The ubiquitous double tap.

[Rastoff]

We hear, and many use, the term "double tap" quite often especially in self-defense discussions. However, like many terms, I believe this one is over used and mostly misunderstood. So, I'd like to take a moment to discuss it with y'all.

As most people use it, double tap means; two shots in rapid succession. Unfortunately, that is not really all that clear of a definition. Just how rapid is rapid? One second? Less than a second? And, what happens during those two shots? Get good sight pictures for both or just mash the trigger as fast as possible?

Because I think it's important to be clear on whatever we do when confronted with a self-defense situation, I think it's important to nail this down. With that in mind, I offer up two terms; "controlled pair" and "the hammer".

Controlled Pair
This is two shots fired as quickly as possible, but with control. With each shot the shooter obtains the correct sight picture. That is the controlled part. These two shots include all the proper handling techniques. Proper sight alignment, sight picture is obtained, then the first shot. As the gun comes down from the recoil, sight alignment and sight picture is re-acquired and then the second shot is fired. Then, to achieve proper follow through, sight alignment and sight picture is obtained again, but no shot is fired unless the threat remains.

The Hammer
This is two shots fired as fast as possible, but with only one sight picture. Here the shooter acquires proper sight alignment and sight picture and fires the first shot and as soon as the barrel is pointed back a the target, fires again. This is not uncontrolled, but certainly not as controlled as the controlled pair.


Typically the hammer group is not as tight as the controlled pair for obvious reasons. Still, both have value. Using one over the other depends, as most self-defense situations do, on distance.

If the bad guy is three feet away, and you have an opportunity to get your gun out, the hammer is probably the best method. This will put two shots on the bad guy. They will not be a tight group, but in this case this is a good thing. It increases the chance of hitting more than one vital organ. Or, if the first shot doesn't strike something vital, the second likely will.

If the bad guy is 7 yards or more away, the controlled pair is the preferred method. This ensures that both shots go where intended. It reduces the possibility of a stray shot traveling where it's not supposed to and possibly injuring an innocent.

I believe that both are valid methods of delivering enough power to stop a threat. It just depends on the situation. Obviously, the individual will have to decide what is best at that time. Thus, I practice both because you never know what will be required when the time comes. Fortune favors the prepared.

Having said all that, I never use the term "double tap" any more. It is too ambiguous and too many see it as just wildly blasting away twice. I rarely talk about "the hammer" because it too can be seen as uncontrolled shooting. It's not, when done correctly, but is perceived as such. So, I prefer to say "controlled pair" mostly. In most situations this is what a defender wants to use anyway.

 

[elm_creek_smith]

I only use the term "double tap" when I post the same post twice by accident! When shooting, it's "Shoot until the target is no longer a threat."

ECS

 

[shouldazagged]

I understand the distinction, and it makes sense. I'm just not sure which method was being employed by a middle-aged doctor I saw shooting at a range one day. He was drawing a 1911 from an OWB holster and shooting centered one- to one-and-a-half-inch pairs at seven yards in what appeared to be no more than a second and a half if that. If it was "the hammer" it was damn well executed.

 

[jtpur]

Proper sight picture. Well from the experience of five shoot outs in 25 Plus years in the business I can honestly say all five did not last long enough to even aim let alone acquire a sight picture. Seems when some is shooting at you or pulls a gun at close range the idea is to draw and shoot. Not spray and pray, but point and shoot. Of course shooting 50 rounds twice a year at a paper target provides lots of time to acquire a sight picture. Shooting at 15 yards, yeah maybe you can aim. Furthest I was from any target That shot at me was all of six feet. He missed and so did I. So being lucky instead of good worked out pretty well.

 

[GerSan69]

I do it once in a while at quarterly qualification to show the young cops how the "old guys" did it back in the day. That, and "one shot-one kill" on the Range 2000 keeps the legend alive...

 

[Smoke]

I’ve never heard the term double tap except on the internet. Our trainer uses the terms The Hammer usually to refer to firing two shots from retention (1 & 2 yards) and a Controlled Pair for any distance greater than that.

I don’t practice point shooting as often as I should, the first time I had to do a range qualification I did point shooting and while every shot was a hit over half of them were outside of the scoring ring and I failed to qualify

 

[Rastoff]

Of course shooting 50 rounds twice a year at a paper target provides lots of time to acquire a sight picture.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but this is the problem. Only shooting 50 rounds twice a year is not nearly enough practice. If you shoot regularly, 20 rounds a week is enough, then acquiring the sight picture becomes part of your muscle memory and is automatic. Yes, it will work even in stressful situations like you describe.

This is not me saying this. I got it from people who've worked hard and practiced AND been in shootings.

This is what you don't want: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaJVaYyHopA

 

[forrestinmathews]

Every time I have trained for the handgun qualification the instructor has discussed the hammer drill and controlled pairs and never used double tap. I believe from my own experience that the hammer can be effective out to maybe seven yards directed at center of mass. I too have seen some remarkably tight hammer groupings that would've screamed to raise the BS flag had I not been standing right there when they were fired. I was not the shooter of these groups. My best is about a three inch spread at seven yards, but I have seen competent shooters with massive forearms and shoulders do some pretty surgical grouping at max speed.

I believe in the controlled pair and also that it can sound like a hammer if the shooter is at all prepping the trigger during the recoil recovery. I can remember shooting Glocks and feel the gun go off is rapid succession as the trigger was breaking right as the sights lined up. I try not to do this as much with the autos unless they have long triggers, but it is a regular practice with a revolver.

I believe all three terms have their uses as previously described.

Double tap is still a valid term for posting way too fast...

 

[Smoke]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but this is the problem. Only shooting 50 rounds twice a year is not nearly enough practice. If you shoot regularly, 20 rounds a week is enough, then acquiring the sight picture becomes part of your muscle memory and is automatic. Yes, it will work even in stressful situations like you describe.

This is not me saying this. I got it from people who've worked hard and practiced AND been in shootings.

This is what you don't want: Drunk Driver Pulls Gun on Police Officer - YouTube

I believe he’s engaging in the logical fallacy of “Argument From Authority and implying that everyone but him only shoots 50 rounds twice a year at the range.

 

[Old cop]

What you see on this youtube video is pretty typical. I was involved in two shootings during my career and in one I never looked at the sights b/c it was too dark to see them. In the other I did and both times hit was I was "aiming" at while shooting very rapidly w/a thirty-eight caliber revolver.

Realistic training, at least as realistic as safe practice will allow, is paramount. Both times I responded as trained, w/revolvers back then, and things worked out for me.

LEOSA qualification requires very fast shooting w/our service Glocks, but I don't recall hearing the term double tap ever mentioned by the instructors. The course we fire for qualification is the same state mandated course for active duty law enforcement officers.

 

[Comrad]

I thought it meant two conductors connected to one circuit breaker.

 

[MSG Glenn]

During my last several years in the Army before retirement we were told to refrain from calling it a "double tap" but to call it a "double squeeze" instead, lol.

 

[forrestinmathews]

So as armed citizens where should we have stopped firing? Somewhere in the middle of the first array? My internet connection is a bit slow, but did I count 14 shots? Quick 7 or 8 and then he really started trying to make them count as the suspect drove off with 9-14. Interesting video, but not sure how this pertains to self defense. Officer was damn lucky he didn't get killed standing still on the BG draw attempt and his own. Not trying to Monday morning QB this one, but what can we learn here? Distance and movement for sure. Move further than you think you need to. I feel like he was trying to get back far enough to draw and engage, but not far enough to be silhouetted in his own lights. Maybe trying to get in the blind spot of the mirrors. Am I correct? Seems like a smooth draw as he moved to rally point one would have likely saved about ten shots, namely the one coming his way. It appears there was a hiccup in drawing the pistol at this first point. Retention holster issues? Anyway, after the BG cranks off a round limited only by his flexibility and intoxication, the officer survives the shooting to return fire from rally point two after ridding himself of the flashlight and successfully drawing his weapon on the second try. He then cranks out the first eight shots and the vehicle starts to move. Six more shots are fired and the episode ends. Thoughts?

 

[S&W45Colt]

Point Shooting is the most realistic self defense method, everything else is just mental "massage," when referencing a pistol. It takes a lot of practice, but it can be done well. There is plenty of evidence showing this method to be effective out to 15 yards. After that, seeking cover and retreating are typically the best plan.(Note I said typically)

As for how many shots you fire, I've instructors that I know have the real life experience to be credible, teach anywhere from 3 rounds to lock back. That's a personal and situational decision that can't be made for tomorrow, today.

JMO.

 

[Lt JL]

For a while, the phrase in Ohio, in the late eighties was "tack-tack", similar to the hammer. We trained that way. The times I did it for real, I just shot the guy, no flashy style, no method, just shot him.
For a while , I wason a fugitive task force,and the motto was two to the chest, and one to the head. We want them alive, but we'll take 'em dead. Later, I learned that was similar to something known among the gun games guys as the Rhodesian Drill.

 

[The Big D]

Thoughts? Sure. Good shoot. Very few actions by LEO's start with an attempt to kill a person(s) thus they are inherently reactive. This was a simple traffic stop except the offender was a wannabe killer.

Most professional LE personnel are taught to avoid shooting at moving vehicles..,and people therein, of course. It was clearly warranted here. Successful, too.

Being a LEO involves far more firearms training than merely punching holes in paper. Some real life occurrences are 'two way ranges' as coined by another Forum member. Much easier to shoot when no one shooting back. Additionally, professional LE personnel are bound by continuum of force protocols. They cannot use deadly force to resolve situations wherein some believe such force is okay.

Be safe.

So as armed citizens where should we have stopped firing? Somewhere in the middle of the first array? My internet connection is a bit slow, but did I count 14 shots? Quick 7 or 8 and then he really started trying to make them count as the suspect drove off with 9-14. Interesting video, but not sure how this pertains to self defense. Officer was damn lucky he didn't get killed standing still on the BG draw attempt and his own. Not trying to Monday morning QB this one, but what can we learn here? Distance and movement for sure. Move further than you think you need to. I feel like he was trying to get back far enough to draw and engage, but not far enough to be silhouetted in his own lights. Maybe trying to get in the blind spot of the mirrors. Am I correct? Seems like a smooth draw as he moved to rally point one would have likely saved about ten shots, namely the one coming his way. It appears there was a hiccup in drawing the pistol at this first point. Retention holster issues? Anyway, after the BG cranks off a round limited only by his flexibility and intoxication, the officer survives the shooting to return fire from rally point two after ridding himself of the flashlight and successfully drawing his weapon on the second try. He then cranks out the first eight shots and the vehicle starts to move. Six more shots are fired and the episode ends. Thoughts?

 

[Rastoff]

So as armed citizens...

I want to address your whole post, but didn't want to just copy the whole thing.

The video teaches us a few things and none of them are cop bashing. First a little background on what happened in the video.

• The cop saw the driver go through a light in a turning lane and pulled him over.
• The cop asked how much the driver had to drink and the response was, "Plenty."
• The driver pulled out a .41Mag and tried to shoot the cop. Fortunately for the cop, the first round was either a dud or an empty chamber. If you listen closely, you can hear a click.
• This is followed by a shot which the cop narrowly avoids.
• At this point the cop moves to the back of the SUV, presents his gun and starts firing in rapid succession.
• The story says that he fired 14 rounds15. In all that shooting, he only hit the SUV 6 times. One round went through the driver's head rest and lodged in his head killing him.

I think it's important to note that it is very unlikely that a civilian will get in a situation like this. Legally, in CA, a civilian would have to stop firing as soon as the SUV starts to pull away. But, I'm not concerned with that and that's not why I posted the video.

The cop did the right thing by moving back to the back of the SUV and directly behind it. This is the safest place to be because a person in the driver's seat will have difficulty shooting in that direction. I'm 100% certain that he didn't give a rats patootie about whether or not he was silhouetted in his lights. That never entered his mind.

However, this is an excellent example of how we can be caught off guard.

When the driver first presented the gun the cop did what we all do, he moved straight back. Had the first shot been live the cop would be dead now. He recovered quickly and moved properly.

As you say, when he first started shooting he had little thought for the sights. We see the back window shatter so, obviously one of the early shots hit the SUV. The problem I see here is that so many shots missed this enormous target at a very close range. His last shot was taken at not more than 15 yards in my estimation. I don't think a smooth draw would have helped, but ingrained muscle memory of using the sights would have.

The major take away is that we all need to practice more than we think. Everything changes when your life is on the line, but I'll bet this particular cop didn't practice shooting, let alone rapid shooting, much. He probably falls into the category of shooting 50 rounds twice a year. I'm not saying that practice would have had all his shots directly in the driver's head, but certainly would have put them all on the vehicle thereby being more effective. Firing in controlled pairs would have helped him achieve that effectiveness.

 

[VictorLouis]

As to the 'term-du-jour', controlled-pair seems to be the most PC for training and legal reasons. However, I try not to ingrain any conditioned quantity of, nor pace of, fire. Mostly due to the chance of multiple BGs, I would want to make sure of serving firsts before either is entitled to seconds. With either pistol or revolver, I will mix-up my indoor practice with "draw: +1, +2, or +3."

You can't do so on indoor ranges for reasons of safety, so incorporate movement whenver one can shoot out-of-doors. "Getting off the X", as you move left or right of target, and putting rounds on-target as you do so. That's but one example, and you all can think of others.

 

[Rastoff]

...teach anywhere from 3 rounds to lock back...

I wouldn't trust a teacher/instructor that teaches to shoot to lock back. It is tactically unsound. For civilians it can be legally unsound as well.

The problem is, if you shoot until empty at one guy, what do you have for the next potential threat? Even if you have another magazine, and you should, do you then empty that mag into the next guy? Now you're empty and what then?

Legally, at least in CA, it is acceptable to use whatever force is necessary to stop the threat. Once you go beyond that you become the aggressor.

If you train to empty the mag, you may be training in muscle memory to do so. Thus, even in a situation where it's not necessary, you'll empty the mag because that's what you practiced. Remember, what you do in practice is likely what you'll do in real life only not as well.

For a while , I wason a fugitive task force,and the motto was two to the chest, and one to the head. We want them alive, but we'll take 'em dead. Later, I learned that was similar to something known among the gun games guys as the Rhodesian Drill.

The concept of two to the chest and one to the head in rapid succession is commonly known as the Mozambique Drill or Box Drill. While it would be extremely effective, it is unlikely that any of use will be able to accomplish it well on a moving target. Yes, a person who just got shot twice in the chest will be moving when you target the head.

Also, thinking of muscle memory, if you train this technique, you're primed to shoot three shots. Because the head is a small target, and it will be moving after the first two, it is highly likely that the head shot will be missed. Where does that round go?

I'm a proponent of shooting a controlled pair in dead center mass. Then assessing the situation; this only takes a fraction of a second. Then, if necessary, take a controlled, aimed, head shot.

 

[S&W45Colt]

I am not a believer in shooting to lock back, tactically, legally or otherwise. I only bring this up to point out there are many approaches from "accepted" experts.

The gentleman I reference is very well known, was consider one of "the" authorities on firearms effectiveness in the 80's-90's and has survived double digit shoot outs.

I try to take the best of all and ignore what I find unsound from every instructor. I've never found one guy I agreed with 100% of his "theory."

Have a good day Sir.