Muzzle direction during reloads

Excellent commentary on the subject from Rich Grassi in the Tac Wire, and Karl Rehn on his blog.

http://blog.krtraining.com/muzzle-di...ring-a-reload/

https://www.thetacticalwire.com/feat...b-85090694923e

Shooters - instructors and students alike - often find themselves incapacitated when a seeming conflict of The Four Rules occurs.

Some deal with this by modifying what they do to meet with the best literal interpretation of The Four Rules.

Others deal with this by modifying their interpretation of The Four Rules.

I think all would be better served by supplanting the idea of "safety" with the idea of "risk". Not just the idea of risk, but the understanding of what risk is. Generally the formula is:


probability of a bad thing happening x consequences of the bad thing


Note that risk has components of both odds and stakes.

It's a daunting task that we constantly train ourselves to not point guns at anyone. Yet, the whole idea is to point your gun at someone at the critical moment. What can be "dangerous" for us or for no-shoots can be "safe" for a threat... and vice versa.

It's good that instructors and students give this some thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Cunningham

Shooters - instructors and students alike - often find themselves incapacitated when a seeming conflict of The Four Rules occurs.

Some deal with this by modifying what they do to meet with the best literal interpretation of The Four Rules.

Others deal with this by modifying their interpretation of The Four Rules.

I think all would be better served by supplanting the idea of "safety" with the idea of "risk". Not just the idea of risk, but the understanding of what risk is. Generally the formula is:


probability of a bad thing happening x consequences of the bad thing


Note that risk has components of both odds and stakes.

It's a daunting task that we constantly train ourselves to not point guns at anyone. Yet, the whole idea is to point your gun at someone at the critical moment. What can be "dangerous" for us or for no-shoots can be "safe" for a threat... and vice versa.

It's good that instructors and students give this some thought.

---

+1

Hackathorn said many times in my class, "Is this dangerous? Yes. Is this unsafe? No. Not if you do it correctly."

When a big fire occurs in the real world, we call the fire department. When a small one occurs we use a fire extinguisher. So why do we teach/learn things like stop/drop and roll? It is for catastrophic failure when your life cannot be saved by the fire department or a fire extinguisher at that precise moment.

I view practicing reloads as the same thing. Catastrophic failure when the police aren’t available and I can’t solve it with the (empty/stopped) firearm I have at the moment.

Reloads should also be viewed as a portion of solving a gun stoppage, not just as adding fuel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Runkle

Reloads should also be viewed as a portion of solving a gun stoppage, not just as adding fuel.

---

Another Hackathorn-ism. He put the question to the class:

"What is the most likely cause of a stoppage in your quality pistol?"

"You ran out of ammo."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JHC

Another Hackathorn-ism. He put the question to the class:

"What is the most likely cause of a stoppage in your quality pistol?"

"You ran out of ammo."

---

I would respectfully disagree with him.

In my observation the need to fix a malf on a semi auto pistol in the real world, especially in the days of double stack 9s, is far more likely than the need for a reload.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chuck Haggard

I would respectfully disagree with him.

In my observation the need to fix a malf on a semi auto pistol in the real world, especially in the days of double stack 9s, is far more likely than the need for a reload.

---

+1. His context was during a lecture period of also saying "How many rounds will you fire in a gunfight (two way vs a one way "shooting") if it isn't over in the first couple shot? As many as you have in the gun." ;) Based on his review of an FBI database he had access to back in the day.

hmmm... food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JHC

+1. His context was during a lecture period of also saying "How many rounds will you fire in a gunfight (two way vs a one way "shooting") if it isn't over in the first couple shot? As many as you have in the gun." ;) Based on his review of an FBI database he had access to back in the day.

---

Clint Smith has something on this too, how police shots per engagement went from ~6 with revolvers to ~18 with autoloaders

Edit - found it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3l6...&feature=share