A CASE FOR SINGLE ACTION SHOOTING

[StrawHat]

Trooper Joe,

I generally like what you are writing. I don’t always agree with it but it is usually well thought out.

My background, I wore a badge for about a decade before I quit. I competed in PPC before, during and after that time. As you may know, PPC involves multiple courses of fire with ranges from 7 to 50 yards. I do not know of any winning competitor who used single action in any of the courses. I met many new shooters who used single action at first but those who stayed with it all “converted” to double action.

I have quoted some of your writing that I felt needed commentary.

…

To this day, I still occasionally find that the double action mode on some revolvers doesn’t seem to be as positive as the single action method…Trooper Joe

Joe, if you have a revolver that is not functioning properly, it needs to be repaired.

…I agree that double action should probably be used for close range encounters. However, if the distance is greater and especially if you are enjoying some cover, I would find myself using the single action mode…Trooper Joe

And for you, that is appropriate. For me, I will use the double action feature that I am most comfortable using.

…I just feel that some “experts” are suggesting that even in non defense types of situation ( maybe 20 yards plus, hunting scenario’s) that double action is the only way to properly use a da/SA revolver

…Trooper Joe

Careful, it sounds like you are trying to say single action is the only way to shoot!

Some folks can learn one or the other. Some can handle both. It is good that we have options.

Kevin

 

[Biggfoot44]

Not possible to aim with the sights in DA mode ? Dang , I must have been doing it wrong for neigh 50 years .

In a wayI guess it specifically dates me : Primarily DA , Speedloaders around but not yet universal ( I adopted early) , and " safety holsters " not yet universal ( O was more ambivalent ) .

But furthermore above is somewhat moor , as in my impressionable youth was tought DA by my father , and absorbed Keith and Jordan as to the virtues of DA .
.
With a reasonably decent DA trigger ( ie most S&W without blatant defect or malfunction ) DA is at least as accurate as SA * for me *

Added - Yes , my Father tought me Trigger Staging . I never teach it , and rarely do so myself , only occasionally as a stunt .

 

[M29since14]

There's a difference between a best practice and "meant to" or "designed to". Browning designed the 1911 without manual safety. The Handejector was designed with an external hammer in the 19th century. You won't find a manual or reference from back then telling you to not cock either hammer.

In the modern world we have different priorities and have adapted old guns to newer paradigms - which is fine.

It’s nice to see someone actually say this, even though the point is hardly worth making a stink about. Nothing I have read has ever suggested the 1911 was intended to be carried cocked and locked, and there is material that indicates otherwise. Nevertheless, I feel safe doing so. And there are times when I also use condition two and three (boondocking, storing the gun at home, etc.). As long as you understand how the gun works, you can safely select the mode you feel is best suited to the situation/activity you’re involved in.

The DA v. SA thing is similar. I have a friend who shoots DA exclusively and he used to like to ridicule me for shooting mostly SA. One need not be exclusive of the other! For 95% of what I do with a revolver, single-action shooting is a logical choice. The other 5% is just practice for me. I’m not a proficient DA shooter, but I have done it enough to be comfortable with it - with certain guns.

The best DA shooters almost invariably use revolvers that have been carefully tuned. No dishonor in that. Some even go the Federal primers-only route, which I view as extreme, but it’s their gun and their choice. In the long haul, unless you have marching orders to do this or that, doing whatever you feel comfortable with and what gives you the greatest likelihood of hitting would make sense.

Excluding the Centennials, I only have one revolver that I enjoy shooting DA (a 4-inch Model 19). I don’t enjoy shooting any revolver DA that kicks more than a .38 Special or low-end .357. As a primarily recreational shooter, the whole DA v. SA argument is just a bore to me, but here I am, commenting on it.

 

[WR Moore]

ISCSYoda
A few decades ago there were incidents of "police shootings" wherein an officer had cocked his revolver and then accidentally touched it off because of the now light trigger. I believe one such incident caused a riot in Miami. 1980s.

That the revolver was cocked was a contention of the prosecution in Miami and refuted at trial. The prosecutors claim-plus actual negligent discharges in other instances- did contribute to the trend of major agencies like LA, Miami and NYPD to have their revolvers converted to double action only.

Not a bad idea in a defensive revolver as some lawyer can always allege that your claim of self defense is covering for a negligent discharge resulting from the gun being cocked. There's no way to prove forensically if the shot was fired SA or DA. Video would be another matter.

The occasional misfire in DA can sometimes be operator error. If one is very slowly moving the trigger while trying for precision, a slight relaxing of the trigger digit as soon as the hammer fall starts can allow the trigger to interfere with the hammer fall, causing a light strike. The trigger press should be a smooth continuous motion ending with the trigger pinned all the way back.

Not sure about the 1911 being designed without a manual safety. The grip safety was demanded by the Army. The 1911 was designed as a cavalry sidearm and originally, even the magazines had lanyard loops. The grip safety was intended to make darn sure that a firearm dangling on the lanyard with the mount at a gallop wouldn't fire.

 

[Trooper Joe]

These are all great comments. A few lean towards the position of using double action only but even then they seem to qualify that thinking that there may be rare occasions where single action is appropriate.

I agree that my original MSP training should have included some double action situations. Heck, we were not even using combat targets just bullseye ones.

A responder on another forum wrote:

“ IF you look at the history of DA revolvers and their use, (and in particular use by military and police) you'll find a long period of time when the DA feature was essentially considered an "emergency use" thing intended for situations where the priority was maximum speed at point blank range. ”

I believe that this was still the mind set of MSP trainers when I came in.

If you remove defense use from these discussions, I still feel that single action is appropriate in most hunting and long range scenarios. I believe
one responder stated that the famed Elmer Keith’s very long range revolver shot was done double action. I have researched this and find that much of his handgun shooting was done with single action revolvers. I can’t find any documentation that when he did use a da/sa revolver he transitioned to double action only.

My thoughts on posting this thread are that many current shooters are failing to experience the beauty of shooting a Smith and Wesson revolver in the single action mode.

Just some thoughts,

Trooper Joe

 

[AJ]

Learn to shoot you gun well, be it single or double action. I cut my teeth on a M1911A1 in the Corps. Guess what it is single action only. Then I bought a Colt Trooper .357 and learned single and double action. Went to a USMC school to become a firearms instructor for security. We relearned shooting the M1911A1 (course was Gunsite) and then 4" revolvers both Ruger and S&W. Learned about staging. Taught Navy security and qualified with Model 36 S&W 2" and Ruger & S&W 4" revolvers and shot Distingished Expert with both (Yes, I was staging them). Several years ago picked up a A.F. Behlert PPC revolver, it is DAO. Once I learned to shoot it, it became my favorite revolver. If you can shoot DAO well then all other forms of handguns shooting should come fairly easily.

 

[AJ]

Not sure about the 1911 being designed without a manual safety. The grip safety was demanded by the Army. The 1911 was designed as a cavalry sidearm and originally, even the magazines had lanyard loops. The grip safety was intended to make darn sure that a firearm dangling on the lanyard with the mount at a gallop wouldn't fire.

The M1911 had a manaul safety, it also has a grip safety and a muzzle safety. As Save Ferrous shows it is a M1910 that has no manual safety and those were not accepted for service. As with the M1905 & M1907 models

 

[Heinz]

The Army requirements for the 45 cal pistol specified both a manual and a grip safety. The Colt, Luger and Savage test pistols all had both a manual and a grip safety.

The Colt 1900 38 ACP and the Colt 1903, initially, had a pivoting rear sight safety that did not work out well. The 1910 in the NRA museum is from a tool room run and has a grip safety. Browning added a safety, locking the frame forward, at the Army's request and refitted the pistol for the 1910 trails. The 1911 was designed with the required. grip safety.
Some of the Colt guys here know much m ore about this that I do.

The Safety on the 38 and prototype 45 Colt automatics was evolving. But, strictly speaking, the 1911 was designed with a grip safety. The Safety was aded to the 1910. All of which has almost zero to do with the topic.

 

[357 shooter]

For 95% of what I do with a revolver, single-action shooting is a logical choice.

Yeah I fall into that 95% category too. Most of my revolver shooting is at 25 and 50 yards on the standard NRA slowfire targets for the respective distances. I shoot far and away better in SA at those distances. l know some will say there are guys that can shoot just as well DA at 50 yards but I am not one of them. In the late 1980s , early 1990s when I shot revolver bullseye league everyone shot SA. When I shot NRA silhouette I never saw anyone shoot DA with a revolver.

On a few occasions I'll fire my 617s DA at 25/50 yards and use the NRA timed/rapid at the 25 yard. With the cost of reloading components and my limited primer inventory high volume centerfire revolver DA shooting is no longer an option.

I don't use revolvers for self defense anyway for some years now and usually shoot a semi auto more accurately compared to DA in a revolver. The last Smith revolver I used for for a defensive handgun was a 642 which of course is DA only.

 

[Heinz]

Your statement was "Browning designed the 1911 without a manual safety"

He did not, he designed earlier pistols without a manual safety. The 1910 Browning auto has both a manual safety and a grip safety, although it did not really go into production until 1912 so maybe not on point.

Your original statement is wrong. If you want to segue into a discussion of how John Browning designed the gun to be carried, that is a different discussion. I have never seen written evidence of John Browning's opinion in this matter.

If you want to do a side topic on Automatic pistol design and carrying cocked, start one. There is no question on double action pistols being designed to fire either cocked or uncocked, that why they were called double action

 

[RetCapt]

When I started as an LEO in 1964, our qualification course was the PPC course. At the time everyone (at least that I was aware of) shot the 50 yard line SA.

After I had been shooting PPC competition for a while, I observed a trend for the best shooters to fire the entire course DA. Since PPC is all two-handed shooting, shooting DA meant no disruption of the grip to cock the revolver. Not disrupting the grip meant no disturbance of the sight picture. Thus more time for the shot.

I resolved to become competent enough to shoot the entire PPC course DA in the effort to improve my scores. It took around 3k rounds of practice to make this transition. But it took and my scores and classifications did go up. Since then I have never looked back.

One poster has mentioned the challenge of shooting the Camp Perry course DA to show the greater accuracy potential of SA. PPC is (now) all supported as opposed to bullseye. It is meant to replicate combat conditions, so I don't think the two are directly comparable. Had I been oriented towards shooting bullseye, I would have shot that SA, even though I was shooting PPC DA, because of the one handed grip and far lighter, shorter trigger pull.

When I was teaching the PC 832 classes, the state-mandated course of fire was DA at 15 yards and timed. Many of my students had never fired a handgun when they came to me. Over the time allotted I had to get each one to where he/she could qualify to pass this course. There was no time to start training in SA then transition to DA. Over the 16 hours of range time, divided into four sessions, the students fired a total of 600 rounds. This was a fair amount of shooting, but I needed to not only teach the techniques, but build muscle memory and develop confidence. It worked. Not a single student ever failed to qualify.

One other point on reliance on SA shooting. I have an early 50s era S&W M&P (model 10) with a 6" bbl. My father had bought it for home protection. I don't think that revolver was ever fired as it appears brand new. When that revolver ended up with me, in checking it over I brought it up to eye level as if to dry fire it DA. That is when I discovered that the rear fixed sight, a groove machined into the top strap, is not visible with the hammer lowered. Extrapolating this historically means that LEOs carrying those era fixed sighted Smiths had no way to shoot DA accurately at distance because there was no way to acquire a complete sight picture using both front and rear sights. Had I not discovered that on this old revolver I never would have known it because the S&W action design had changed well before I started in LE. But I am left with the impression that this characteristic of fixed sight S&W revolvers had to have contributed to the practice of shooting SA for accurate shooting at distance. There was no other way to get a sight picture.

Whether one chooses to shoot DA, SA or a combination, is dependent on one's training and experience to build the skills. The skills then dictate the preferences. That is an individual choice. For me it was predicated on improving my PPC scores. But once accomplished, there was no going back.

 

[GerSan69]

So much to comment on, so little time. I'll stick to a couple.
"3. Because S&W revolvers aren't just built for police defensive shooting inside 25 yards. People use revolvers to hunt, target shoot, etc. The existence of a capability doesn't mean it is the best option for all uses.
If I were to carry a revolver as police, I would appreciate being able to cock the hammer for very specific kinds of shooting - like when dealing with someone who has a rifle and all I have is cover."
and
"Police officers often start pointing guns at people long before there has been an established threat." - Save Ferrous!

On your first comment - where the heck did you get that? "Not built" for the most common type of defensive shoot? Ridiculous.
I don't know about all police departments from more than 30 years ago or whenever revolvers were largely replaced by semis, but two of the largest, NYPD and LAPD, restricted their officers to double-action only revolvers.... and thousands of others followed the major departments in many aspects of police training.
As to your second part I quoted, at one time that was true. Contrary to popular belief, the police owe no one the "benefit" of drawing first. They don't follow the Marquess of Queensberry Rules, either. "Fighting fair" in a street fight is for losers. Anyway, it was common practice to be "ready" with a gun in hand when confronting a suspicious person or on suspicious calls, like a burglary in progress. I can't count the number of times I did that over 35 years. Some nights it was every call!
But since I left in 2014, the "social justice" tidal wave has wiped away the old ways, as you can see from the articles you listed. IMO, since the SJWs are now the loudest voices out there, politicians now find that a few dead cops is acceptable, so changing the rules to lessen officers' "advantages" is the trend. All I can say is, glad I retired.
[As for your later post: I think some of the incidents you linked to were likely OK under the rules that were in place just a few years ago - but that was then, this is now, and there's no excuse for not learning, nor is there an excuse for out-and-out misconduct. "We" are better than that as a whole.]
---------------------------------------------------------------
"As to police officers needing to decide wether or not to fire at a person, that "decision tree" starts several steps before they point a gun at someone, I believe. They train to make those decisions and how to handle their weapon. And they are very good at it." Heinz

Your belief is correct. Every officer is trained in a "use of force continuum" that covers everything from voice commands all the way up to deadly force. Every step is carefully laid out as to the parameters for the step as well as when to go to the next. Of course, if your initial contact is someone shooting at you, you aren't expected to talk them out of it. (Although that may be the next "trend"....)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Saved the OP for last. Sir, your comments reflect the school of thought more than 60 years ago. Police firearms training has advanced a heck of a lot since then. Even 13 years after you started, which is when I was sworn in, things like single-action and the old competitions were nowhere in training new recruits. I think that you are entitled to your opinions. You earned it (although I was disappointed by your comment about not wanting to shoot a burglar.... I had an Academy classmate get fired for similar conduct) but I earned mine, too, and in my not so humble opinion, I'm glad for you that you aren't a cop now.
So there ya go, no doubt stepped on a few toes. Sorry, but sometimes the truth is painful. Enjoy the rest of your holiday!

 

[steelslaver]

For the last few months since it warmed up again, I have been firing over 50 rounds a week from revolvers, from 32s to 45s. 95% of them are DA. I only use single action to check guns best accuracy and where it fires with perfect sight picture. The more you fire DA the more the trigger pull becomes a muscle function. IMHO If your conscious of thinking though the trigger pull your not doing it right. I try to focus on the sight picture as my finger does its thing. Just like a rifle, you focus on the sight picture, putting pressure on the trigger and the bang is a bit of a surprise. Just a longer pressure period with DA.

Ya, if I was going to shoot game that was standing still and not intending me harm I would cock the hammer and use single action. I am more accurate SA, but not by all that much. If I can put a hole in a paper plate every time at 25 yds with DA I am happy. None of my carry guns have hammer spurs. If I go rabbit hunting I will take a 22 or 32 and cock the gun if the rabbit just sits there. If I go deer or elk hunting I will have a 4" or longer barreled 45 colt and cock it unless the game is right there. Hey if your good DA you should better SA without much practice.

The great thing about S&W revolvers is both SA and DA work well. Each has its place

If I was a cop in a high crime city area I would carry a semi auto anyway. But, then around here a couple of the sheriff deputies carry revolvers.

 

[GerSan69]

You misread. I said they are build for defensive shooting inside 25 yards, and not just defensive shooting inside 25 yard.

OK, you got me. I think I did a pretty good job with the rest.

Seriously, the basis of this exercise is the old way vs. the new. I submit that there really weren't "tactics" taught in the Police Academies prior to the push for officer safety that began in California in the late 60s - early 70s or thereabouts. "Shooting" in the old academies was simply a crash course in competitive shooting. No emphasis on anything but the 10-ring.

There is no comparison to more recent training.... really, some of it changed immediately after the Newhall incident in California in 1970. The need for tactics was tragically demonstrated by the number of CHP officers killed there.

Anyway. I'm done with the history lesson, but at least folks that weren't aware that there is a "reason" why much of what we do when shooting these days can understand a bit better.

Oh, and single-action revolver stuff has no place in police shooting. (Just wanted to add that again.)
(BTW, I'm not this bad in person. Really.)

 

[Biggfoot44]

The only justification I've convincingly heard for retaining SA capability on duty revolver was an ofc simultaneously getting injured in both hands / arms in a fight , using last remaining strength to thumb back hammer . Yes , off the wall .

Ironically , while I'm perfectly on board for DAO , I do prefer to retain the hammer spur .

At least in my region , by early '80s there were still some legacy COF that technically permitted SA at the longest stage , but it wasn't tought , and was strongly DIScouraged , unless the hapless shooter couldn't make a minimum qualification score , and the instructor/ range master was more concerned with finishing up & going home instead of giving additional training .

 

[Biggfoot44]

Kudos to Sgt Johnson !

As great as his marksmanship and heroism , it's moot to this discussion , as he used an M&P .40 bottomfeeder . ( All the more credit to his skills )

For slightly less apples & oranges example from the bottomfeeder world :

In a particular medium size PD of my intimate aquaintence , against an escaped prisoner ( escaped from different agency ) in mid carjacking , Ofc. took him down with first shot hit @ measured 76 yds . With the DA first shot from DA/SA P226 .

 

[ISCS Yoda]

I HATE TYPOS

Apparently, in my post above I wrote this dumb sentence, brought to my attention by a sharp reader:

Paragraph 4 states that the worst thing you can do is to train to shoot double action in self defense situations.

Clearly, I meant to write "the the worst thing you can do is to train to shoot single action in self defense situations."


I thank WRMoore for pointing that out to me - and I would change that post above but I must have edited it once and the edit function wants me to compare my original and edited version and it's just too weird to deal with.

 

[Trooper Joe]

GerSan69 —

….” Saved the OP for last. Sir, your comments reflect the school of thought more than 60 years ago. Police firearms training has advanced a heck of a lot since then. Even 13 years after you started, which is when I was sworn in, things like single-action and the old competitions were nowhere in training new recruits. I think that you are entitled to your opinions. You earned it (although I was disappointed by your comment about not wanting to shoot a burglar.... I had an Academy classmate get fired for similar conduct) but I earned mine, too, and in my not so humble opinion, I'm glad for you that you aren't a cop now. ”….

1) When I came in in 1966, the rule was you could shoot at any felon. In a few years (by the time of this incident) the department had a list of only 7 or 8 felonies where you could use deadly force. A couple of kids running from a building they broke into was definitely not on that list. Maybe MSP was more progressive than you think.

2) I am glad I am no longer on the job also. However, three weeks ago I passed my annual certification for my LEOSA permit (100% on the range and written test) with a Glock 19. A number of younger retirees had trouble with both tests.

Just sayin..

Trooper Joe

 

[ISCS Yoda]

HA! I figured it out and changed it to single action. Happy am I!!!

WR MOOORE also wrote:

The occasional misfire in DA can sometimes be operator error. If one is very slowly moving the trigger while trying for precision, a slight relaxing of the trigger digit as soon as the hammer fall starts can allow the trigger to interfere with the hammer fall, causing a light strike. The trigger press should be a smooth continuous motion ending with the trigger pinned all the way back.

This is true but when you’re in a fight for your life you really do not have time to shoot for precision. You do that at the range to have this skill but, again, when confronted by a gremlin threatening your life or someone else’s you should just point and shoot the gremlin’s lights out. That’s how I practice, and I can certainly shoot precisely in both single action and double action modes. I do that to impress myself and my friends, not to win gunfights – and, again, I do not expect gunfights at 75 feet.

Trooper Joe wrote:

“ IF you look at the history of DA revolvers and their use, (and in particular use by military and police) you'll find a long period of time when the DA feature was essentially considered an "emergency use" thing intended for situations where the priority was maximum speed at point blank range. ”

I believe that this was still the mind set of MSP trainers when I came in.

I can’t argue the point – but I have NEVER heard it expressed or seen it written anywhere.

Then he wrote:

if you remove defense use from these discussions, I still feel that single action is appropriate in most hunting and long range scenarios.

That is my point exactly. If Trooper Joe stayed with that I'd never have piped up in opposition. Long range hunting and target shooting is where using a revolver single action comes into its own – not fighting.

Then:

I believe one responder stated that the famed Elmer Keith’s very long range revolver shot was done double action. I have researched this and find that much of his handgun shooting was done with single action revolvers. I can’t find any documentation that when he did use a da/sa revolver he transitioned to double action only.

I am not sure where that comes from but Elmer Keith was well known to have shot a variety of sixguns, including a number of S&W double actions. I have not seen his discussion on shooting his double action revolvers single action for self defense but John Taffin would know.

THE SIXGUNS OF ELMER KEITH
© Sixguns

My thoughts on posting this thread are that many current shooters are failing to experience the beauty of shooting a Smith and Wesson revolver in the single action mode.

Beauty is always in the eyes of the beholder. For precision shooting at the range, sure, it’s fun to shoot single action, especially at distance. If you're a handgun hunter you should practice single action shooting at distance. But when I hang B-27 silhouette targets I treat them as the enemy and everything is point shot, double action (using revolvers, of course), at center of mass at various ranges that I consider to be up close and personal, never beyond 15 yards, and not too many at that distance because even that is too far for single action gun fighting under pressure. Again, revolvers. Clearly, if I am using a TDA or striker fired pistol it's a completely different situation. And sometimes I take some head shots, too, but only after I perforated the silhouette’s center of mass, That’s the way to win a confrontation, not by drawing faces on the head of the silhouette.*

Never forget the Mozambique drill taught by the late, great Colonel Jeff Cooper.

 

[WR Moore]

A couple of points here:

Removing the hammer spur isn't necessarily a good idea (OK, I've got a J frame like that, but it can be a pocket gun and I did it 50 years ago). Back in the late 1980's I got hired by an entity that still issued revolvers. They made up for it by issuing 681s, Federal 125 gr JHP .357 ammo and making us train a lot. In the process we learned that revolvers do, in fact, malfunction. One of those is the trigger refusing to move to the rear to fire the next shot. There are several possible causes for this. Except for the dreaded bullet between barrel and cylinder, the most effective immediate action drill is a hearty yank on the hammer spur. No hammer spur, no IAD-unless you've got a readily accessible backup.

My comments on operator induced misfires was establishing another possible/probable cause of misfires while on the range. And, it prominently mentioned "precision", didn't have anything to do with behavior during a close range encounter where trigger yanking is much more likely.

With respect, there can be issues with head shots, especially with handguns. Hollywood has firmly established the wrong place on the head to aim. The medical community calls that area the cranial vault for good reason. The head shot isn't the magic off button unless you hit the right place. This being a public forum, I'm not going beyond that.