HungryHunter
New member
Anybody change camps if said gun is a revolver? Just wondering..I've seen a few guys that could pick a few empties out and reload very quick. Anyway, good thread.
If you really need to do that (i.e. imminent threat exists), then you also need to do it as fast as possible. If you don't really NEED your weapon to be at full battle-readiness status (i.e. no imminent threat exists) then reload however you want and take as long as you want. If there's no imminent threat it doesn't matter how you reload.
That's not true unless you drop the partially depleted magazine after manually removing it--which would be ludicrous.
If there IS an imminent threat and you have a running gun, it makes no sense to stop and reload if you don't have to. If you DO have to reload then reload as fast as you can.
If there is NO imminent threat then any technique that's reasonable and that meets whatever personal requirements you can dream up is just fine.
Justifying that requires that there is simultaneously no threat and that a threat exists.
If there's no threat then it doesn't matter how one reloads. If there is a threat then one needs to reload as rapidly as possible and dropping a partially loaded mag is of no consequence.
It's only when there is a threat and there is no threat simultaneously that it makes sense to keep the partially loaded mag (because of the threat) and take your time doing the reload (because there is no threat).
Glock magazines have a plastic baseplate. Drop one that's 1/2 to 3/4 full onto a hard surface from shoulder height and the baseplate has been known to crack at the edge. When this crack happens the magazine spring will burst the floorplate off the magazine. That's not a good thing if I want to keep that magazine and ammo.
How many actual unexpected stoppages (failure to feed, stovepipe, in-line stovepipe, doublefeed) have you experienced during training which interferes with the slide going into battery? I suspect it's probably very few. So how do you KNOW when you "feel" (diagnose) a difference? YOU DON'T KNOW because YOU DON'T HAVE EXPERIENCE in "feeling" and diagnosing the difference between a slide that's out of battery because of an empty magazine or because it's out of battery because of a failure.
When your gun fails to fire what do you do? Do you presume your magazine is empty and stand there like a static cardboard target while you attempt to perform a Combat Reload?
Your concern at that time is making sure you don't want to break a magazine by dropping it on the floor? THAT is the thing you are worried about?
I've never once seen a Glock magazine fly apart and spill its guts from being dropped to the ground, pavement or floor. Not once. Not ever. I've never even heard of it actually happening "in the wild".
Firstly, you are describing a process called "difference sorting" by which someone determines what something IS by its differences from what it ISN'T. That's not a normal, intuitive mode of recognition...
One learns to recognize "Orange" by being exposed continually to that color, not by being exposed to all the other colors and then concluding that Orange is "the one that's not all the other ones".
Slide lock is encountered regularly, and it's easy to learn to recognize it intuitively.
So, I don't know where this idea of adopting tap/rack on slide-lock as a preferred technique comes from. I would really like to know who teaches it.
With any modern gun in reasonably well-maintained condition, the standard malfunctions are pretty rare ...
I have no idea where the "stand there like a static cardboard target" comment comes from. I have to conclude that you have a very vivid imagination concerning those with whom you disagree.
That simple logic dictates that even in the case that you cannot recognize slide-lock, you are far more likely to gain an advantage by training to simply reload than to proceed as if there is a malfunction.
But the simple fact is that people can and do learn to recognize slide-lock, as a part of basic instruction...
That simple logic dictates that even in the case that you cannot recognize slide-lock, you are far more likely to gain an advantage by training to simply reload than to proceed as if there is a malfunction.
Ummm ... OK, glad to know that. Perhaps you should not state all that stuff about bursting mags, over-n-over, if that's not your concern. People have a bad habit of thinking you mean what you say (joke). Glad to have that cleared up.Not really
That's interesting, but being that something like 95% of LEO (Fed, State, County & Local combined) never fire their sidearm in the course of duty, I'm not certain what that is actually supposed to mean. I make no "claims of awesomeness", but I do know that I train far more than most LEO, and I have been at this for decades.As a former LEO my experience is different than yours.
Obviously you haven't seen this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Bby5pOVZJ0
That's all fine and good but I prefer to use a robust technique that increases my probability of success in completing a task quickly in a variety of stressful and possibly unfavorable conditions.
Diagnosing stoppages is not a robust technique. Diagnosing stoppages increases the time it takes to cycle through your OODA Loop. Diagnosing stoppages diverts your attention from the danger.
Care to document where he advocates tap/rack on slide-lock? Is that your one source? How does he (or you) account for doing something so differently than everyone else, including the current SEAL training standards?Former Navy SEAL Jeff Gonzales, Trident Concepts - http://www.tridentconcepts.com/
So what do you do when you're in the open and your gun doesn't fire when you press the trigger? Do you stand there while you attempt to perform a Combat Reload (with the expectation that the problem is just an empty magazine) or do you quickly move off the line of attack?
Except we've established that an empty gun is far more likely than a malfunction. You've said as much yourself. If you can't recognize slide-lock, and instead perform a technique based upon your expectation (that it's a malfunction) then the reality that it is far more likely simply an empty gun runs counter to your expectation.When reality doesn't meet your expectation (you have a stoppage other than an empty magazine) your OODA Loop resets and your attention is dangerously diverted to the gun.
"Recognizing slide lock" is not a robust and reliable combative technique under stress in a variety of conditions.
Combative manipulations may take a a little longer to perform but they're designed to be robust and reliable in a variety of conditions.
Playing the scenario game is often a way to try to make the simple complex.Another situation that comes to mind is I may have had to shoot a bad guy in a sketchy part of town (perhaps a Walmart parking lot or gas station). The immediate danger is over. But the bad guy’s homies may show up shortly thereafter or a brazenly hostile crowd gathers before police (or backup) arrive. I’ve personally been in both of these kinds situations (although no shots were fired.)
Of course not. It would make it impossible to reasonably argue that they both take essentially the same amount of time if you did. But the fact remains that retaining the loaded mag is the entire point of doing a tac-reload as opposed to a speed reload.I don’t count the time it takes to stow the partially depleted magazine because it doesn’t count as down time for the gun.
If you're in a situation where you reasonably expect danger to suddenly appear then you shouldn't be playing around with your gun, reloading it when you don't need to. You're WAY more likely to get shot because your gun isn't working when you need it than you are because you dumped a partially loaded mag that you could have otherwise retained.Whereas if I were in the middle of a Tactical Reload and danger suddenly appeared...
This is part of the contradiction....when time and situation permit...
If the situation is so critical that retaining half a magazine is actually likely to make the difference between life and death, then it's also so critical that taking your gun out of the fight when you don't have to doesn't make sense.
... The doctrine of the tactical reload demands that there is a threat (so you can't waste even a single round) but that there's also not a threat (so it doesn't matter if you reload when you don't have to and take more time doing it than necessary) . It should be done when the situation is so critical that you can't afford to drop a partially loaded mag for fear of running out of ammunition before the scenario can be resolved and yet it's not critical and therefore you can afford to take the gun out of the fight even though it's not absolutely necessary to do so and then use up more time getting it running again than is actually required.
Justifying the tac-reload requires that contradictory circumstances exist simultaneously.
I can envision a situation where there MAY be another threat, but you don't know if/when it will present itself.
Perhaps you should not state all that stuff about bursting mags, over-n-over, if that's not your concern.
If you have specific instances in mind, please detail them. Perhaps we can learn from your experience. (And I do mean specific. There is no reason why matters which are public record should not be discussed. Department and case number should be minimally mentioned)
That's wonderful jargon but how is a technique based upon lowest-likelihood occurrences increasing the probability of success? That's like saying "you should train for the thing which never happens, because it'll probably be the thing that happens" That's contradictory nonsense.
And (as has occurred several times now), you're simply making statements with providing any intervening logic. You've provided no reasoning as to WHY the technique you suggest is "robust", you simply keep stating it or words to the same effect.
Recognizing slide-lock is a trivial, basic skill.
Care to document where he advocates tap/rack on slide-lock?
It doesn't look something they teach in their class. Notice the number of side-lock relaods absent even a hint of TAP/RACK:
I think you said something about skills that are common between your handgun and rifle, so ....
And golly jee ... here's Jeff himself just pulling that empty mag out and replacing it with nary a TAP/RACK in sight.
Pincus has one or two former Seals as CFS certified instructors ... they don't teach it that way, FWIW. Paul Howe is former Delta ... same story. Like I said earlier ... the list is pretty long.
Why does this question come up in this context? I don't think we're discussing movement or tactics, so it seems like an attempt to muddy the waters more than anything else. Regardless of how one is reloading, they shouldn't be standing still unless they are behind hard cover.
Except that earlier you were telling us that it was all about doing things "quickly". Yes, you are contradicting yourself. There's nothing "robust" or reliable about adding unnecessary steps to a procedure.
Trying to explain why it's critical to reload in the face of an imminent threat when you don't have to and then that it's also important to take more time than is really required in order to accomplish the procedure--now that's complicated.
If you're in a situation where you reasonably expect danger to suddenly appear then you shouldn't be playing around with your gun…
Ugh. Too much overthinking for something simple.
If the situation is so critical that retaining half a magazine is actually likely to make the difference between life and death, then it's also so critical that taking your gun out of the fight when you don't have to doesn't make sense.
... The doctrine of the tactical reload demands that there is a threat (so you can't waste even a single round) but that there's also not a threat (so it doesn't matter if you reload when you don't have to and take more time doing it than necessary) . It should be done when the situation is so critical that you can't afford to drop a partially loaded mag for fear of running out of ammunition before the scenario can be resolved and yet it's not critical and therefore you can afford to take the gun out of the fight even though it's not absolutely necessary to do so and then use up more time getting it running again than is actually required.
Justifying the tac-reload requires that contradictory circumstances exist simultaneously.
It was the first and only reason you initially gave for not wanting to drop a magazine. If it wasn't a big issue, then you've taken a long time getting to that statement.I simply mentioned it as a hazard I wish to avoid. I wasn't the one who made a big issue out of it. I merely explained my rationale when asked.
If you say you've seen it. I'm not going to be the one calling you a liar. I have several decades of not seeing it. Perhaps Bigfoot will be shopping on Black Friday.I’ve witnessed full/partially full magazines burst apart when dropped onto a hard surface.
So you say. Again, you offer no explanation as to why this is so, you simply keep repeating it like some religious mantra. The experience of thousands of people over decades of time indicates that recognizing slide-lock is a trivial skill, easily-learned and presenting no special disadvantages.It is unreliable. It is not robust.
I'll have to read it again, as I must have missed it. Even so, why does one man's opinion in this regard hold special sway over that of dozens of other similarly experienced individuals?I’ve been training with Jeff since 2001. You can find it in his book: Combative Fundamentals: An Unconventional Approach
That’s an El Presidente drill with defined reloads ...
... That’s a Navy drill with defined reloads.
Of course, but what's your point in this context? That's how I do it too, and how dozens of instructors teach it. What does it have to do with whether or not one taps/racks in response to bolt or slide-lock?But did you notice that Jeff operates the charging handle after the reload just as he would operate the slide on a pistol?
Combative manipulations are all about tactics. If they’re not integrated with your other actions then you've simply cobbled together a bunch of stuff.
Tap/rack gets you off the X more quickly than diagnosing your pistol. Tap/rack can also get you back into the fight more quickly than diagnosing your pistol.
So does the dictionary. This suggests that perhaps you are a little fuzzy about who is exactly "confused" in this respect. It's going to be very difficult to have any kind of discussion if you insist on using words in special ways, with definitions known only to you.Many people confuse “quickness” with “speed”.
The saying predates the creation of SEAL teams or even UDT.“Fast is slow. Slow is smooth, smooth is quick.” -- Navy SEAL adage.
That'll come in very handy for those special cases where bad guys read that sentence before trying to kill you. I sure HOPE it takes you less time than I can read that sentence!I perform a Tactical Reload and drive-on in less time than it takes to for you to read this sentence - it’s THAT simple.
Well, everything is a judgement call depending on the circumstances. What I'm talking about, in particular, is "practical" competitions which force competitors to tac-reload while threats still exist--while under the gun/on the clock. That and trainers who teach the tac-reload as if it's a reasonable option during a civilian deadly threat scenario.I agree. Pay attention now – “WHEN TIME AND SITUATION PERMIT I MAY PERFORM A TACTICAL RELOAD…”.
There may be uncertainty. That means it’s a judgment call depending on the circumstances.
Right. I agreed in an earlier post that a tac-reload can make sense in a military situation. As civilians we don't get to rely on cover from professionally trained/armed persons with whom we have practiced and worked. In addition, the occasions where we make a conscious decision to advance on a second deadly threat after having already resolved one (or to voluntarily re-engage after disengaging) are not only rare but are potentially problematic from both a legal and tactical standpoint.And as military people have found ever since firearms have been used, topping off ones weapon before advancing...