples daily rutines. They are far more concealable and therefore appropriate for urban encounters, yet are still relatively WEAK in comparison to the rifle, 12ga.slugs, or swords. To trust your handgun to stop a BG from continuing to be a threat after only two shots seems to me to be a leap of faith in the OL .45, 9mm, 40S&W, .357mag, or (insert your favorite caliber here).

Since nobody who has espoused this drill, in my readings/discussions, has been able to give a GOOD REASON WHY "double-tap" as opposed to "triple", "quadruple", "empty most of the magazine, THEN head shot" tap method; I have a one.
>I think that MAYBE some of the trainers do not want to get caught up in a civil suit or their students in criminal procedings which the DA/prosecuter/or BG attorney accuses them of using EXCESSIVE FORCE in the situation. If they limit it to the standard double tap, they should be safe as far as a justified shooting. I hate to think that this could be a reason, but until someone corrects me, (please DO), I can not think of any other reasons for the limit of shots. Can You???????????? The above is by no means an attack upon the trainers or their schools. The trainers at these schools have shot far more than I ever have and are far more skilled with the handgun. There are a couple that I have considered going to, because there is a lot to learn from them. I would think that they must know more than I do about this subject. Anybody here who can explain this subject for me?



------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)


[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited October 18, 1999).]
 
EQ, what it comes down to is, Joe Average can't get away with spray-and-pray like, oh, NYPD or LAPD...

Nope, I'm not bitter about the division between LE and "civilians," not even a little bit.

------------------
"Janet Reno is the fire that ignites my loins."
--Joe Cartoon
 
EQUALIZER,

The old "FBI double tap" had, I thought, been rejected for some time. The requirement in the middle for the "evaluation of effectiveness" will get you killed! The brain will not be able, under the full stress of a firefight, to evaluate much of anything more delicate than whether the perp is down or up.

The double tap is fairly standard in defensive practice with the premise being, if two center mass hits didn't put him down then he's either on dope or wearing body armor and there's no need in wasting more hits to the body. I believe the newer method is to go straight to the head if the target is still standing with no pause to evaluate beyond that.

If, however, you are faced with the known instance of a single assailant, as you have stated, there should be no reason to stop with two or even three, except that you will do what you practice and you can't practice EVERYTHING. In a perfect world we would have reactive targets that fall on different and random round counts allowing us to practice "fire 'till they fall" drills, with some requiring head shots.

Hmmmm, yet another million dollar idea!

Mikey
 
EQUIL - I tend to agree with you on this one. I carry a 9mm (legally) and I KNOW that unless I do place one exactly right, in the head zone, the BG will require multiple shots to "stop".

Consequently, I train by shooting 2 rapid, consecusitve double-taps - then evalualte without lowering the gun.

Caution is a stupid reason to be dead. If you are using deadly force, this means that you are have encountered a deadly threat to begin with.

I hate to borrow a "signature" from a TFLer but "anyone worth shooting is worth shooting twice".

Be safe.

CMOS
 
Here in KC (just east of the real OZ)... the single and double shot senerio gets you time in jail (for a home or store defender) however... all cases where the defender "emptied it" the prosecutor reasons that it was a "panic" self defense situation...but that also depends on who the shooter was and the given defense situation....gang bangers soon find that that defense doesn't wash with the courts... ... here anyway... those that used one or two rounds ended up in jail until the prosecuter eveluated the situation.... all the "Panic" shooters didn't even see a police station.........Case one = where an 80 year-old woman grabbed her deceased husbands pistol and then proceeded to empty 16 rounds from a 92F at two intruders.... didn't kill 'em but it really gummed them up a bit...( the attending officers came back later and helped her clean the pistol and gave her a few pointers)... case two = a store owner shot an killed an intruder (armed) with one shot to the chest... he spent 4-5 days in jail till the situation was evaluated....the bottom line is ... it depends on your local LEO's and how they wish to handle it....
 
guy coming at you with a pointed stick.. or say a radish..

you need only tap him ONCE with a 16 ton steel wieght.

(boy there a a LOT of Python fans here.. who would have guessed that rabid pro gun folks find british tounge in cheek drag comedy funny... its cool. Ah diveristy.. it keeps things interesting)


Still giggling about the radish.

Dr.Rob
 
Dr. Rob, :D !!!!!

Each and Everyone:
The info is great!!!
Of course, we aren't talking about a spray and pray schenario. The magazine might just as well hold only 7 rounds, or it could be a revolver, but all of the shots are right on the money.
Coinneach and Chemnco,
Are you saying that LEO and DAs might consider that the shooting is not justified, but rather an over response to a real or immagined threat, if more than a couple shots are fired? The explanation makes sense; not the evaluation by investigators, but the explanation you give does, if I understand what you are saying.
Mikey,
I can see the point about the body armor in a military context. And I've read about LE facing BG with kevlar, but this is still extremely rare compared to the overall shootings. I don't know much about human physiology under the influence of drugs, but I think the body would react about the same, except for the lack of response to pain and the increased adrenaline dump in those on amphetamines or PCP. I've been the recipient of unarmed attacks by a couple of these criminal assults. I'm not arguing the point made. I'd just be happy to see a study or multiple first hand experiences showing that immediate multiple (more than 2) shots are not effective on drug influenced attacks; and that chances of armed robbery are common by those on those specific drugs. The FB of investigation starts to lose credibility with me when they try to base a whole decade of firearm/ammo/training choices on the ONE shooting incident in Florida. Then come away with the 10mm weak as a result, etc. Again, I'm not argueing the point. I know you are simply answering my question and responding to the gun writers/trainers reasoning behind WHY they push this method. I think you might be right about this being the reasoning that schools use for limiting it to double tap. I appreciate it.

------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
 
Its really a shame the way the laws are written. by that I mean: that if I present my weapon, I mean to destroy my target because I fear for my life. I am not talking about getting beat up or hit by a bg I am talking about being stabbed, clubbed, or shot by a bg when I have no possible avenue of escape. It seems that the bg means to do you harm in such a way as to maim you or kill you, but you must only use enough force to "stop" him. If you kill him get the best lawyer you can afford. Again lets be brutally honest. If you have a good lawyer, you can get away with murder. WE have all seen what high price lawyers can do.

In the real world, there is really not time to evaluate what your first two shots accomplish. The average senario probably happens with very little if any warning. If the bg is of the persuasion to use a gun, knife club, he is also going to use surprise, his most effective weapon..

If you think the average senario goes like this think again: BG 15' away has knife in his hand and says give my your $^&*^%# wallet or I will kill you. Forget it. It is more likely to occur like this: He walks past you and as he is behind you he hits you with a club and take your wallet, gun etc. Don't give up hope, the best protection is know your situation, be aware what and who is around you. dark doorways, alleys, parked cars etc. The ol saying An ounce or prevention really applies here. Eg. your in a darkened parking lot to get your car, do not hesitate to have your weapon in your hand, or in your hand in your pocket if it is a revolver, do not hesitate to challange anyone near you or by your vechile, by that I mean let him or her know that you are aware of their presence by just some remark of whats up, or cold out isn't it. And by all means do not take your eyes off them. This is an extremely long post and I feel that I am rambling a bit, so I will end by saying that, be aware of your surroundings as best you can. Also practice practice practice practice with your carry weapon. Believe me if the situatio arises you will not really evaluate the situation after the first two shots. If your attacker has a firearm, you must shoot till he can no longer function, if you know what I mean.....
 
Equalizer: There are good things to remember.

Why waste many bullets on your target if you can accomplish with 2 or 3 bullets.

That is the reason why a rifle also has single, semi auto, and full auto, features to evaluate which one to use on particular target or situation.

If you're attacked with numerous bad guys at the same time then you can use full auto or if a pistol then you can emptied all your magazines.

Another thing, if you use all your full load magazine say 13 to 17 bullets on the first bad guy and suddenly there are still back-up of that gangster, now where will you get another bullets. Let say you have 2 magazines reserves but it would be faster to shoot the second attacker if you have only use 2 or 3 in that same magazine where you have emptied.

Aside of the case to be simple homicide it will be added by agravating circumstances that it may become murder. We will be questioned again by the required bullets for self defense.

I agree with you that there are many unnecessary teaching by Gun Schools and look dangerous, like the assessing the target to get near to it if still a threat, for if still a threat we will plant more bullets to the head. How about if he is alive, then we will be the one to be killed. We can play as dead as a ploy.

But still I prefer to use lesser bullets if I can to finish the job for my pistol. If we think to use much then we need a shotgun not to learn the beauty of single aimed shot or double tap to a pistol.

Just my personal opinion.
 
Clearly, if one's "plan A" does not work, then one should go to "plan B", rather than just continuing to pursue the failed "plan A" with additional fervor. A quick pair to the center-of-mass has much to recommend it as "plan A". If this "plan A" fails, then the attacker may be wearing body armor. A different approach is called for and, thus, the head-shot as "plan B".

There are those who hold that the "evaluation" step wastes time. One poster noted that one shouldn't "evaluate" beyond whether the attacker is down or still up. Quite right...what else needs evaluation right then? Thus, rather than a lengthy process, the "evaluation" step is hyper-rapid. Some folks quibble over lowering the gun slightly during this evaluation step. The fact of the matter is that you will probably HAVE TO lower the gun slightly to see if your attacker has fallen down. If he has fallen but is still attempting to shoot you, you will have to track your muzzle down to execute "plan B" anyway.

The notion that one is wasting time by incorporating a hyper-rapid evaluation step is silly. What are you going to do WITHOUT an evaluation step?...shoot until empty? Unless that is your plan, then you ARE incorporating an "evaluation", whether you realize and acknowledge it or not.

Rosco
 
I think the evaluation is important for making sure that your assailant is indeed alone. The difference in time between a double tap and a quad may just be enough for the BG's partner to nail you. We can't always count on attackers showing their hand right at the start and just lining up in front of you for an assault. The evaluation gives you time to make a quick decision:

-continue shooting
-head shot
-another BG. Shoot him too
-take cover
-run away

I guess it's just a matter of not getting too focused on just what's in front of you.
 
Quote:
"In order to keep this topic somewhat specific so we don't get off track into the unlimited variety of scenarios, which could occur requiring different techniques than what we are discussing, ID LIKE TO EXCLUDE MULTIPLE OPPONENTS." Emphasis mine. Quote mine.
I can see that one might need to have a reserve in case there are multiple opponents in the vicinity hiding. IMHO Since we are excluding mult ops from this schenario, the time it takes to look around, behind etc. might just be enough time for the BG to apply his own multiple taps to MY center mass, followed by head shot. Maybe I'm wrong but the one to two seconds that it takes to trigger off several or more rounds seems to not be a waste of ammo. Especially if my gun holds more than 3 or 4 rounds. We aren't talking empty the mag completely. Just mostly.
Rosco, just because I might shoot 6 rounds (three left in the gun plus 2 more magazines for reserve), as opposed to a "double tap" doesn't mean that I will empty the magazine. I train that way. Sure it might be difficult to count under pressure of life/death. Hey, some don't even hear or know that they fired any shots until after the fact. That is why we train. I don't have a timer so I won't tell you how fast that 6 shots to center mass plus one to the head goes, but with the weak defense that a handgun offers, I'd rather shoot 7 rather than 3. If the head shot misses, (I'm not going to be so arrogant as to say it can't happen w/me holding the gun), I still have a couple more plus reloads when I make distance and get behind cover.

Stdalire,
Read my posts friend. I'm not talking about using a shotgun, machine gun, or single shot whatever. I'm talking about handgun tactics. I agree with you and stated before that the handgun is relatively weak compared to long guns and such. But we are trying to keep the subject specific to urban mugging type violence where you don't have your favorite 12 ga handy under your coat. (But then again Duncan McCloud hides a big long Samari sword under his no matter where HE goes....I better think about that one.) :)

You have all made very good points in my opinion, but the only benefit under the given circumstances that I've read so far is the legal ramifications, which really need expanded upon. Any other points or explanation for double tap as oppossed to more shots planted is welcome. I'm still in the fog about this one.

[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited October 19, 1999).]
 
Equalizer,
It seems our only difference of opinion is where we each train to do our "evaluation" of whether "plan A" has worked or not. Your "plan A" is six rounds, with the "evaluation" thereafter. I prefer a pair.

I won't quibble over stylistic differences as long as the overall tactic is to execute "plan A", rapidly evaluate whether "plan A" has worked or not, and, if it has not, then execute "plan B". The essence here is to, at a point, stop doing what hasn't worked and do something ELSE. I've worked with reactive targets that would fall if the shooter placed a good center-of-mass shot thereon. When one throws in a target that won't fall from any number of c-o-m hits and requires a head-shot, you would be surprised how many shooters just keep pumping round after round into the "chest" of that target....even to the point of having to reload to keep pursuing a FAILED course of action.

Let the mantra be, If it's not working, then do something ELSE!
 
Rosco,

I don't have a problem with what you are saying. I just want to know why some schools use the number "2" as opposed to a higher number. For a trained shooter, the time between 2 shots at close range and a few more is miniscule. I have no problem with you using the double tap. I just want to know if there is some kind of major advantage to going up against a single opponent with 2 shots to the chest as oppossed to more, is the basic premise of this thread.

The assumption seems to be that if the BG doesn't go down w/2, then he will not go down w/ 4, or 6. I personally come from the philosophy that if a BG is trying to make my wife a widow, I want to put as much lead into him accurately and in the shortest amount of time possible. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe this takes too much time, or that 2 should be adequate. I personally hope it will be, but if not, then the head shot. I think "first make a head shot" has been discussed already in another thread. I don't have enough confidence in my marksmanship and the potential dynamics of a life/death situation to go for that first. I guess that is one reason why I chose 6 shots to heart first.
I have no problem with those who use the double tap. More power to them. I just want to know what is wrong with more chest taps.
 
Double taps are pretty moot in my book. The way I learned it - and the way I teach it... You fire and keep firing untill the BG goes down.
This varies according to the number of threats.

This might be brutal - and unPC... But LIFE is brutal. Untill the BG hits the ground - you make sure he (or she) can't continue to be a threat. Thats the whole point of everything isn't it?

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
I think we can all agree that one is more likely to run out of TIME, than ammo, in a gunfight. With each passing moment, we are giving our attacker(s) more time to kill us. Thus, the two-shot initial response. Given a decent round and good placement, it ought to work. If it does not, then we get on with "plan B" that much sooner. Sooner is better.

As to the notion of making one's initial response, "plan A", a head-shot; the problem is that it is a tougher markmanship challenge and, thus, slower to accomplish. Once again, delay is one's enemy. Quicker is better.

As to George's advice to keep firing 'til the bad guy is down, this is sound advice, so long as it presumes that the defender will transition to "plan B" if "plan A" doesn't work. If not, then repeatedly shooting a bad guy on the vest is not going to help matters much. This demands that the defender have a "plan A" and a "plan B" and further demands that there be a hyper-rapid "evaluation" step after executing "plan A". One can't just keep hammering away at something that isn't working and hope that, somehow, the seventh or tenth attempt will somehow prove superior to the earlier failed attempts. Do SOMETHING differently.

Rosco
 
Some time ago I had a similar discussion in a class conducted by a
former SAS Instructor. Admittedly we were discussing scenarios where
the Good Guys outnumbered the Bad Guys (who would be taken by
surprise).

He said that anyone worth shooting deserved the entire magazine. With
a slight sigh (and roll of his eyes) he gave the following answers to my
questions:

Q: “What if there are other Bad Guys?”
A: “That’s why you have other Good Guys.”

Q: “What if two of you happen to pick on the same Bad Guy?”
A: “Then THAT Bad Guy gets TWO entire magazines emptied into him.
(pause) (condescendingly) It’s quite simple really. That’s why you carry
many magazines!”

I noticed a slight increase in my PPF (Personal Pucker Factor)! ;)
 
George, Rosco, and Dennis,

Now we're getting down to business! I think we are getting to the heart of the matter. To address the issue of body armour first:
Q: What are the chances of being assulted by someone in body armour in the context of Joe Shmoe. I'm not talking about LEOs here. We're talking about Joe Shmoe "civilian/citizen" if I may use a devisive term for sake of clarity. I can see that a hollow point can get clogged and fail to expand, therefore drastically lessening the effects of handgun ammo on BG. But then we are talking about roundnose type holes punching through him.

Rosco, I have relized your point in regards to quickly as possible putting an end to the threat before he/she puts an end to you. That's why I favor the 165gr Triton 45 Super more and more in a personal defense round in a compensated 1911. It still does not match the effectiveness of a rifle, but until I find a carry rig that can adequately conceal a long gun like that guy did in the "Sword under my jacket" series, it seems like the next best thing. Oh yea, it was called the Highlander. I found that to become immortal is FAR easier than to hide a sword or long gun on ones person. Immortal I am, but the 1911 is about as close to max as it gets in the concealable, most effective weapons department.

George,
Do you teach start by shooting center mass, then go to head, or start at center mass and "zip" up to the cranium, OR empty mag at the heart and find cover as you reload and evaluate situation from a position of defense? Just curious, and wanting to learn something.

Dennis,
Same questions for you and why?

------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)


[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited October 20, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited October 20, 1999).]
 
Body armor usage by bad guys is still a rarity. However, as the North Hollywood bank robbery showed, it cannot be discounted. As a practical matter, it really doesn't matter exactly why your attacker does not drop from your initial center-of mass shot(s). HE could be armored, drugged, drunk, enraged, mentally disturbed, very determined, or it might just be your unlucky day. Whatever the cause, you don't have time to diagnose it in detail. You must go to "plan B" without delay. Your "plan B" should be one that is effective no matter exactly why "plan A" didn't work.

There is also the theory that the body becomes much less susceptible to shock after the initial injury, thus permitting additional center-of-mass hits to be soaked up without much immediate effect. All of these factors add up to a pretty compelling argument for having the head-shot as "plan B".

Rosco
 
Equalizer,
Good question! Where were ya when the instructor was here? (BIG grin!)

I was passing on what I was told. At the time I thought it was a terrible waste of ammunition, time, and attention. Then I realized he was talking about a raid in force (perhaps 10-20 Good Guys) attacking a smaller group of Bad Guys. He was talking about continuing to shoot the BG even when the BG fell - something totally inappropriate to any situation I foresee for myself!

The instructor DID talk about the "T" of the Central Nervous System (CNS). That was useful (obviously).

Me? It depends. If I know exactly what I'm up against I'd probably keep shooting until I perceived BG was no longer a threat. At least that's how I train (mentally) and "hope" I would react under fire. (I'm trying to admit that sitting and talking is much different than being shot at! ;) )

If there are multiple BGs, I'd pass out .45 HydraShoks to all viable threats, going back to "clean up" as necessary (reloading as appropriate). At least, that's how I was taught.

Personally, though I frequently play scenarios in my mind's eye, I hope avoidance works sufficiently that I never have to find out how I'd react under that kind of pressure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top