double tap
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
The double tap is considered an advanced skill. Many other things should be learned and practiced before double tapping. Many make the false assumption that the double tap is a cure all for any situation that may arise.
That being said, get professional help. Learning "pointers" about double taps on an internet forum isn't going to help much.
Learn to shoot proficiently while maintaining total control of your gun. Learn trigger control and sight picture. Learn to shoot on the move. Learn to draw from a holster quickly but safely. Learn to draw while moving and then shooting.
Double taps will come naturally. Be patient. Pratice and then practive some more. It ain't as easy as it looks.
That being said, get professional help. Learning "pointers" about double taps on an internet forum isn't going to help much.
Learn to shoot proficiently while maintaining total control of your gun. Learn trigger control and sight picture. Learn to shoot on the move. Learn to draw from a holster quickly but safely. Learn to draw while moving and then shooting.
Double taps will come naturally. Be patient. Pratice and then practive some more. It ain't as easy as it looks.
Joined
·
20,401 Posts
Blammo is right. A double tap to keep both rounds in the same area is very difficult, especially in a stress-fire situation. Quite often the second rounds ends up a flier, dangerous to the whole area. Even tougher is the "Mozambique" so popular ten years ago...two shots to COM and one to the head. Looks great in the training films against static targets, but try to do it on a moving or charging target.
I could tell you but...
It would be worthless without being shown proper technique. There's actually a lot involved from sight picture to trigger management to recoil control and a few other things. Kinda like those instructions I mail ordered. "How To Build An Atomic Bomb". I lack the necessary background to make sense of the instructions.
Heh, I type that as a joke, now I'll wind up on some alphabet agency watch list.
It would be worthless without being shown proper technique. There's actually a lot involved from sight picture to trigger management to recoil control and a few other things. Kinda like those instructions I mail ordered. "How To Build An Atomic Bomb". I lack the necessary background to make sense of the instructions.
Heh, I type that as a joke, now I'll wind up on some alphabet agency watch list.
If you can..spend the money on good training..learn good shooting technique first..
check out this video too of TJ..
TJ on shooting.
check out this video too of TJ..
TJ on shooting.
The question could cover a lot of ground. One does not know whether the term "double tap" is referring to a Controlled Pair, a Dedicated pair or a Hammer????? Of course anyone can call anything what they like, even some folks who should know better have picked up the term "double tap".
If just referring to automatically firing 2 shots (no matter which of the above techniques are used) then there is still controversy. No doubt, few people would today advocate the firing of just one shot in a lethal encounter with a handgun - there are simply too many failures on record with torso hits, even with good lung area hits, indeed even with heart shots, to stake your life on the odds of one shot working.
Indeed, based on actual results, it is clear that 2 good hits, even with the 5.56mm rifle, are often not sufficient to stop a fight instantly and there are many top flight trainers who now teach the "Non Standard Response" of shooting from 3 to 7 rounds as a reflex (the "Standard Response" being to fire two shots as a default).
Definitely worth thinking about.
Jim H.
If just referring to automatically firing 2 shots (no matter which of the above techniques are used) then there is still controversy. No doubt, few people would today advocate the firing of just one shot in a lethal encounter with a handgun - there are simply too many failures on record with torso hits, even with good lung area hits, indeed even with heart shots, to stake your life on the odds of one shot working.
Indeed, based on actual results, it is clear that 2 good hits, even with the 5.56mm rifle, are often not sufficient to stop a fight instantly and there are many top flight trainers who now teach the "Non Standard Response" of shooting from 3 to 7 rounds as a reflex (the "Standard Response" being to fire two shots as a default).
Definitely worth thinking about.
Jim H.
Like others has posted get some instuction on the fundementals and then work up the speed. Most I shoot with can run splits with called shots in the .16-.19 (sec) range at a 7-10 yd target cold (and the same split time for really close targets). Personally I dont see mch use in one sight picture (flash or otherwise) for multiple shots when one sight picture (regarless of type) for each shot fired can be just as fast and often times more accurate.
You have got some solid advice coming in here.
I see a lot of folks "double tapping" at the range....however they define that. A couple are good and most are really crappy at it. Being 60 with a slightly whacked right arm I go for shot placement (make every shot count whether stactic or moving) now-a-days, but that is by default more that anything else.
As shared.....go with the basics and then get some solid training to move on up. Learn what you can and can't do. Stretch yourself, but do what you can in the end as you only have so many rounds to throw down range in any given "situation". Those rounds need to count when the time comes. One hit and one thrown doesn't work for my, but if you are solid with two rapidly on target......practice and just get better.
Be safe, shoot well. :rock:
I see a lot of folks "double tapping" at the range....however they define that. A couple are good and most are really crappy at it. Being 60 with a slightly whacked right arm I go for shot placement (make every shot count whether stactic or moving) now-a-days, but that is by default more that anything else.
As shared.....go with the basics and then get some solid training to move on up. Learn what you can and can't do. Stretch yourself, but do what you can in the end as you only have so many rounds to throw down range in any given "situation". Those rounds need to count when the time comes. One hit and one thrown doesn't work for my, but if you are solid with two rapidly on target......practice and just get better.
Be safe, shoot well. :rock:
The only way to know if you can is to try it! Once you have the basics of weapons handling down go for it.
Do not get so wrapped up about placing the 2 shots next to each other on paper. Try to keep them within one out stretched hand of each other.
Then work on multiple shots.
Then do it all while moving to the side or angles.
Then add the draw to the beginning, if you've not already done so. But I would suggest working the draw and one shot by itself to get started.
Then add after action assessments/drills.
Of course all this needs to be done while maintaining good basic, safe weapons handling. Have fun!
Do not get so wrapped up about placing the 2 shots next to each other on paper. Try to keep them within one out stretched hand of each other.
Then work on multiple shots.
Then do it all while moving to the side or angles.
Then add the draw to the beginning, if you've not already done so. But I would suggest working the draw and one shot by itself to get started.
Then add after action assessments/drills.
Of course all this needs to be done while maintaining good basic, safe weapons handling. Have fun!
Jim, you have such a way with words.:biglaugh:
But you do make a lot of sense.
thanks guys i just needed some advice i have the basic shooting skills on a static target i just need to practice shooting on the move and drawing my weapon. I appreciate your help thank you. Would a tactical shooting class help on most of these techniques?
yea Todd Jarret is one of my fav pro shooters along with Doug K from S&W i use that technique when i shoot with his hand placements
Joined
·
630 Posts
Wan't there some old story floating around about a Texas Ranger saying the way to do it was to "shoot them down to the ground"?
I vary my techiniques depending on range, the type of target, etc. Focused alot on close quarter marksmanship, to incluide failure drills (Mozambique), contolled pairs (want 'em about 6 inches apart), and rapid fire.
I vary my techiniques depending on range, the type of target, etc. Focused alot on close quarter marksmanship, to incluide failure drills (Mozambique), contolled pairs (want 'em about 6 inches apart), and rapid fire.
you made the list buddy!
bb
Joined
·
70 Posts
Like the others said proper training is key, I think the grip is the most important thing. Here is a link to a video of Todd Jarrett.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4584332856867071363
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4584332856867071363
Joined
·
70 Posts
Oops! didn't see the other post with that link.
1st, thank you for your service!!!
I dont know who said that, but I sure dont doubt that some ranger did (Ranger M.T. "lone Wolf" Gonzaullas had a Browning 30 cal 1919 affixed to fire out of the front of his Dodge).
I know one thing we try to get across in our training of mobilizing soldiers and also I do this in my LEO training (to a somewhat more court defensible level) is that we would not be shooting if our life was not in danger - some people do not stop easily (ask the San Bernadino S.O. who shot a subject 106 times before he fell!).
We have a couple of mantras we try to instill in the students:
1. "Anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting a whole bunch!" (this has nothing to do with excessiveness or "finishing them off").
2. "Shoot until the threat changes shape or catches fire." - true enough the last part is exaggerated and is meant to add humor to an otherwise grim subject but the first part is relevant.
I have come to dislike the "Standard Response" as there are no "Standard Gunfights".
Onward,
Jim
As I recall, two-shot regimen were created to deal with multiple threats.
It was determined that it takes little extra time to shoot at a BG the
second time, and greatly improves chances of taking him out of the fight.
A two shot regimen for a single threat makes no sense. Shoot them
several times. Shoot til they are no longer a threat. No point in saving
ammo. Persistent training with shooting two rounds then pausing to
check target feedback is not good. I'd suggest using two targets when
shooting 'double taps.' Shoot one target twice, then the other one
twice. If shooting a single target, get 'two' out of your head.
Joe
It was determined that it takes little extra time to shoot at a BG the
second time, and greatly improves chances of taking him out of the fight.
A two shot regimen for a single threat makes no sense. Shoot them
several times. Shoot til they are no longer a threat. No point in saving
ammo. Persistent training with shooting two rounds then pausing to
check target feedback is not good. I'd suggest using two targets when
shooting 'double taps.' Shoot one target twice, then the other one
twice. If shooting a single target, get 'two' out of your head.
Joe
Joe;
Very close but at first it was just one subject. Indeed, it was an argument against shooting just once then checking to see if the threat would stop. I know that is hard to beleive in this day and age but it was still common - though certianly not universal - in the standard police training of the 1950s.
I am sure others made the point but the first time I ever heard this articulated was in an article by Jeff Cooper around 1960 when he postulated that there was no reason to shoot anyone just once as 2 shots doubled the damage and doubled the chances of hitting something inside that would stop the fight. I think his ending summary went "From this point forward thou shalt not shoot anybody once without a very good excuse". Long time ago, I may have gotten that slightly wrong.
It was later on that the argument of multiple assailants was introduced and the argument you mentioned was put forward by one side - there are still folks who argue that if there are multiple targets involved you shoot each one only once then come back - called "Boarding house rules" (every one gets served before anyone gets secons).
I dont particularly agree with that philosophy but then I am not for standing still and shooting 3 threats twice each either (force on force experiments teach us that either way you are going to get shot).
Jim H.
Very close but at first it was just one subject. Indeed, it was an argument against shooting just once then checking to see if the threat would stop. I know that is hard to beleive in this day and age but it was still common - though certianly not universal - in the standard police training of the 1950s.
I am sure others made the point but the first time I ever heard this articulated was in an article by Jeff Cooper around 1960 when he postulated that there was no reason to shoot anyone just once as 2 shots doubled the damage and doubled the chances of hitting something inside that would stop the fight. I think his ending summary went "From this point forward thou shalt not shoot anybody once without a very good excuse". Long time ago, I may have gotten that slightly wrong.
It was later on that the argument of multiple assailants was introduced and the argument you mentioned was put forward by one side - there are still folks who argue that if there are multiple targets involved you shoot each one only once then come back - called "Boarding house rules" (every one gets served before anyone gets secons).
I dont particularly agree with that philosophy but then I am not for standing still and shooting 3 threats twice each either (force on force experiments teach us that either way you are going to get shot).
Jim H.
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!