Second strike

[kazzaerexys]

You got me! As a matter of fact, my Sig 220 SAO would disagree too. The same would be true for Sig's 1911.

BTW, how do you like your 220 SAO?

Love it, but I shoot the SAO only for IDPA. My carry P220 is DA/SA. I do keep one of my SAOs in the GunVault as a house gun, though.

Back on topic, I don't really care whether the "Assess" part is stated explicitly or is just an implicit part of the process---there has to be an assessment, no matter how quick, before every *bang*. Not only might you be assessing whether or not you actually managed to clear the stoppage, but the bad guy may have dropped his gun, grabbed a meatshield, had an innocent step behind him into the intended line of fire...

An anecdote to support this. I took a class with Bruce Gray and he told a story about being in the middle of an IPSC stage at a match; coming up to a shooting port, he was muzzle on target through the port, taking up the pull weight of his (extremely light, competition) trigger when a small boy popped his head up on the other side of the port. His mother had lost track of the kid, who'd manage to be sufficiently hidden by the stage props that nobody saw him. Bruce had probably taken up all but a few ounces of the trigger weight when he was able to abort the shot.

'Assess' must always happen right up to the moment that the shot breaks.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[OPFOR]

Contrary to popular belief, LE and Govt. agencies do in fact train to pull a second time, then clear if needed, and the feature is a reguirement for some purchases.

No LE or Govt agency that I know of (DEA, FBI, ATF, DSS, USSS, ICE, military...the list of groups I've worked with is pretty long) trains this way. Considering that many, many of these groups use weapons without second-strike capability (i.e. Glocks), there is no reason for training to pull the trigger again. Immediate action is tap, rack, re-assess, re-engage.

[Tangle]

...Immediate action is tap, rack, re-assess, re-engage.

I.e. re-engage if needed, right?

[OPFOR]

Yes indeed, Tangle.

[Seraph]

Bottom line is a second strike is pretty worthless. Get the bad round the hell out of there, and drive on.

[Tangle]

Bottom line is a second strike is pretty worthless. Get the bad round the hell out of there, and drive on.

Get whatever it is out of there; improperly seated mag could be the problem too, and second strike won't fix it.

[gottabkiddin]

I'm reading this thread and I gotta throw this out there and see if there's some common ground. By some of the comments I'm reading, it looks like the "Physical Act" of re-acquiring and re-engaging the BG is being confused with the "Thought process" of "reassessment".

It may be just me, but my thought process has always been along the lines of; If I'm pointing my pistol at some one or some thing, I've already accessed the threat and prepared to defend myself against it. This will not change in the event my pistol has a failure. Maybe I was unclear in my wording or delivery, but the physical act of engaging a threat should always follow the assessment of the threat and not in reverse. That fact shouldn't change due to a failure with our equipment. My point about "Tap, rack, reacquire and bang" is meant in the sense of (Never point your weapon at something unless you intend to destroy it). The assessment is done at the time of re-acquiring the threat and by the thought process and not a physical reaction. The two are totally different to me and again, by the act or raising your pistol and pointing it at anything the assessment part should be over regardless. It then comes down to what the BG does in the situation that will either defuse or escalate the ordeal. If the guy has dropped his gun great! he gets to live, if not, being that he has engaged me in a gun battle, he darn well better be ready finish what he started, or surrender. I would hope that none of us would shoot an unarmed person under any conditions.

GBK