Single Shots or Double Taps?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Short Bursts

New member
Lately I have heard considerable discussion about whether in a real world encounter at close range with two or three opponents you should double tap each attacker or fire a single shot at each. The argument usually advanced by people who favor single shots is that it takes too much time to fire double taps. Those who favor double taps argue that the probability of stopping an attacker is much greater with two hits and it does not tke significantly longer to fire them.
Does anypne have any experience (real world or Training) which would indicate who is right? To keep the discussion focused. let's please concentrate on the shooting aspects and not diverge onto other alternate tactics.
Thanks. Short bursts
 
IMO another thing you have to consider is the caliber. if i had a .45 i would probably shoot each BG once but if i had a 9mm (which is my defense handgun) then i would probably by the end try to get a few rounds in each BG.

the way i would probably do it with 2 BGs is 1 in the first, 2 in the second, and another in the first. so that way i would get to both of them as fast as possible but still get 2 rounds in each.
 
If there are multiple bad guys and I have only a handgun I think I would pop each one twice while moving away or to the side somehow.

Then come back and engage whoever is still a threat.

That's the school answer.

In a real bad day it may resemble nothing taught by any school.

Edmund
 
Geez - let's assume 3 bad guys.

Really good times between shots with an
easy recoiling gun is 150 msec.

So here we go.

See the first guy threatening you. Assume
about 650 msec to draw and double tap this guy.

Then you move to second guy - 100 msec to move.

You are at 750 msec. Now add 300 msec for the next two shots. Now move to the third guy who
is of course stationary.

It takes you about 1050 msec or a second
to get to the 3rd guy if you double tap
and he doesn't move.

A second and someone can travel 14 ft or be shooting at you.

With three armed opponents - you are screwed
to begin with. You would be lucky to single shot each one.

Forget stopping power. Get a bullet in each.
However, you'd be real lucky. You might
be better diving for cover or running
like a scared chicken in a zig zag pattern.

Standing there and shooting out with three guys let's you talk to Saint Peter.
 
Hi, guys,

A major factor is the armament of the opposition. Always take out the guy with the most dangerous hardware first. This may be a shotgun, an "assault" rifle, or (less likely) a sub gun. A guy with an SNS pistol might kill you, the guy with the shotgun will kill you. And if you are lucky enough to survive, ask yourself what the hell you did to get into such a mess in the first place.

Jim

[This message has been edited by Jim Keenan (edited March 13, 2000).]
 
My instructor has had me practicing double-taps for so long now, that I'm 100% positive that I would double-tap the bad guys whether I wanted to or not, out of habit.

I shoot a commander-sized 1911 and its surprising how quickly you can get those two shots off with a little practice...
 
Gee, two shots? What if they need three or more? Is there a limit? You ASSUME you can count in such a state of mind. The simple act of counting is all but beyond a human being in a state of fright. Toss in other things you must process, you find the mind is over capacity and you ran out of time. I would worry more about other factors. I would hate to think I shot the first one twice and he/she needed three and I was working on someone else and it came back to haunt me. More than hardware worry about the distance. CLOSEST one first. Even unarmed the one closest can do the most damage in the shortest period of time. Don't forget there is a gun in this situation...YOURS.
An actual shooting is no place to try and be cute, fashionable or make a statement. It is time to survive. There is no limit. I'd rather explain why I fired to many than not enough. If someone even thinks they should pause to "evaluate" hasn't lived in the real world of shootings. That is like leaving a door open for your demise equal to a train tunnel.
It is rare a person involved in a shooting will even recall how many shots they fired and in fact many will claim they didn't fire a gun when in fact they had. Counting is all but beyond the ability of the mind to process the information, and it won't like counting when it has other concerns to process of more importance. Things don't move so slowly that we can be afforded such a luxury.
 
Darrell make a good point.

Double tapping paper is BS. One should try
this with three BGs in a FOF situation when
everyone is moving and screaming.

Now you want to scan each target for an
evaluation of their firearm.

My, my is that a 16 gauge or 20 gauge.
Perhaps I should triple tap you.

Oh wait, there is an AR-15, is that more dangerous than a shotgun?

A lot folk are opining who know little about chronometrics of behavior.

You don't have all this time.

Perhaps, Darrell is right and you can pick
up who is closer (literature suggests depth is an easy one). Firearms type is slow to determine. You need to act and you guys are suggesting slooooooooooooooow things.

You'd be surprised how slow your fast times
are in a fight.
 
Hi, Glenn,

I agree with the need for speed. But guys who have "been there, done that" say you have to identify and evaluate the target. This is not a drawn out process, and you better learn to do it darn quick (part of good training).

But not doing it means that you shoot a good guy, or a hostage. Or that you choose to shoot at a guy fumbling in his pocket and ignore the guy with his gun drawn. Or that you fire first on a guy with a knife 20 feet away and ignore the guy with the AR-15 30 feet away.

Jim
 
One thing a shooter has to understand is that if you do everything RIGHT and make no errors you can still get killed. Sometimes you are in a situation you can not win for a long list of reasons.
Your vision becomes so tunneled (weapon threat focus) that any attempt to "scan" becomes lost. And, NO you can NOT train out of this genetic experience.
In Washington state years ago an officer saw a man with extended arm and a gun in his hand and fired. The 9mm slug exited the neck of the thug and hit the officer holding him and killing him , whom the cop said he did not see. I believe him. If you think you can scan, do you think can also switch around do that and them look up a sight picture?
The good news is the simplicity of most shootings. That is why I hated riots etc. You have no clue where the dangers were and could not control them.
We find in training once the target or officer move (most often both will to some degree in real life) scores of the best fall to very low levels with little stress or fear. If we do indeed resort to our training we resort to what we have done. Fired at an unrealistic face on target that never moves.
Even the targets used for self-defense training are almost to the point of silly if we want to be serious about such things. Only 15% of all self defense shootings are face on based on medical reports etc.
If we look at the number of issues you see on these forums that we need to shoot someone in self defense, adding the mental crafts needed to count shots we have a menu so long we can't possibley use it all even at the range. Which ones do you give up? THAT is the question.
How much longer will we make this menu? Every one wants a position, drill or concept named after them. I lost track years ago and I do this everyday.
 
Twenty foot guy can be on you in a second.

AR guy might miss.

If you dismiss the threat from the knife
guy as he only has a knife - you need to
see what a knife can do.

I know a lot about visual search and
good training is not going to speed you up
in a dynamic situation.

So let's say, you with gun holstered
are surprised by three guys, one with a knife (20 feet), one with a AR-15 at 30
and one more (what distance and with what).

You need to draw and engage. You are lucky
to draw and engage any of them before the
other is at at you. To handle the 20 foot knife guy, you have to move in the right manner and be shooting at him. That is ample time for the other two to hose you. If you try to engage the AR-15, the knife guy is on you.

Break it down into times and you see that adding a double tap doesn't make it.

While it is nice to evaluate - with three opponents, your best evaluation will be necessarily crude and your action better be fast.

Anyway, this is a low probability of a good
outcome.
 
> Only 15% of all self defense shootings are face on based on medical reports etc.

What are the percentages for the other angles?
 
15% figure came from a study in an ER in Oklahoma. Good info in it. But it didn't go further. But based on 40+ years of experience I would feel comfortable with it. I've always been a critic of present targets as we all shoot the same thing over and over. I'd love to see a line of targets showing the body at various and odd angles so we seldom shoot the same one twice. I would BET you the "scores" and effectiveness of the hits would be pretty low for ALL of us.
But today we are dumbing down the range effort so Ray Charles can qualify.
 
Hmmm. So what then is the answer? I mean you have to evaluate so you don't tag a good guy as in the example above with the officer shooting, but hesitation is fatal. Are we in a catch-22 situation? Some situations would almost seem to dictate spray and pray, if they were actually to happen as described (the knife/AR guy comes to mind). I guess we have to endeavor not to get in a no-win deal like this. I know that even if you don't go looking for trouble it sometimes comes looking for you, but hey, awareness can only help this. I like the idea of training with off-angle, moving targets. I've got to see if I can print something up like that. The B-27 and "generic thug with shotgun" is getting kind of silly.
 
Paper shooting training for this scenario is not worth much.

I have asked my tactical trainer buddies who teach people to do this for real and they say:

1. If the three are armed, you are probably dead.

2. Standing there and double tapping, you're dead.

3. You should first:

Move, run, cover, dodge, learn to fly

4. If you are shooting - then single tap
and repeat if you can.

Each weapon has such risks that evaluating
and deciding I'm going to shoot you first
dumb. Shoot someone first, then move on.


Remember this double tap dudes - a person with one round in them has a probability of being stopped. The one with no rounds has NO
probability of being stopped. You have given
the two other guys time to nuke you while they are unimpaired. Comprende?

If you can do three fatal head shots quick, you may survive. Since this is hard - you are
going to get hurt most likely.

So I disagree with the premise of the question to avoid anything but the shooting tactics. You will die if you just concentrate on the shooting. Without movement, etc. you die, die, die.

Too much coffee.
 
The question has to do with which is better when engaging multible targets, fire single or double shots into each adversary.

I have seen and heard of master pistol shooters who can draw and double tap three targets with astonishing speed. This would lead me to believe that this is the answer- IF you are a master pistol shooter.

I advocate for most people shooting as fast as you are able to, starting with the nearest guy and working from there. If that means firing three bursts of double taps, so be it. If that means one shot each, I hope your on video tape! The problem is that every situation is different. If you "know" the guy twenty feet away will shoot you and the guy ten feet away doesn't appear to have the stomach for it who do you shoot? For what it is worth I have had different tactics instructors advocate different approaches. All of them qualified there arguments by stating that sometimes the best laid plans go awry.

Good thread.

Erik
 
Master shooter? Please find me a study or source that claims range performance and surviveability are related. I can't find one and each year hear of great shooters getting killed.
As for three head shots, dream on. If you pull it off, leave the scene at once and race to a store a buy a lottery ticket. Just one. You will win.
Surviving just one is marginal as it is. Most thugs will outshoot the best cops. If you face three you really screwed up big time someone along the way BEFORE the shooting to get caught in that position.
I know of one civilian shooting where the homeowner outshot four home invaders. He had the lights OFF after getting a prior warning and in the dark when they crashed through the door he did the deed with a shotgun and they never saw him. I'd have to look, but I think it was or one two dead, and one badly wounded and the other fled. They got the Gomer Pyle. "Surprise surprise surprise." Had it been a more obvious confrontation he probably wouldn't have survived. Remember, we LIKE the darkness. It is good.
A survivor of the most famous gunfight in Minnesota history just died after 40 years of treatment for his wounds.
I should post the story. the three thugs won and one cop died and one wounded. A gun battle like from movies. I went to school with two of the criminals and they were vicious even as teenagers.
 
Sounds like another "one-time" incident. :D

"Master shooter? Please find me a study or source that claims range performance and surviveability are related."

So the ability to shoot well has no bearing on a gunfight?

"I know of one civilian shooting where the homeowner outshot four home invaders. He had the lights OFF after getting a prior warning and in the dark when they crashed through the door he did the deed with a shotgun and they never saw him. I'd have to look, but I think it was or one two dead, and one badly wounded and the other fled. They got the Gomer Pyle. "Surprise surprise surprise." Had it been a more obvious confrontation he probably wouldn't have survived."

you just explained your 91% hit rate by BGs claim.

This is turning into another "Is training useful" thread, which if I remember correctly, you stopped participating in. Some of us are still waiting for answers to some very good questions asked of you.

[This message has been edited by Dave AA (edited March 14, 2000).]
 
I never said three head shots, just three targets.

The bad guys are initiating the shootings most of the time, and whoever initiates always has an advantage. I'll hit 91% of people I walk up on and shoot, probably more. As to how I react to that happening to me, well I don't know, but go around in condition yellow as we all should.

I'm not sure where, but remember reading that Gunsite graduates have a 85% hit rate in defending themselves- and they are taught "front sight, squeeze." Any Gunsite graduates please confirm/deny.

Erik

[This message has been edited by Erik (edited March 14, 2000).]
 
The real way to deal with this is to line them up and get em all with one shot. It's easy with my 211J plasma pistol. Ha Ha. Hmmmm multiple attackers.... forget the pistols and grab the shotgun from behind the truck seat and blast till your problems go away. 12gauge pumps "get the lead out". ddt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top